Emerging through the great west door of York Minster to be photographed, flanked by the Archbishop of York, Dr Sentamu, and the Bishop of Stockport, the Rt Revd Libby Lane, the new Bishop of Burnley, the Rt Revd Philip North, reflected on a “wonderful expression of the unity of the Church”.
Consecrated on Monday, exactly a week after Bishop Lane, Bishop North is the first traditionalist bishop to be appointed since the passing of the women-bishops Measure. His laughter with her on the steps – both were beaming in the winter sun – was indicative of a jubilant atmosphere among the many bishops present.
After receiving a long line of people seeking his blessing (and at least one selfie), the new Bishop spoke first of unity.
“We had all the bishops together, including Bishop Libby, gathered around in prayer for the Holy Spirit, and I got a real sense of the unity of the Church, and of the precedents that have been set this last week: eight extraordinary days in York Minster, which have seen the consecration, to great joy amongst many Anglicans, of the first woman, and then what’s happened today, which has shown that there’s a future for those who in good conscience can’t accept that development.”
“… with a reminder that this decision was “mine, and mine alone”.
Methinks his optimism is a bit hyperbolic, and might be better informed by grappling with statements such as this from the ABC, and a review of the David Porter document.
There may be a future, but not likely with the CoE.
[blockquote] “It doesn’t mean there are no theological issues or questions left hanging, but it actually seemed fine in the event. If this is what it takes for us all to flourish, then I think I can live with it.”[/blockquote]
Sure it will be in the CoE. They’re just “traditionalists” now — you know, like people who prefer Latin or King James English to the vernacular. Just little peculiarities that don’t really make any difference anyway. If these folks had a real problem with cognitive dissonance they wouldn’t be there in the first place.
Oh please. If the man is referring to Ms. Libby as a fellow bishop he is just another W/O heretic. Moving on. Seriously, if you support W/O fine. But let’s not pretend that you can be in the CofE without being in communion with all of its heresy. And if history is any guide, W/O is just the beginning.
The flood gates are now open.
History documented here: http://walkingapart.us/tiki-index.php
One can observe the rapidity with which cOE traverses it.
dwstroudmd
Thanks for that very informative link.
RE: “But let’s not pretend that you can be in the CofE without being in communion with all of its heresy.”
“In communion” as defined by the Orthodox.
[blockquote] RE: “But let’s not pretend that you can be in the CofE without being in communion with all of its heresy.â€
“In communion†as defined by the Orthodox. [/blockquote]
…And the Roman Catholic Church, and the Oriental Orthodox, and every one of the Fathers of the Church. But yes, your implicit point stands. That would exclude Anglicanism.
Someone really ought to write a little history of the non-modernist Anglo Catholics over the last 25 years, or so. Assurances broken, proposals repeatedly rejected, bishops and clergy retiring or resigning. It could finish poignantly with Bishop North’s consecration and his jubilant affirmation of the “unity” of the church and his praise of the way the Church of England honors its promises.
Prayers surely coming his way.
RE: “…and every one of the Fathers of the Church . . . ”
Nope.
But amusing to watch you assert so every single time, thankfully in contradiction to the actual practice of both Rome and the EO.
RE: “That would exclude Anglicanism.”
Yep — it’s nice to be right about something and watch the others be wrong.
Re # 9
LOL You keep making the same risible claims that the Fathers were anything other than unanimous on this subject. And every time I ask you to name one, not a long list, just one, that would support your claims. I have been waiting for a couple of years for a reply. Still waiting…