Has the Archbishop of Canterbury condemned usury this morning? (report on the Today programme that he had declared war on Wonga).
That is a change from the post-war non-judgmental stance of the Anglican church towards societal sins.
Many people (usually non-Anglicans) sneer that the Church of England is wishy-washy in its refusal to condemn erroneous human behaviour and has an over-reliance on earnest understanding and sympathy rather than fundamentalist judgment followed by penance or expulsion (or indeed damnation, if you believe in damnation).
As I understand it (and I have no theological training, this is just what I have picked up, so I may be wrong in all or part of it) the Anglican Church is in the Apostolic Succession and (according to some) is the only true Church in the Apostolic Succession given that the Church of Rome has fallen into error.
As the successors to the Apostles the Anglican Church has the power to judge human behaviour and these judgments are for all time. This is the power to bind and loose - what is bound on Earth will be bound in Heaven and what is loosened on Earth will be loosened in Heaven. If taken seriously this is a heavy responsibility for priests to carry.
However there is a get-out clause to this heavy responsibility.
If sins are not judged by the Church they will be carried over to be judged on the Day of Judgment at the End of Days.
For some time Anglican theologians have developed the theory that the final judgment at the End of Days will be more merciful than the judgments by individual priests, prone as they are to all the human failings of anger, stupidity, pride etc.
Therefore, the argument has gone, it is better for the Anglican Church not to absolutely judge and condemn but to support the wrongdoers and urge them to repentance and leave the judging to the Day of Judgment.
This has been the stance of the Church of England for so long that the Archbishop's declaration of "war" against usurers must be seen as a new departure.
Does any of this matter?
The atheists will scoff as usual. The minority religions will say it doesn't apply to them (although technically they are auto-enrolled into the Anglican communion whether they like it or not). The Bad and the Very Bad (to use a medieval classification from the Vision of Tondal manuscript) will be exultant as they think they are winning the war of sin anyway.
Is anyone listening to the Anglican bishops?
That is a change from the post-war non-judgmental stance of the Anglican church towards societal sins.
Many people (usually non-Anglicans) sneer that the Church of England is wishy-washy in its refusal to condemn erroneous human behaviour and has an over-reliance on earnest understanding and sympathy rather than fundamentalist judgment followed by penance or expulsion (or indeed damnation, if you believe in damnation).
As I understand it (and I have no theological training, this is just what I have picked up, so I may be wrong in all or part of it) the Anglican Church is in the Apostolic Succession and (according to some) is the only true Church in the Apostolic Succession given that the Church of Rome has fallen into error.
As the successors to the Apostles the Anglican Church has the power to judge human behaviour and these judgments are for all time. This is the power to bind and loose - what is bound on Earth will be bound in Heaven and what is loosened on Earth will be loosened in Heaven. If taken seriously this is a heavy responsibility for priests to carry.
However there is a get-out clause to this heavy responsibility.
If sins are not judged by the Church they will be carried over to be judged on the Day of Judgment at the End of Days.
For some time Anglican theologians have developed the theory that the final judgment at the End of Days will be more merciful than the judgments by individual priests, prone as they are to all the human failings of anger, stupidity, pride etc.
Therefore, the argument has gone, it is better for the Anglican Church not to absolutely judge and condemn but to support the wrongdoers and urge them to repentance and leave the judging to the Day of Judgment.
This has been the stance of the Church of England for so long that the Archbishop's declaration of "war" against usurers must be seen as a new departure.
Does any of this matter?
The atheists will scoff as usual. The minority religions will say it doesn't apply to them (although technically they are auto-enrolled into the Anglican communion whether they like it or not). The Bad and the Very Bad (to use a medieval classification from the Vision of Tondal manuscript) will be exultant as they think they are winning the war of sin anyway.
Is anyone listening to the Anglican bishops?
No comments:
Post a Comment