| Letters from
19 to 25 March 2012
Like
all letters to the editor everywhere, these letters express
the opinions of the writers and not Anglicans Online.
We publish letters that we think will be of interest
to our readers, whether we agree with them or not. If
you'd like to write a letter of your own, click here.
Underestimating
Canterbury?
For
the first time ever, I disagree and am disappointed with your
editorial and in particular its sad and silly
comment regarding the Archbishop of Canterbury.
There
is an Anglican Communion beyond England and the US
as the tributes from other parts of the Communion
indicate. At least you have published those tributes.
As your own valuable AT site demonstrates, the Communion's
concerns and activities and service and life and
personal and parochial and diocesan links are broader
and deeper and richer than a lot of sensational reporting
of the divisive issues would suggest.
I'd
recommend that you and your readers check out now
the various far more generous articles regarding
the Archbishop of Canterbury that, for example, the
London Guardian has published on the excellent Religion
part of its site, including the paper's editorial,
none of which you have so far included in Thinking
Anglicans.
I
am more on the liberal left theologically than Anglicans
Together (on Scriptural and scientific grounds, a
convinced unitarian Episcopalian, for many years
a member of the unitarian Christian congregation
of Boston's historic King's Chapel) though also,
culturally conservative, a member of the Prayer Book
Society — and former long-time parish priest
and still hospital and ex-service chaplain in the
now all-too-narrow Diocese of Sydney. But above all,
I am a broad churchman.
Because
of that, I believe that whether Archbishop Rowan's
particular choices and actions were always right
(and whose are?), the Archbishop has rightly sought,
I believe, the unity of the Spirit in the bond of
peace. He has rightly sought, for example, charitably
to incorporate both those supportive of ordained
women's ministry and those opposed, those supportive
of the blessing of civil union and even "gay marriage",
as well as those strongly opposed.
The
intolerant and obsessive concern with these issues,
on both extremes of these debates, I think, is a
blot on a Church and a Communion where too often
in the past those on the extremes have done more
harm than good, and worse, has diverted the Church
from the heart of its mission, a strong witness to
the good news of the nearness of kingdom of heaven
on earth and to our Lord's call to us all to repent
(or return, as the Aramaic word is also well translated),
and to put our trust in that good news.
Fortunately,
on the whole, many do recognise that one of the greatest
and most able Archbishops of recent times, whatever
his faults, has done much to contribute to that mission.
(Even the bare statistics for the Church of England,
not least in its cathedrals, are evidence for that.)
But, as I say, the Guardian leader and its articles
put this all in better ways than I can.
John
Bunyan
St John the Baptist's, Canberra & King's Chapel, Boston
Campbelltown, New South Wales, AUSTRALIA
bunyanj@tpg.com.au
19 March 2012
A
constitutional challenge indeed
the
next ABC will need the constitution of
an ox and the skin of a rhinoceros. This is the
view of Rowan Williams.
Trying
to keep the Anglican Communion together has been
a thankless task especially in the last ten years.
The immense theological skills and the quiet charm
of the Archbishop are going to be sorely missed.
Like Michael Ramsey, he has been more of a theologian
and less of an administrator, but his gifts have
been at the service of the whole communion.
Cambridge
will be lucky to have him here in December, where
he was trained, and the search for a successor who
will bring similar gifts is going to be really difficult.
Those on the various selection committees will need
everyone's prayers.
Very
Reverend Keith Johnson
Holy Trinity Church, Balsham
near Cambridge, UNITED KINGDOM
keith1412@hotmail.com
21 March 2012
The
model of a perfect primate?
On
your musings as to whether the position of
Archbishop of Canterbury “continues to
bring value to the Church and God,” perhaps
the problem is our expectations of the office.
Ambrose Bierce had a more realistic idea of the
potential of the office:
PRIMATE,
n. The head of a church, especially a State church
supported by involuntary contributions. The Primate
of England is the Archbishop of Canterbury, an
amiable old gentleman, who occupies Lambeth Palace
when living and Westminster Abbey when dead.
He is commonly dead.
Steve
Lusk
St. Alban's Church, Annandale
Annandale, Virginia, USA
25 March 2012
Fret
not, it's Lent
I
was a bit taken aback by the tablet-notes format of last
week's letter. I missed having a picture.
However, by the time I got to the end, I got
it.
Regarding
the content, it's Lent and I refuse to fret about
the current or next Archbishop of Canterbury. Thanks
for your remarks.
The
Reverend Lois Keen
Grace Episcopal Norwalk
Norwalk, Connecticut, USA
19
March 2012
Every
picture tells a story
Not
owning an iPad or other tablet device,
it took me a moment to realize that your
image was a pad of paper set within an iPad.
Very clever image to go with the story.
Steven
Rindahl
Chapel of Christ the King, Fort Jackson
Columbia, South Carolina, USA
19 March 2012
Laetare!
The
letter of two weeks ago was not unprovocative. It
was thoughtful. It helped us go into Refreshment
Sunday thinking slightly more uplifting things
than usual for that time of Lent.
Claire
Steep
St Andrews in St Andrews
St Andrews, Fife, SCOTLAND
cs772@st-andrews.ac.uk
22 March 2012
Earlier
letters
We
launched our 'Letters to AO' section on 11 May 2003.
All published letters are in our archives.
 |
