Although more conservative members of the Anglican Communion and Episcopal Church would probably consider themselves heirs of the English Reformers, I wonder if it is not actually those of us on the more progressive side of things who are their true heirs.
Among our concerns (and theirs?): liturgical renewal and worship truly “understanded of the people;” primary emphasis on baptism and the eucharist; the Bible in the hands of the people and interpreted by the best contemporary translation and scholarship; ecumenical engagement, learning from the insights of other communions; suspicion of hierarchy and certainly of “foreign” control of dioceses and national churches; awareness that the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic church must develop and change over time and that she must always engage (but not be co-opted by) the culture in which she finds herself.
Anyway, it’s worth thinking about: after all, I’m sure the reformers were called “revisionists” as well!
That We All May Be One 
November 23, 2010 at 5:08 pm |
Hi Chris,
Great to see that you are still writing!
I think you are on to something. I always remember my doctoral adviser, George Worgul at Duquesne in Pittsburgh pointing out that all the great heretics were actually conservatives of their day.
Athanasius was a progressive!
Hope you are well, my friend.
Pierre
November 23, 2010 at 5:18 pm |
Thanks, my friend. Use the blog for sermons a lot these days, but occasionally have some other thoughts! Wasn’t too happy with the ABC’s address to Synod. I wonder what in the world the C of E will do about the Covenant? I suppose…fall in line with Rowan, eh?