In this fine article the Anglican Curmudgeon describes, helpfully, what is meant when the phrase, “doctrine, discipline and worship” is invoked. See what you think:
Reaction from the left side of the Episcopal aisle to the facts laid out in my previous post about South Carolina has been, if not completely predictable, then certainly telling. In fact, I find it downright fascinating. Here we have the liberals in the Church — the reappraisers, the ones oriented to the left of center — taking a fundamentalist approach to the issue of just what constitutes the “doctrine, discipline and worship” of the Episcopal Church (USA). In jurisprudence, we would call their stance one of “legal positivism” — that is to say, “if there is not a law about it somewhere, then no law exists on the subject.”
Related Articles
3 users responded in this post
The guy with the biggest stick can make up the rules as he/she goes along. Is anyone surprised?
The Anglican Curmudgeon does and excellent job and his new post regarding the Writ to the Supreme Court of the US is also excellent….I commend it to all.
Very interesting and telling post from the Curmudgeon! Several things:
–By their own admission, the 1979 BCP is not you Father’s Oldsmobile, not a mere revision of the 1928 American, 1662, and other versions of the Book of Common Prayer but something so different, so “other,” as to constitute another book and another worship entirely. Peter Toon must be looking down and feeling very vindicated!
–Many of their arguments are errily reminiscent of those made against J. Gresham Machen by earlier revisionists in the Prebyterian Church (USA) in the early 20th Century. The PC(USA) ruled that Machen’s refusal to support their revisionist Forign Missions Board and his founding and support of the Independent Presbyterian Board of Foreign Missions constituted an offense as grave as refusing to take Holy Communion. When you swallow everything else, sins against the institution are the only truly unforgivable sins!