Sunday, March 22, 2009

Schisms: Why didn't we go to Lambeth?

It's a genuine question. Is there a statement where I can find this out? The reason I ask is because I'm reading Oliver O'Donovan's Church In Crisis: The Gay Controversy and The Anglican Communion, and he is clearly in favour of a conciliar approach to the current crisis over encouraging a split. He closes a chapter with this;

Schisms may come, but woe to that church through whom they come! There is no right, or duty, of schism. As unity is given to the church as a gift, so it is taken away as a judgement. But on no account can disunity be a course of action that the church may embrace in pursuit of its mission or identity. The only justified breach is the one we have taken every possible step to avert, the one that lies on the far side of every conciliar process that can be devised.



O'Donovan is evangelical, and he's well respected by a lot of Moore students and lecturers. I always assumed it was a Evangelicals v Liberals, good guys vs the the bad thing, but turns out it isn't.

2 comments:

kt said...

some articles that might be helpful

http://www.sydneyanglicans.net/archive/indepth/the_next_20_years_for_the_anglican_communion/

http://www.gafcon.org/news/why_peter_jensen_is_going_to_gafcon/

http://www.sydneyanglicans.net/images/uploads/mediareleases/Lambeth_2008.pdf

psychodougie said...

i heard it was something to do with the catering...