Ann's officially been (temporarily?) defrocked, for better or worse.
Comments
Anonymous said…
This might be a good thing for her. She'll obviously have more time to devote to both learning Islam and teaching Christianity. This seems like fair judgment from the bishop, looking from the outside.
Yeah, it seems pretty fair. She can't teach in the Episcopal Church for the year, which will be an interesting change for her.
I think a signicant motivator for the decision is probably political expedience. The ECUSA is already dealing with so much division related to homosexuality, it makes sense that bishops wouldn't want to create more national and international controversy. This whole deal really brings up a similar set of questions though, about whether post-modernity and Christian tradition can exist together, and how much shift is appropriate from historically predominant Xtian practice.
Anonymous said…
That last bit about co-existence is ultimately why i have decided against involvement with the emerging scene. While i may at times look and sound like i belong to that movement, i'm not willing to concede much to post-modernity. My issue with pop-christianity is largely aesthetics, while my problem with the emerging is one of epistemology. Surely a way to relate to or harmonize with post-modern ideas and aesthetics can be reached without uncomfortably converting ones whole perspective to the same? A harmless compromise of sorts.
My problem w/emerging is actually more one of aesthetics--I think it can be short sighted in it's adoption of new liturgical approaches. (That statement is very Episcopalian of me, by the way) I agree with the epistemology for the most part. I'm a critical realist--a la Michael Polanyi--not a radical relativist, but the effect is similar on one's approach to religious faith.
Anonymous said…
Reading much about Polanyi might brush you past F.A. Hayek. And you wouldnt want to waste any time on such a classical liberal as Hayek, though he holds similar views of knowledge. You should be more careful. I think I can agree with you on emerging somewhat. The general aesthetic of the movement can be attractive to youngsters who arent concerned with responsible thinking, or who havent grappled with traditional christianity enough to sympathize with the church's issues writ large. So perhaps the movement is short-sighted in general. And in my opinion, it just seethes with pseudo-intellectual pretension. But I like the acceptance of creative/innovative approach, even if i also like high church liturgy. Actually meeting a group of emerging would be more telling than reading 'their' literature.
Comments
I think a signicant motivator for the decision is probably political expedience. The ECUSA is already dealing with so much division related to homosexuality, it makes sense that bishops wouldn't want to create more national and international controversy. This whole deal really brings up a similar set of questions though, about whether post-modernity and Christian tradition can exist together, and how much shift is appropriate from historically predominant Xtian practice.
I think I can agree with you on emerging somewhat. The general aesthetic of the movement can be attractive to youngsters who arent concerned with responsible thinking, or who havent grappled with traditional christianity enough to sympathize with the church's issues writ large. So perhaps the movement is short-sighted in general. And in my opinion, it just seethes with pseudo-intellectual pretension. But I like the acceptance of creative/innovative approach, even if i also like high church liturgy. Actually meeting a group of emerging would be more telling than reading 'their' literature.