Saturday, June 05, 2004

Donning the Cassock

Just so everyone else knows: I'm not a cleric, nor a professional theologian or religious academic. I do theology the way any layman does it: reading the texts, listening to the advice of others, and thinking. By the grace of God, the voice of the Spirit is heard. Or not.

And if you believe Richard Hooker, that's the way the clerics are doing it too.

So who gets to speak for a church? Well, in episcopal polity, certainly not laymen. You have to ask a bishop, or repeat what a bishop says-- word for word. And if what the bishop says isn't firmly grounded in tradition--

Well, how do you tell that it is so grounded? Well, um, you do theology. After all, even if one bishop is just repeating something another bishop said, the predecessor has to fulfill the same test, and so forth.

So: is it actually true that in Orthodox tradition dogs are unclean animals? Well, I don't know for sure: Nick, you aren't good enough authority on your own. And even then the same problem applies to whichever bishop you end up citing. Is what he says an integral part of the tradition, or is it just a presumption or prejudice riding the genuine merit of other canons and positions?


尼古拉 said...

When you (and your church) abandon truth and tradition this is how you get all these questions that you cannot answer.

C. Wingate said...

You put absolute trust in your bishop, and I'll put absolute trust in mine, and then where will we be? Well, um, hmmmmmm... Funny, my bishop is first of all going to say not to put absolute trust in him. Then he's going to say not to put absolute trust in you.

尼古拉 said...

You bishop is right. Since he has no true Apostolic Succession, since he does not teach the true Faith, since he is part of a church accepting lesbian bishops and in communion with Bishops that give their blessings to marry homosexuals, he obviously is not one that you can put your trust in any more than Belial.

C. Wingate said...

And I can trust one who has been in five different denominations and whose prelate doesn't have succession?

It's time for the Battle of the Bishops!

尼古拉 said...

Thanks for avoiding the question again Charles, since you know that you cannot defend your faith being opposite of that of the Apostles, the Church Fathers, the Church. You would rather stay in the place you are, in the same church while it sinks even further than admit error and move on towards truth. Why is that?

As for Archbishop Gregory's moves, in each of those he was not alone and has a reason given for them, while you continue to be unable to defend your faith belief in lesbian bishopesses and priestesses and gay bishops and priests.

尼古拉 said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
C. Wingate said...

First, Nick, I'm not presenting myself for interrogation on my beliefs. So yes, I'm refusing your question.

Second, you are advancing a contamination theory that damns every church. All churches tolerate phariseeism, after all.

And as far as Gregory's moves are concerned, he condemns himself in you in doing them. More on that in a separate post.

尼古拉 said...

Oh but I am presenting myself for interrogation? Sorry, not why I came here. I guess I will leave before I am "presenting myself for the gulag" too.

If your beliefs are not up for discussion on your own blog about your own theological opinions and a blog for you to attack everyone else's ... I wonder where you would consider it on topic? Curious.