… the sheer number of those who rang in to express warm thanks to a man who was widely perceived as thoughtful and decent was striking. These were not the commentariat or academics – who have been swift to criticise – but those whom I suspect Williams would have seen as his real constituency.
How will things be different, both for the church and for the wider culture, with the new Archbishop, Justin Welby? On first glance, there is less theological depth…
Love this statement: “Some have found his obvious intellect off-putting, seeing too much ambiguity and even contradiction in his public statements.”
As if “intellect” has anything to do with “ambiguity and even contradiction” in “public statements.”
No, assessing the quality, coherence, and Gospel-credibility of his statements had nothing whatsoever to do with his “obvious intellect.”
[snort]
“However, this academic background and depth of learning are unusual among Archbishops of Canterbury. The last one who came close was Archbishop Temple in the 1940s.”
Um–Michael Ramsey, the 100th abp of C., in the 1960s.
(Gracious.)
#1 I must agree with Sarah (I usually do) – Intellect, backgrounds of any type, depth of learning, etc. mean exactly nothing, and can be quite dangerous spiritually, IF they are agents of undermining or distorting “the Faith once received” with “ambiguity and even contradiction”. Consider Paul’s admonition in Galatians 1:8,9. Even an angel! Let alone mere human intellect. May God save us from our presumption to interpret the Gospel to suit ourselves.
Carl+, I agree with you. It certainly wouldn’t hurt to have some Christ-centered traditional scripture-based theologians in Anglicanism, and I’m quite sure we could use a couple more of them among us right now. St Paul’s words are as true now as they were when he wrote the letter to the Church at Ephesus.
There is nothing wrong with Anglican theology except it is not followed. We said the Great Litany this morning. It is all there. We need to become the people we say we are.
It is not enough to merely [i]say[/i] the Great Litany; it is more important to actually put into practice what it says…..to really mean it.
The journalist writes:
[blockquote] “They were obviously a self-selecting group, but the sheer number of those who rang in to express warm thanks to a man who was widely perceived as thoughtful and decent was striking. These were not the commentariat or academics – who have been swift to criticise – but those whom I suspect Williams would have seen as his real constituency.” [/blockquote]
To appreciate the irony of this quote, it is necessary to read the previous sentence – these are people who “declared that they had no contact with the church except through the media”.
Now, aiming at a group of people who are not members of the church (evangelism) is a laudable aim. But I doubt even Rowan Williams claims to have been very successful in evangelism to this group. They are far more likely to express general support of a soft liberal church, while at the same time never darkening its doors or helping to pay its bills.
Not very useful for a church that is suffering a real financial crisis.