tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post4547974842518497077..comments2024-03-28T00:17:55.823+00:00Comments on Bruce Charlton's Notions: Heresy and AuthorityBruce Charltonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-21085810342314073232012-10-05T05:44:11.824+01:002012-10-05T05:44:11.824+01:00@SoM - I think there are only two sides in the war...@SoM - I think there are only two sides in the war, and it seems you are arguing the same - but emphasizing that some non-Christians may be on the Christian side. I would agree with that , I think. <br /><br />Certainly I agree with Pascal's point that the line of salvation is crossed by the sincere, and discontented (and wretched) Christian *seeker*, and not by the convert (the line is crossed before conversion). <br /><br />Perhaps this point is reached when somebody begins to pray that they may become Christian or know Christ. <br /><br />But can such seekers be a part of the 'church' in the sense of the community of those who pray to Christ? Perhaps they can, probably they can indeed unite their prayers. <br /><br />You seem, also, to be talking about virtuous pagans - which is a large and diverse category. Speaking as an ex-neo-pagan - many or most of such people have a core anti-Christianity deep in their belief system; which puts them on the other side *unless* they remain discontented seekers after truth, beauty and virtue. <br /><br />However, on the whole, this kind of focusing on grey areas is a snare to Christians, a delusive striving after non-existent precision in understanding the world and the plan of salvation. <br /><br />My point here was to put forward a non-exclusivist vision of Christian unity which was *not* aiming at organizational unity - which in fact rejected organizational unity.<br /><br />But since this unity (of Mere Christianity) is based on Christ, and of course any positive unity must be based on some principle/s, then it is hard to see how such a unity can be extended (except in the way I describe above) to those who reject Christ. Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-44201973668740341442012-10-04T20:47:53.553+01:002012-10-04T20:47:53.553+01:00Dear Bruce,
As you know, I don’t often comment, bu...Dear Bruce,<br />As you know, I don’t often comment, but you can be sure that I read every word you write. I find your mind refreshingly probing and incisive, and I thank you for the trouble you take to record your thoughts.<br />However, I feel that sometimes you go too far. <br />One issue on which we differ is your conviction, oft repeated, and probably taken from Fr. Rose among others, that, as you put it today, ‘there are only two sides’.<br />Since you obviously respect C.S.Lewis and claim to ‘align’ with him in your present heresy article, what about the followers of the Tao as he defines them in his marvellous booklet ‘The Abolition of Man’? Are not the virtuous followers of that Tao, which would include the Hebrews, the Athenians, the Stoics, etc., a third ‘side’, and thus surely not to be damned?<br />I take it you are seeking to be as inclusive as possible in your article, trying to see ways in which the traditional denominations of Christianity can be accepted into one overarching faith, and this out of respect, I would imagine, for the teachings of our Lord regarding the love of our neighbour. Can you not, then, find it in your heart to include within your theology those who, though they may not follow the Western practices of the recent church, have been and are faithful in other ways to the goodness put into their hearts by their Creator?<br />Perhaps when Jesus said ‘In my Father’s house are many mansions’ he was suggesting that our human divisions are not made in Heaven.<br />Perhaps, also, it would be a good thing if all those who truly seek Spirit, whatever the outward form of their devotions, were to draw together and unite in the face of the increasingly predominant materialism, ignorance and repudiation of the Good, the True, and the Beautiful which are characteristic of our times. I do not myself think that Christians are the only fighters in the war you speak of.<br />Yet I agree with you that each great tradition has its own integrity, which is, I assume, why you say that mere Christianity is not sufficient. <br />So I am by no means trying to sell any sort of admixture of faiths. Nonetheless, there is a decided unattractiveness about people who think they are the only ones who have got it right and that all others can be rejected with a wave of a righteous hand. <br />Indeed, it used to be the fashion for people with similar fixed ideas to crucify those who wouldn’t conform to their shopping lists.<br />SonofMosesnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-30058831607454128972012-10-03T18:34:27.290+01:002012-10-03T18:34:27.290+01:00This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.Wurmbrandhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17345523517796356674noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-4676339287873108072012-10-03T17:27:48.034+01:002012-10-03T17:27:48.034+01:00@BB - Oh, that's what you meant! I thought you...@BB - Oh, that's what you meant! I thought your Hash 7 referred to some obscure document of Canon Law...<br /><br />I don't see the Ordinariate as a violation of 7. It is one of three possible responses to the imminent extinction of the Anglo-Catholicism - all of which involve major changes. <br /><br />1. Hang on and hope (against hope) for the best; but very probably become merely a different worship style within Liberal Anglicanism. <br /><br />2. Leave and set-up independently ('Continuing' Anglicans). <br /><br />3. Leave and join Rome, retaining the Anglican liturgy and married priests.Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-73763678064596930482012-10-03T15:39:48.941+01:002012-10-03T15:39:48.941+01:00Maybe I didn’t understand your perspective number ...Maybe I didn’t understand your perspective number seven. I was thinking that the Anglican Ordinariates would be an attempt to “fuse” denominations.Bruce B,noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-11273612247109496462012-10-03T13:13:51.922+01:002012-10-03T13:13:51.922+01:00@BB - I'm afraid I have no idea what you mean;...@BB - I'm afraid I have no idea what you mean; but it doesn't sound like a thing that would concern me. <br /><br />I have no plans at present to change denomination because there are still a few valid Christian Churches in the C of E and within my geographical range; but the situation in the Anglican Church is deterioriating rapidly, and I have no confidence that this situation will be sustained for many years ahead.<br /><br />For example, there might be an impossible change of personnel, or liturgy, or it is possible that one of the churches I attend might be 'constrctively dismissed' from the CoE.<br /><br />Therefore, I must remain open to consider alternatives - the Ordinariate is one of these alternative; but at present the nearest is about 40 miles away. So it is not high on the 'reserve list'.Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-28646243992532275812012-10-03T13:02:21.841+01:002012-10-03T13:02:21.841+01:00I am glad to have found your writings. I find them...I am glad to have found your writings. I find them very interesting. <br />I think you mentioned that you might enter the Roman Catholic Anglican Ordinariate. Isn’t Anglicanorum Coetibus a violation of #7?<br />We had a chance to enter the ordinariate through the ACA, a continuing Anglican jurisdiction but we declined.Bruce B.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-37784112973328796052012-10-03T12:44:08.304+01:002012-10-03T12:44:08.304+01:00@asdf - "There are however a much larger numb...@asdf - "There are however a much larger number of "Christian" churches/denominations that wouldn't meet the guidelines of "Mere Christianity" today then Lewis's time."<br /><br />Yes, and that is one of the reasons why the concept is even more important now than before. <br /><br />Indeed, the leadership of most Christian denominations would not 'meet the guidelines' - so, the matter becomes even more specific, since individual Mere Christians seem to be rather thinly scattered as minorities within several or many denominations.<br /><br />It is highly desirable, probably necessary, that these scattered individuals or minorities can form a mutual alliance in a unity at the most profound and spiritual level. <br /><br />Denominational differences will remain, and are both necessary and indeed desirable (compared with the alternatives), but should not block the path of this spiritual unity.Bruce Charltonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09615189090601688535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4683970826895755480.post-91202841430455110612012-10-03T12:28:50.460+01:002012-10-03T12:28:50.460+01:00Agree with your whole post. There are however a m...Agree with your whole post. There are however a much larger number of "Christian" churches/denominations that wouldn't meet the guidelines of "Mere Christianity" today then Lewis's time.asdfnoreply@blogger.com