Father Clancy Nixon’s church has finally reached the Promised Land.
After nine years of worshiping in Mill Run Elementary School in Broadlands, the Church of the Holy Spirit moved recently to its new home in Leesburg.
Nixon compared the nine years of setting up and tearing down in a school gym to the Israelites setting up a tabernacle at each new camp in the wilderness.
“It keeps you humble when you have to set up and tear down every week,” Nixon said. “When you have to look at the basketball hoop every week, it reminds you that the church is the people, not the steeple.”
“On the other hand, it was a lot of work,” he added.
To read full article, click here.
12 comments:
There are several problems with this story from my perspective. First of all, calling the minister "father" so and so is a dead give away. Secondly, the bishop is toting a shepherd's staff, another give away to their Tractarian biases. Finally, the name of the church shows clearly it is a charismatic congregation and has no commitment to Reformed theology except as an aside perhaps. "Doctrine" divides!.
Charlie,
I have been publishing Anglicans Ablaze since 2004. I have run a number of articles of this type in those six years.
As far as I can recollect, you have never raised any objections to those articles before, why now?
I have my own reasons for running this particular article, and I plan to run similar articles in the near future. Among those reasons is that I am seeking to build a wider readership.
I do not see any advantage in limiting my readership to a small tightly knit circle in which everybody agrees on everything, including which end of the egg to crack when eating a soft boiled egg.
Because I run a particular article does not mean that I agree with the content of the article or share or endorse the views expressed in it.
If you have an article relating to a new or existing church that is Anglican and Reformed, I will run that too.
I do not try to tell you how you should run your blog. I recognize that we have different objectives and pursue different strategies to achieve those objectives. Please show me the same courtesy.
Robin, I don't believe I've tried to tell you what to do. Where did you get that impression.
I did, however, point out that you are inconsistent. If you're going to complain about Anglo-Catholic theology while promoting charismania and Anglo-Catholicism, then I can only conclude that either you're confused or you're a hypocrite.
I've been patient with you thus far because no one is perfect.
However, if you're going to insist on mixing heresy with orthodoxy, I'm going to disfellowship you.
I know. I know. You don't care:)
Charlie
Charlie
It really amounts to the same thing that happened when the Sydney Anglicans recognized full communion with ACNA. There's no difference whatsoever.
Besides, I have complained about your broad evangelicalism in the past. You just weren't listening. :)
Charlie,
Your comments gave me the impression that you are trying to tell me what I should or should not post on Anglicans Ablaze. "'Doctrine' divides!" Come on, Charlie.
Posting an article about a church that may be charismatic evangelical, rather than charismatic Anglo-Catholic, is not promoting the charismatic movement and Anglo-Catholicism.
Former Episcopalians call their pastors "father." It does not mean their Anglo-Catholic. It is habit. If you draw it to their attention, they look at you blankly.
Guernsey was wearing rochet and chimera, not cope and mitre. So he carries a pastoral staff. I have in my files a photo of evangelical Bishop Wallace Benn with a pastoral staff. The clergy of Holy Spirit were wearing cassock albs and stoles, not chasubles. The Holy Spirit website identifies the church as a "three streams, one river" church.
I had a bishop who was Anglo-Catholic and he would have dressed to the nines for such an occasion. He might have brought along his own incense pot with him and censed everything and I mean everything!
The notion that my evangelicalism is broad almost cost me a good cup of coffee and new laptop. Fortunately for me I had not put the cup to my lips. Fortunately for my cat he had the sense to still be in bed instead of up at this ungodly hour in the morning. Otherwise, he might have had an unexpected coffee bath and while he loves coffee, he hates baths!
There is method to my madness, Charlie. If I maintain too narrow a focus then I am only likely to attract those who agree with me to my blog. What does that accomplish? Nada. Another mutual appreciation society.
Posting a range of articles, however, attracts a wider readership and exposes a larger group to my own views and other people's views whom I am championing. I have found that showing openness to other people's views promotes greater openness to my own views.
My objectives for this blog are fairly close to those I outlined for the proposed network in my article, "Meeting the Challenge of Anglicanorum Coetibus--Part II":
(1) to spread the gospel in North America and throughout the world, (2) to encourage and support network members and other Christians sympathetic to network aims and core principles wherever God has placed them and in whatever ministry God has placed them; (3) to promote cooperation, fellowship, mutual assistance, and unity between network members and other Christians sympathetic to network aims and core principles, in and outside existing Anglican bodies, in and outside of North America; (4) to establish and grow new Anglican churches in North America and assist and strengthen existing ones; and (5) to promote authentic historic Anglicanism and the Church of England’s Protestant and Reformed heritage.
