Comments on: David Zahl Talks About Mockingbird Ministries: The IM Interview http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview ...dispatches from the post-evangelical wilderness Sun, 12 Feb 2012 12:47:28 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1 By: Eve Nash http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-506930 Eve Nash Thu, 13 Aug 2009 09:45:28 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-506930 RE: "Most of the Episcopalians I know [don't subscribe to the 39 articles]..." You may need to broaden your horizons, as nearly every orthodox Episcopalian I;ve ever known does indeed affirm these. RE: “Most of the Episcopalians I know [don't subscribe to the 39 articles]…”

You may need to broaden your horizons, as nearly every orthodox Episcopalian I;ve ever known does indeed affirm these.

]]> By: Rob Eaton+ http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-506771 Rob Eaton+ Wed, 12 Aug 2009 07:13:10 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-506771 Excellent. This is the kind of the forerunners that we will be seeing more of in this season. Good to know John+ hasn't worked you to death, John+. RGEaton Excellent.
This is the kind of the forerunners that we will be seeing more of in this season.
Good to know John+ hasn’t worked you to death, John+.

RGEaton

]]> By: Jody+ http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-505441 Jody+ Sun, 02 Aug 2009 02:01:18 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-505441 One quibble, the articles do not condemn the real presence, but transubstantiation and specifically the idea of venerating the host (lifting it up, gazing upon it and carrying it about, as at Corpus Christi) rather than eating it. This practice stemmed from the belief in ocular communion, which in turn came from a belief of pholosophers during the middle ages, that when one gazed upon something, tiny bits of it (simulacra) entered one's eyes; because of this, people believed they were communing when they looked upon the host. Gradually people stopped receiving altogether and believed the host was something to be reverenced rather than eaten. There were even little Mass books in Germany which helped people time their runs from one church to the other so that they could get there at the precise moment of the elevation. Anglicans and other reformers reacted against this, declared it superstitious and unfaithful and said that one should properly reverence the sacrament by doing with it what was commanded, i.e. eating it. Contrary to what is sometimes said, Cranmer was not a Zwinglian and in the broad history of Anglicanism memorialism is a much a ditch on one side as transubstantiation is on the other (though of course there are examples of Anglicans believing each, such as the ritualists and some contemporary Sidney Anglicans). That being said, you're right that the Episcopal Church has never required assent or subscription to the articles, except for article VI, a form of which all clergy must subscribe to in their ordination, i.e. that we believe the Holy Scriptures to contain all things necessary for salvation. One quibble, the articles do not condemn the real presence, but transubstantiation and specifically the idea of venerating the host (lifting it up, gazing upon it and carrying it about, as at Corpus Christi) rather than eating it. This practice stemmed from the belief in ocular communion, which in turn came from a belief of pholosophers during the middle ages, that when one gazed upon something, tiny bits of it (simulacra) entered one’s eyes; because of this, people believed they were communing when they looked upon the host. Gradually people stopped receiving altogether and believed the host was something to be reverenced rather than eaten. There were even little Mass books in Germany which helped people time their runs from one church to the other so that they could get there at the precise moment of the elevation. Anglicans and other reformers reacted against this, declared it superstitious and unfaithful and said that one should properly reverence the sacrament by doing with it what was commanded, i.e. eating it. Contrary to what is sometimes said, Cranmer was not a Zwinglian and in the broad history of Anglicanism memorialism is a much a ditch on one side as transubstantiation is on the other (though of course there are examples of Anglicans believing each, such as the ritualists and some contemporary Sidney Anglicans).

That being said, you’re right that the Episcopal Church has never required assent or subscription to the articles, except for article VI, a form of which all clergy must subscribe to in their ordination, i.e. that we believe the Holy Scriptures to contain all things necessary for salvation.

]]> By: Jeff Hual http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-505045 Jeff Hual Fri, 31 Jul 2009 17:19:07 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-505045 As an episcopal anglican, and as one of the "Cranmerian Lutherans" over at Mockingbird, perhaps I can shed some light: Episcopalians believe their theology is summed up in the statement "Lex orandi, lex credendi", or "What we pray is what we believe". So rather than a confession, we look to the Book of Common Prayer as our source of guidance much as other denominations look to their confessions, and of course the BCP points to, not replaces, the guidance of Scripture. And I would agree with our host that Epsicopalians are much more reformation in our theology than some might believe. But you are right about the 39 articles: some churches swear by them, while others sweep them under the rug based on the fact that they are in the back of the BCP as "historical documents". As an episcopal anglican, and as one of the “Cranmerian Lutherans” over at Mockingbird, perhaps I can shed some light: Episcopalians believe their theology is summed up in the statement “Lex orandi, lex credendi”, or “What we pray is what we believe”. So rather than a confession, we look to the Book of Common Prayer as our source of guidance much as other denominations look to their confessions, and of course the BCP points to, not replaces, the guidance of Scripture.

And I would agree with our host that Epsicopalians are much more reformation in our theology than some might believe. But you are right about the 39 articles: some churches swear by them, while others sweep them under the rug based on the fact that they are in the back of the BCP as “historical documents”.

]]> By: Chad Rushing http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-504922 Chad Rushing Thu, 30 Jul 2009 23:08:56 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-504922 For those having trouble with John Zahl's hyperlink, you have to cut and paste the entire URL into the Address field on your browser in order to access it. For some reason, everything after the first "|" is left off of the direct link when clicking directly on it. Reading the article right now ... so far, I agree with the author wholeheartedly in his criticism of NPP. For those having trouble with John Zahl’s hyperlink, you have to cut and paste the entire URL into the Address field on your browser in order to access it. For some reason, everything after the first “|” is left off of the direct link when clicking directly on it.

