Before Canterbury Advocated "Indaba"
It seems that very few people, even among the attendees at General Convention, believe Archbishop Rowan Williams will actually take serious action to discipline the Episcopal Church. This video is a reminder that there once was a time when Archbishops of Canterbury were known for taking a "firm line."
posted by Texanglican (R.W. Foster+) | 8:25 PM
9 Comments:
The inability of excommunicating is symptomatic of the feminization of the Church. In every institution that preserves masculine traits, the response to violating order and discipline is dealt with, with order and discipline. Think sports, the military, medical profession etc..
Pax,
Edward
It would be a blessing if once again, we had more men of God with tough hides and tender hearts...
Why would you expect Rowan Williams to take a hardline, when he allows his CofE to be subservient to the Jews and contributes to the problem of Islamification within his own backyard. Ridiculous! The ArchBishop of Canterbury is nothing more than a Judas to Christ.
I have been following your blog for awhile now....and these comments seem more than just a little aggressive. Don't you think things may be getting a little out of hand with the insults? Some of these people writing these comments are coming across a bit unstable. I mean, you may not respect the archbishop, but Father Foster, I don't see you as someone who would support someone who refers to any christian, as Judas! Would you encourage your students to make this comparison. What would you say to your female students about these misogynistic comments,if they read them,(which they do), how can you defend some of these comments? The hate that is brewing in this blog is unnerving, and I'm surprised you aren't more troubled by it.
Why be unnerved? I'm simply calling a spade, a spade. Rowan Williams has been conspiring against Christianity in his own land, Our spiritual homeland, to the Muslims and Jews. No wonder the pews are empty.
I do have a problem with misogynistic attitudes, but I have a bigger problem with making Christianity a second-rate religion. We do not have to bow to the Jews or the Muslims. We don't need their approval. But Mr. Williams seems to think so.
Anon no. 2, as a general rule I don't delete comments that don't violate "community standards" for basic decency. I assume that readers can make up their own minds as to the merits of the comments.
Personally I think it is way "over the top" to refer to the ABC as a "Judas," and I find the anti-Semitic nature of "the other anon's" remarks to be most troubling ("subservient to Jews"? Makes the skin crawl--reminiscent of some of the rhetoric out of central Europe in the early thirties). But I have enough libertarian in me to believe "the other anon" has the right to voice his or her opinion, even if I think it is complete Tommy rot. By letting "the other anon" have his/her say, my readers can assess for themselves whether they want to give those remarks any credence. (My vote is "not a bit of it!," but that's just me.)
thank you, i guess I got my feathers ruffled so fast, that I failed to remember "I may not like what you say, but I will defend your right to say it". I should have taken a 10 minute breather before blowing steam.
And at that time the Archbishops of Canterbury were Roman Catholic, not Anglican.
Sorry anon, but making such a distinction does not make sense before the 1530's. And even after the clear separation of the Roman Catholic and Anglican streams in the mid-sixteenth century, the Archbishops of Canterbury didn't shy away from taking such strong action until the last couple of centuries. Just ask the Puritans about it in the 17th century! :-)
Post a Comment
<< Home