« The Plurality Preceding Babel | Main | Baptist Minister on Ali G Show »

Thursday, June 28, 2007

Comments

I love your number 3, Sean. Me too (re Oxford, I mean).

Hi Graham
I take your point although even martyrdom has been 'welcomed' by some.

'I always get the impression they were glad of the helping hand and were much happier to jump that Luther or the early English Separatists were.'

Bearing in mind that the helping hand was often martyrdom, I'm not sure that 'glad' is the right word to use! However, I can see what you're saying now, so thanks.

Hi Graham
In the end it seems to me that, either through explicit disciplinary measures, or through intense persecution and enforced exile, the 'established church' (whether it be European Catholicism of the 16th Century or the Church of England in the early 17th Century) effectively expelled those whose agenda was, albeit expressed in ideal terms, the reform of those churches. In many sense I think they were pushed. Separation lies at the heart of the early Anabaptist agenda, however. They were pushed as well, but I always get the impression they were glad of the helping hand and were much happier to jump that Luther or the early English Separatists were.

Sean, can you elaborate on your statement on 'one of the reasons why I am a Baptist rather than an Anabaptist'.

It seems to me that the suggestion that the Reformers were not schismatic is simply romantic, so I must be missing something.

Fernando: it would take too long to develop what is a fairly broad swipe at many fellow Baptists. I guess that overall my point is that I would like to see much more explicit reflection on the nature and shape of Christian worship so that the reflection actually begins to transform the weekly practice in many of our churches. The challenge is to find ways of doing this that are authentically Baptist.

Ingrid: I agree. Steve Harmon in his book on Baptist Catholicism concludes by asking the question 'Why am I not a Catholic?' - his answer begins with profound issues about the role of women in the Catholic church. However (and this should not be understood as a definitive answer to the contrary) in the end the theological question looms large for me: when is the need for reform sufficiently crucial to necessitate ecclesial schism? The best answer to this is that the reformers did not seek schism, but that, through the disciplinary actions of the church, were made to be schismatic. This is one of the reasons why I am a Baptist rather than an Anabaptist (complex historical argument I know).

I was at Regents' in '93. I've been searching for a way/excuse/money to get back ever since.

I'm in sympathy with the Catholic thing (liturgy especially) but you could only really do it if you can answer yes to these questions...
1. Is mothering the most fulfilling thing a woman can do?
2. If a woman isn't an amazing, motherly, angelic, pure person is she a temptress/seductress/whore?
(Yes I know I'm sterotyping but I didn't start it!)

Hi Sean, could you please say a bit more on #2? Liturgy and other matters need some reflection and not just being led by the tide, as it were, I think

Hi Michael
I agree, see my response to Catriona. What year were you at Regent's?

The comments to this entry are closed.

Keeping in Touch

  • Readers and Friends

Currently Reviewing

Recent Posts from My Blogroll