tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27612445.post8118521896895211435..comments2024-03-23T12:05:23.537-05:00Comments on The Wild Reed: An Update on St. Mary's in BrisbaneMichael J. Baylyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/03087458490602152648noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27612445.post-32350305667296911972009-04-18T15:42:00.000-05:002009-04-18T15:42:00.000-05:00HI Michael
I am a producer making a documentary on...HI Michael<br />I am a producer making a documentary on St Mary's. I would very much like to speak to Carmel Glover who wrote to you recently, could you please pass on my interest in speaking to her in relation to her views and experiences of St Mary's. Thankyou.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27612445.post-91628602188705032262009-04-11T10:57:00.000-05:002009-04-11T10:57:00.000-05:00So who gets to decide who's "playing church" and w...So who gets to decide who's "playing church" and when?<BR/><BR/>Could it be that those who drafted the canon laws you cite were "playing church" in order to safeguard their particular understanding of church - one that gave them much earthly power and prestige?<BR/><BR/>I must admit I'm surprised, Gay Species, at how rigid and dogmatic you often sound when discussing these matters. It reminds me of Doris Lessing's contention that atheism is itself, more often than not, a type of religion. (Then again, I sometimes wonder if deep down you're not somewhat of a closeted "traditionalist" Roman Catholic! You can certainly sound like one.)<BR/><BR/>Also, I find it difficult to take seriously anyone who relies on 500-year old church laws to address contemporary issues/problems in the church. I'm sorry, but that's not a sign of a living tradition. Yes, I know it's a dirty word for so-called "traditonalists" (Catholic or atheist, it would seem), but all such laws are "relative" to their time and place in church history. Things can and do change - including the people of God's understanding of church and of God's presence and action in our lives - individually and communally.<BR/><BR/>Peace,<BR/><BR/>MichaelMichael J. Baylyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03087458490602152648noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-27612445.post-45259577415116742212009-04-10T15:58:00.000-05:002009-04-10T15:58:00.000-05:00Interesting. A priest without authority of a bisho...Interesting. A priest without authority of a bishop cannot exercise any sacerdotal rites, ceremonies, or acts <I>validly.</I><BR/><BR/>He may perform the rites, those rites may appear like usual, but without explicit approval and jurisdiction of the bishop, or "ordinary," the rites are invalid.<BR/><BR/>This aspect of canon law dates to the second century and to Ignatius of Antioch, Tertullian, and Ireneaus. Only the bishop is consecrated with authority, some of which he may delegate to presbyters and deacons.<BR/><BR/>The rite of baptism "in extremis" may be performed by any baptized Christian, but only under exigent circumstances, lest the "covenant" not be incorporated, and the recipient invalidate the action.<BR/><BR/>Playing "your own church" is what the Reformers did in the 15th century and were properly excommunicated. As a matter of canon law, any individual who knowingly partakes in an "illict" rite, ceremony, or sacrament is excommunicated by his own actions.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com