Holding a future Lambeth Conference in the south would help the Church better understand the diverse contexts that many members of the Communion emerge from and prevent over-simplified conclusions about geography and theology.
What about the host? What about the Archbishop of Canterbury, the first among equals, who this year and in years past addresses the gathered bishops from his throne in the Cathedral in Canterbury? Could he still be the first among equals if the next Lambeth were in, say, Johannesburg or Madras?
There is no reason that the Archbishop of Canterbury couldn’t maintain his position as “first among equals” and an instrument of unity in his person while playing the role of guest rather than host.
By dislocating the Lambeth Conference from its English moorings, this important gathering could rid itself of some of its colonial vestiges and relocate closer to the heart of the current Anglican Communion. A change of this magnitude would take some imagination on the part of bishops gathered this week in Kent, but as modern leaders in a religious tradition that produced poets and artists like John Donne, William Blake, and Julian of Norwich, such vision would not be impossible.
I’m always intrigued by the inclusion of Julian of Norwich in the Anglican tradition. As a devout Roman Catholic, she’d have no clue about about the meaning of the “Anglican tradition”.
1. Dan — Actually, if you consider the broader term of “Anglican tradition” to mean the spiritual tradition and heritage of the land of England, which has always had its own distinctive flavor (like the devotions to Our Lady of Walsingham), then Julian certainly should be included, even though she lived before the English Reformation. Outside England today, Julian is virtually unknown to Catholics. Meanwhile, her spirituality left a tremendous impact on Anglicanism.
[blockquote]Anglicans are no exception to this geographic shift in Christianity’s center of gravity. The Church of Nigeria claims 18 million members, while the entire Episcopal Church, USA, has about 4 million.[/blockquote]
The author is an Episcopal priest ought to be able to get on the Episcopal Church website and find that the domestic membership is [url=http://www.episcopalchurch.org/documents/FAST_FACTS_for_Domestic_Dioceses_20061.pdf ]2,154,572[/url].
I’ll give her Julian (blessed be she), but William Blake was born a dissenter, lived a Swedenborgian (a dissenting dissenter), and was buried in a dissenter’s cemetery.
Other than that, sure he was an Anglican. In that he spoke English. Otherwise, please spin again.
See, there’s the problem in a nutshell. Anglicanism is seen, even by her own priests, as Anglophilia, the essence of Englishness, so you sweep up Blake — hey, why not Milton and Defoe while you’re at it? If you know what Anglicanism is as a theological impluse, then you go to George Herbert and John Donne of course and Susan Howatch, but when you throw in Willaim Blake you give away the game — you are showing that you don’t see Anglicanism as anything much more than this green and pleasant land, seen mistily through a drizzle, pint of bitters in your hand.
The last time I read an article by Chloe Breyer, she was arguing that we must take seriously the “evidence” that Jesus was conceived when Roman soldiers raped his mother. The “evidence”, IIRC, was from an anti-Christian tract which was written during the first century AD, and which Breyer therefore considered an important historical document.
Unfortunately, I can’t get the link to work for me, so I couldn’t read the rest of her article.
Jeez. The fourth paragraph of the article in particular is a corker, but the entire article really shows how an individual steeped in a particular indoctrination cannot lay out a coherent portrayal of history, let alone ground any suggestions for the future in an understanding of the past. In essence she says, this lot couldn’t get anything right until now (when we Enlightened have appeared to lead them), but with our leadership this institution will become a beacon for humanity’s future.
Of course it;’s impossible. Why? Because there IS no vision. The ABC and the CofE are spiritually exhausted, and the land is only fit for weeds, such as TEC. The momentum has shifted, and England is in a long twilight, as France entered after WW2. T his battery will not hold a charge because the cells are dead. Larry
robroy someone multiplied the TEC by 2 in the quote and even that may be an bit high. The point is when you add up the Western churches they are the tail but they think they should wag the dog and the dog will no longer accept this concept which is a terrible shock to the Western churches. In fact they refuse to believe it,
The author is living evidence that it’s not what you know , but who you know that pays. Dan and Knapsack, I too got a chuckle over her inclusion of Julian and Blake as part of the Anglican traditon. To be an Episcopalian seems to be license to believe and say anything.
#5, it always amazes me when someone ‘claims’ that extra Biblical sources, sometimes written centuries after the facts, are more reliable than the first century Biblical sources.
I’m having the same discussion on another site re: the 2nd century “Gospel” of Thomas as being more accurate than the 1st century Gospel of John! 🙄
Peace
Jim E. <><