3 thoughts on “The meaning of words – Nick Baines Blog”
this is a copy of my view of this on Nick Baines Blog
Words are only transferable between cultures and languages and dialects if they are accompanied by action. To that end without action the words have no meaning at all. The point of words is to express not only instruction but also emotion. All abuse begins with words , all change begins with words but Love begins with action. Whereas hate is the confirming of words with an action. Oppression begins with the denial of expression which is to be given the opportunity to know him and share him in whichever way we express that.
The issues which surround same sex unions are the issues which have surrounded many issues over the years , it all comes down to one thing in the end, and that is human judgement without compassion and without discernment, Often the way in which some “Christians” Governments and leaders handle the issue of inequality leads to the only unity they have which is “perceived” inner spirituality which just happen to be different in the way in which they approach life and the gospel.
It is indeed a really difficult concept to believe that God loves the persecutor as well as the persecuted; I still find it hard to get my head round it another blurring of the edges, because God not only loves Both but he also tells the one who thinks they are without perceived sin to love the one with sin, Then just to complicate it further there is no distinction between “the bishop or the clergy” and any one they may serve in the name of Christ. It makes for uncomfortable living, some cope with it by sharing every happy event in their lives and some more mundane events, as the example of how to live life with Christ in it. Others go on the self denial track, the monastic route that says simplicity solves the problem, rather than actually making it go deeper. That God Loves us that we might Love is a precious gift. The meaning of words identifies the meaning of thought and thus shows our intentions.
Stupid question but if our clergy presides over a same sex wedding and someone in Africa gets murdered because of the ceremony, could the clergy be charged with an accessory to murder? Or if certain bishops in the US refuse to ignore this rule by the ABC could the church or an international court hold them or charge them with the crime. It seems crazy but I am trying to figure out how we can get out of control clergy in line. The PB here in the US has “blood all over her hands” and does not seem to care about anyone or anything but her agenda. Why does the ABC let her run wild?
“…if our clergy preside over a same sex wedding and someone in Africa gets murdered because of the ceremony, could the clergy be charged with an accessory to murder?”
No.
“Or if certain bishops in the US refuse to ignore this rule by the ABC could the church or an international court hold them or charge them with the crime?”
No.
“…I am trying to figure out how we can get out-of-control clergy in line. The PB here in the US has “blood all over her hands” and does not seem to care about anyone or anything but her agenda. Why does the ABC let her run wild?”
Concisely, David–
(1) The ABC does not personally make rules– neither, except in form, does the Pope– and s/he exercises more influence than power in a Communion where susceptibility to such influence was once more highly esteemed.
(2) The PB is theoretically accountable to the House of Bishops.
(3) The House of Bishops has stronger disciplinary procedures than in the past, but they have been invoked mainly in relation to bishops, dioceses, and parishes seceding from the Episcopal Church.
(4) The next PB will be elected by the House of Bishops in 2015.
this is a copy of my view of this on Nick Baines Blog
Words are only transferable between cultures and languages and dialects if they are accompanied by action. To that end without action the words have no meaning at all. The point of words is to express not only instruction but also emotion. All abuse begins with words , all change begins with words but Love begins with action. Whereas hate is the confirming of words with an action. Oppression begins with the denial of expression which is to be given the opportunity to know him and share him in whichever way we express that.
The issues which surround same sex unions are the issues which have surrounded many issues over the years , it all comes down to one thing in the end, and that is human judgement without compassion and without discernment, Often the way in which some “Christians” Governments and leaders handle the issue of inequality leads to the only unity they have which is “perceived” inner spirituality which just happen to be different in the way in which they approach life and the gospel.
It is indeed a really difficult concept to believe that God loves the persecutor as well as the persecuted; I still find it hard to get my head round it another blurring of the edges, because God not only loves Both but he also tells the one who thinks they are without perceived sin to love the one with sin, Then just to complicate it further there is no distinction between “the bishop or the clergy” and any one they may serve in the name of Christ. It makes for uncomfortable living, some cope with it by sharing every happy event in their lives and some more mundane events, as the example of how to live life with Christ in it. Others go on the self denial track, the monastic route that says simplicity solves the problem, rather than actually making it go deeper. That God Loves us that we might Love is a precious gift. The meaning of words identifies the meaning of thought and thus shows our intentions.
Stupid question but if our clergy presides over a same sex wedding and someone in Africa gets murdered because of the ceremony, could the clergy be charged with an accessory to murder? Or if certain bishops in the US refuse to ignore this rule by the ABC could the church or an international court hold them or charge them with the crime. It seems crazy but I am trying to figure out how we can get out of control clergy in line. The PB here in the US has “blood all over her hands” and does not seem to care about anyone or anything but her agenda. Why does the ABC let her run wild?
“…if our clergy preside over a same sex wedding and someone in Africa gets murdered because of the ceremony, could the clergy be charged with an accessory to murder?”
No.
“Or if certain bishops in the US refuse to ignore this rule by the ABC could the church or an international court hold them or charge them with the crime?”
No.
“…I am trying to figure out how we can get out-of-control clergy in line. The PB here in the US has “blood all over her hands” and does not seem to care about anyone or anything but her agenda. Why does the ABC let her run wild?”
Concisely, David–
(1) The ABC does not personally make rules– neither, except in form, does the Pope– and s/he exercises more influence than power in a Communion where susceptibility to such influence was once more highly esteemed.
(2) The PB is theoretically accountable to the House of Bishops.
(3) The House of Bishops has stronger disciplinary procedures than in the past, but they have been invoked mainly in relation to bishops, dioceses, and parishes seceding from the Episcopal Church.
(4) The next PB will be elected by the House of Bishops in 2015.