Reading the article right now … so far, I agree with the author wholeheartedly in his criticism of NPP.

]]> By: John Zahl http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-504920 John Zahl Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:51:54 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-504920 Can't speak for the whole Mockingbird conglomerate obviously, and we're all a little different, but I think most of us veer in the low-church direction. Can’t speak for the whole Mockingbird conglomerate obviously, and we’re all a little different, but I think most of us veer in the low-church direction.

]]> By: Steve in Toronto http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-504917 Steve in Toronto Thu, 30 Jul 2009 20:01:34 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-504917 Peter was my first Anglican priest and I yet to sit under a better preacher. I also know about FOCUS (one of my old high school friends used to work for them). I am afraid the world of Orthodox Episcopalian is a small one (for the simple reason that there don’t seem a lot of them). Where do you guys stand on the High vs. Low Church spectrum? I have often found that the more evangelical the Anglican the less emphases was placed on traditional liturgy (Peters old church Little Trinity would not even let us have candles at our wedding). I hate having to choose between rich historic liturgy and clear articulation of the gospel. Peter was my first Anglican priest and I yet to sit under a better preacher. I also know about FOCUS (one of my old high school friends used to work for them). I am afraid the world of Orthodox Episcopalian is a small one (for the simple reason that there don’t seem a lot of them). Where do you guys stand on the High vs. Low Church spectrum? I have often found that the more evangelical the Anglican the less emphases was placed on traditional liturgy (Peters old church Little Trinity would not even let us have candles at our wedding). I hate having to choose between rich historic liturgy and clear articulation of the gospel.

]]> By: John Zahl http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-504916 John Zahl Thu, 30 Jul 2009 19:11:00 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-504916 Steve, I appreciate the thoughtful response, and, yes, I'm in Charleston and will tell Peter hello the next time I see him. Are you aware that his son-in-law, Sean Norris, is the other main guy behind Mockingbird besides DZ, and that DZ worked for years (along with many other mockingbirds) for FOCUS, which Peter started? Small world! JZ sorry about the dead link. Maybe this one works? http://www.alliancenet.org/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID307086|CHID560462|CIID1660662,00.html Steve, I appreciate the thoughtful response, and, yes, I’m in Charleston and will tell Peter hello the next time I see him. Are you aware that his son-in-law, Sean Norris, is the other main guy behind Mockingbird besides DZ, and that DZ worked for years (along with many other mockingbirds) for FOCUS, which Peter started? Small world! JZ

sorry about the dead link. Maybe this one works? http://www.alliancenet.org/partner/Article_Display_Page/0,,PTID307086|CHID560462|CIID1660662,00.html

]]> By: Steve in Toronto http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-504913 Steve in Toronto Thu, 30 Jul 2009 18:28:11 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-504913 Thanks for the link John. (It’s dead but I am familiar with Ligon Duncan critique of the NPP) that’s part of the reason I asked my question. As a non-theologian it hard for me to know what to think about Dr. Wright not only do I enjoy both his books and his preaching (I got to spend some time in Durham last year) but he also a forceful advocate for “Mere Christianity” and he seems to be a central figure in the ascension of the evangelical “faction” in the Church of England. I also really like the way the new perspective seems to point to a possible reconciliation between Evangelicalism and Anglo-Catholicism. On the other hand I don’t want to give up on the truly transformative effect my discovery of the Lutheran understanding of the Gospel has had on my own faith. I look forward to reading more of your (and fellow Mocking Birds) stuff and if you are in Charleston any time soon give my regards to my old Priest Dr. Peter Moore. God Bless Steve in Toronto Thanks for the link John. (It’s dead but I am familiar with Ligon Duncan critique of the NPP) that’s part of the reason I asked my question. As a non-theologian it hard for me to know what to think about Dr. Wright not only do I enjoy both his books and his preaching (I got to spend some time in Durham last year) but he also a forceful advocate for “Mere Christianity” and he seems to be a central figure in the ascension of the evangelical “faction” in the Church of England. I also really like the way the new perspective seems to point to a possible reconciliation between Evangelicalism and Anglo-Catholicism. On the other hand I don’t want to give up on the truly transformative effect my discovery of the Lutheran understanding of the Gospel has had on my own faith. I look forward to reading more of your (and fellow Mocking Birds) stuff and if you are in Charleston any time soon give my regards to my old Priest Dr. Peter Moore.

God Bless

Steve in Toronto

]]> By: J.P. http://www.internetmonk.com/archive/david-zahl-talks-about-mockingbird-ministries-the-im-interview/comment-page-1#comment-504902 J.P. Thu, 30 Jul 2009 17:54:46 +0000 http://www.internetmonk.com/?p=3939#comment-504902 <em>"So part of Mockingbird is a response to the tendency described above of Christians “splitting” their lives into their “Christian life” and their everyday one, implicit being the fact that you cannot be a Christian and a human being at the same time."</em> Is that what they're teaching in churches these days? ... Come to think of it, yeah. <em>"Of course, there are some risks involved: growing too disembodied, or becoming pharisaical about Pharisees or just plain smug – it’s a slippery slope ..."</em> whoa, you can be pharisaical about Pharisees? That's ironic. “So part of Mockingbird is a response to the tendency described above of Christians “splitting” their lives into their “Christian life” and their everyday one, implicit being the fact that you cannot be a Christian and a human being at the same time.”

Is that what they’re teaching in churches these days? … Come to think of it, yeah.

“Of course, there are some risks involved: growing too disembodied, or becoming pharisaical about Pharisees or just plain smug – it’s a slippery slope …”

whoa, you can be pharisaical about Pharisees? That’s ironic.

]]>