The Fulcrum Newsletter I wrote and noted on the blog last week - entitled "The Anglican Communion: Mapping the Terrain" - led to a fascinating level of response, much of it critical.
As a result I’ve written two further pieces trying to engage with some of the issues raised. As they are rather too lengthy to put on the blog (though if there is demand then I can) I have posted them up online as PDFs.
The first is a general response on the challenges of mapping. This asks
-
Is mapping – particularly of this level of complexity - a helpful exercise - particularly at the present moment?
-
Is the map accurate and helpful?
-
Where am I/are we on the map?
-
What do we do with it?
The second has a focus on the main area of controversy in the mapping - the validity and usefulness of suggesting it is helpful to distinguish two approaches among conservatives on sexuality which I then labelled "rejectionist" and "reasserter".
This looks at
-
Is it accurate and helpful to distinguish two positions on sexuality among conservatives?
-
Are the names I gave accurate and helpful?
-
Was the quotation I used an unfair slur on the "rejectionist" group?
-
Are the distinguishing features I offered accurate and helpful?
-
Does the distinction help understand the current tensions within the Communion?
I look forward (I think) to any further responses and ongoing discussion either here or on other blogs.
1 comment:
I do think that the question of 'ecclesiology in terms of issues of discipline and purity within the church and how one views the church as a mixed body' will tend to be answered differently by Reasserters and Rejecters. But I also think that any attempt at a serious discussion of this would be characterised by the same 'confusion and incoherence' that has characterised the discussion about everything else.
In the US, at least, I think there is a general sense that it's too late for such discussions; too many people have already made their minds up and expressed them publicly. I suspect those realigning will find reasons to have such a discussion among themselves before very long; those not realigning are, presumably, expressing acceptance of the mixed nature of the church.
Philip Wainwright
Post a Comment