Church Times' Report on Today at General Synod

In his sermon in York Minster on Sunday morning, the Archbishop of Canterbury urged General Synod members to relinquish the attempt to control their future; for that way they would be freer to encounter God.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Anglican Provinces, Church of England (CoE)

8 comments on “Church Times' Report on Today at General Synod

  1. Watcher On The Wall says:

    I guess we find out this week if the stuff hits the fan for ++Rowen and the COE. Will the 600 depart to greener pastures?
    Not sure what he’s saying in this sermon with the lesson on Joseph. Shouldn’t the people of COE fight for the truth in the church? Is he saying give up & roll over because we know better than you what the future should be? Sounds like “being freer to encounter God” is not genuine and is code for “we’re in control, not you”. Not sure I would trust this guy if I were in the COE.

  2. Milton says:

    This seems a feeble, desparate attempt by Rowan Williams to control his own future! He actually has cast the mold that will control his future-his inaction, his revisionist sympathies, his undercutting of all orthodox efforts to discipline rouge provinces, his dependence on TEC’s checkbook-and now his future is indeed out of his control.

    I don’t read Joseph trying to control his future, just tactlessly relating a remarkable dream to his family, in which his existence is a cause for division. If Cantaur can’t do any better than this TEC-revisionist flavored hermenutic that sounds more like a hypnotist saying that we are “getting very sleepy, your eyes are getting heavy”, then he deserves being ignored as a historic irrelavancy.

  3. RMBruton says:

    Relax, don’t fight it, in through your nose and out through your mouth, count backwards from one hundred, go into the light.

  4. driver8 says:

    I really love and admire Rowan Williams and I do think, unlike many, that he is a holy man. Yet his preaching sometimes shies away from teaching anything clearly just at the moment when you think he may be speaking to you. So the future is God’s and we should relinquish our anxiety about it and go into it trusting God. I agree with that – but want someone to teach me and show me more about how to do it. What does it look like – I want to learn from the figure of Joseph – and I want to place myself in the narrative – but why does the story stop at the point my life begins. Dare to tell the story so that it embraces the present.

    Tell me the story of what it looks like – in a church where for some God’s future is one of inclusion, and the pluriform play of creativity than is human sexual desire, and for others it is a world of proclaiming Good News of Jesus to a world in which he are held captive by our broken desire, or, or, or. Does the Gospel ever take a particular shape and can more ever be said about it than – “we should trust God” – what does that mean, for my life, in my church, in this moment. Can you help or am I left in the place I was before you began to speak. In other words Archbishop, I want to learn. Please be willing to teach.

  5. teatime says:

    #4 — Along those lines, I wish +++Rowan would consider “the little ones” of whom Jesus was so fond of speaking and preach/teach as if he was speaking to them. (I’ve never thought that Jesus was only speaking about children; if we are seeking to follow Him, it’s good to remember our “littleness” in whatever form it takes.)

    Would +++Rowan tell the young to go forth and celebrate their sexuality in whatever way moves them and God will bless them? Would he tell the spiritually confused that it’s all good; many paths lead to God? Would he tell those broken-hearted over divorce, infidelity, etc. to cheer up — the ones who left them just had to “be what they are!”? Would he encourage those who have unplanned pregnancies that abortion can be “holy” and the Church wholeheartedly supports their right to “choose”?

    From what I’ve read of +++Rowans’ books and sermons, I can’t imagine that he would advise the “little ones” anything of the sort! So why on Earth is he allowing (and by allowing, perhaps encouraging) this movement in the Church? Indeed, it IS a movement that has been snow-balling for many years. And why is this great mind and honorable scholar still failing to take it on?

    I’m sure he understands full well the philosophy and ideology behind it; yet, he still frames it within the context of homosexuality and inclusion when he speaks to the wider audience. And as one who writes brilliantly of the catholicity of the Church, its history, and of the doctors of the Church themselves, how on Earth can he master the waffle and believe he’s doing his level best with the role entrusted to him? There are so many disconnects and it’s very disheartening.

  6. carloarturo says:

    Yes, perhaps Jesus would be with each of the groups that the ABp mentions here, but he would not just “be” with them, he would call them to repentence, and tell them to “go and sin no more” and to drink deeply of the waters of life. I can’t see Jesus just “being” with these folk and letting them “hang” with him without a call to the newness of life in Him, and yes, metanoia is involved in this process now, as it was two thousand years ago.

  7. rugbyplayingpriest says:

    Two initial comments:
    1) When people at the top of the tree urge you to relinquish control it always seems a little hollow (though he does seem to have heeded his own advice for the last few years)

    2) The Catholic group are not seeking ‘control’ we are seeking to proclaim the Gospel in a church that is ‘one holy, catholic and apostolic’. When scripture and tradition are kicked into touch it becomes our duty to stand up and speak the truth in love. We are not being akward but seeking to be faithful- thus this is not an issue of politics with two equal factions needing to find a middle ground- this is a church that needs to preach one truth with unity.

    By the day credibility is leaking from a once fine church….I really do ask why I am working so hard for a church that has no clear voice, integrity or purpose. Super bishops…what a fudging joke!

    Either it is GOd’s will or it is not. Tell us which and then we know if this is a biblical faith worth following or a modern innovation and as hollow and shallow as pecusa

  8. driver8 says:

    From Ruth Gledhill’s blog of Rowan Williams’ opening comments today at General Synod:

    This disagreement over authority had been part of the Anglican legacy for centuries. ‘What I want to underline is that embodying that disagreement over the centuries has in all kinds of ways been good for us .. stopped us drifting into being a complacent folk church… ‘ ‘What is the nature of our answerability to the wider church? What is the nature of our answerability to scripture?’ If the effect of legislation was to end this internal conflict, that was not healthy. ‘We should have changed profoundly.’

    The penultimate line is the killer – that’s the Anglican genius – we fight like ferrets in a sack.