I do not see how I can bring into the sphere of influence of this blog those who may be sympathetic to some of my views or other people's views that I champion if I am constantly on the attack, constantly lashing out about all and sundry. It has not worked for me: it has not gained for me a hearing. It also does not fit with my temperament.
How's the weather down your way? I hear that you were getting tornadoes. It snowed here last night after drizzling all day, which means icy roads.
Have a great day, Charlie.
Robin, likewise, I refuse to fellowship with the devil. If you like to attract the devil's minions to your readership, more power to you.
I choose not to compromise.
And in fact, I have a fair amount of readership without compromising:)
I would not join membership at an Anglo-Catholic or charismatic church because one is heretical and the other is heterdox.
I do not recommend people to either fellowship because both are in serious error.
If that bothers you, so be it.
The current Archbishop of Canterbury is an antichrist and the vast majority of the Anglican Communion, including the new ACNA is apostate and a synagogue of satan.
Sincerely,
Charlie
Charlie,
My posting of this article has nothing to do with anything that you mentioned. I am not going to let myself be drawn into any debate of topics of your own choosing in which you infer that I hold positions that I do not hold. Such threads go nowhere and accomplish nothing and just give other people a platform from which they can present their point of view and misrepresent mine. To me they are a waste of time.
If you have a particular good article that you are posting on your own blog and you would like me to draw attention to that article, just send me an email. You use to send regular emails, which I found very useful but stopped after you switched over to Facebook. I do not post on Facebook due to intellectual property issues, and I am too busy researching and writing articles to read other people's blogs and I miss some good articles.
If you want to write a point of view article especially for Anglicans Ablaze, let me know and send me a draft of the article. I do reserve the right to edit articles in consultation with their writer. I will post it with the headline "Viewpoint:....."
If you want to stand in the midst of your cathedral, striking the flagstones with your staff and intoning "excommunicatus es...." there is nothing I can do about it other than think to myself, "Charlie really needs to learn to rein in his imagination and stop seeing Anglo-Catholics in everybody who does not think exactly like him...."
Robin, I have my own blog. Why would I want to write something for yours?
Secondly, the last I checked the Gospel is not open for revision. That seems to be the view of the majority of Anglicans these days.
If more Anglicans had the guts of a Toplady, perhaps we might not be in the situation we're in.
Anyone who calls their minister "Father" is no brother of mine.
Charlie
Charlie,
No one has said anything about the gospel being open for revision other than yourself. You seem intent upon making my publication of this article something more than it is.
Ever so often you leave a comment in response to one of my posts as if you are trying to pick a fight with me. I can only speculate on your reasons for doing so.
I am not going to be drawn into a quarrel over this article. On my part I am going to give the apostle Paul the last word in this matter: "Therefore let us pursue the things which make for peace and the things by which one may edify another" (Romans 14:19).
Robin, I never comment unless I see a major problem.
The fact is you're promoting heresy by posting articles like this. It implies that you agree with the theology of those you're promoting.
Having spent 10 years in the pentecostal/charismatic movement, I can tell you that it is a movement that is heterodox at best and heretical at worst. Combine that with broad evangelicalism and wishy washy Anglicanism that won't stand for anything and you have the same mix for relativism and liberalism that caused the present state of apostasy in the first place.
Secondly, if you're trying to draw in charismaniacs and Anglo-Papists, what makes you think you're going to influence them away from their own heresies?
Yes, I said "heresies". These are divisions. Your false sense of ecumenicalism would call these traditions. But the fact is the Anglican Communion is a facade, a sham. Anglicanism is a splittered, fragmented group containing many congregations that are synagogues of satan. I would include the ACNA and the REC is that evaluation.
I'm wondering why you're so touchy about criticism? I didn't say that much. I just pointed out your inconsistency. On the one hand you're criticizing the Anglo-Papists and on the other hand you're indirectly promoting them. You're like a small version of David Virtue!
The thing is, oil and water don't mix.
Charlie
Which gospel are you promoting, Robin? The charismatic one? The "historic episcopacy" gospel? Or the Evangelical and Protestant Gospel?
Post a Comment