Height has nothing to do with it.
"The Church is not something imposed externally on civil society; the Church is civil society when through the baptism of all its members it has reached the terminus of its potentialities. When Church and State have thus become one, humanity has at last found its home in a social organism for which it has been longing since creation; it is a home which is supernatural, one which embraces every side of man’s life and prepares him for his home in eternity. The Church is the climax of man’s longings as a social being."
...
"Their knowledge of the Fathers had made High Churchmen familiar with the conception of history as an ordered process working from creation towards a certain end, the restoration of all things in Christ. The Incarnation is not something new. The Word made Flesh is the same as He who was in the beginning with God, by whom all things were made, the Light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world. Christ came not to destroy but to fulfil the process begun by Him in the primitive civil and religious society of Genesis. As the Convocation Book puts it, the platform of Church government in the New Testament can be lawfully deduced from that laid down in the Old. [Ibid., p. 141.]"
from The High Church Tradition, by G.W.O. Addleshaw
"The Incarnation is not something new." I don't know what to make of that sentence. Of course the Incarnation was something new, but I won't hold Addleshaw accountable to that kind of wooden literalism. I think that his point is that Old Covenant reality was incarnational reality, no less than our post-Word-made-flesh reality is. In context, it is important to note that Addleshaw here stresses the continuity between the church prior to Christ's coming, and its development and continuing perfecting since. He obviously doesn't deny the "ordered process" "working toward the restoration of all things in Christ," so doesn't belittle the Incarnation, but that statement, "The Incarnation is not something new," is jarring nonetheless.
Incarnational reality of the Old Covenant. Something to think about.
"The Church is not something imposed externally on civil society; the Church is civil society when through the baptism of all its members it has reached the terminus of its potentialities. When Church and State have thus become one, humanity has at last found its home in a social organism for which it has been longing since creation; it is a home which is supernatural, one which embraces every side of man’s life and prepares him for his home in eternity. The Church is the climax of man’s longings as a social being."
...
"Their knowledge of the Fathers had made High Churchmen familiar with the conception of history as an ordered process working from creation towards a certain end, the restoration of all things in Christ. The Incarnation is not something new. The Word made Flesh is the same as He who was in the beginning with God, by whom all things were made, the Light that lighteth every man that cometh into the world. Christ came not to destroy but to fulfil the process begun by Him in the primitive civil and religious society of Genesis. As the Convocation Book puts it, the platform of Church government in the New Testament can be lawfully deduced from that laid down in the Old. [Ibid., p. 141.]"
from The High Church Tradition, by G.W.O. Addleshaw
"The Incarnation is not something new." I don't know what to make of that sentence. Of course the Incarnation was something new, but I won't hold Addleshaw accountable to that kind of wooden literalism. I think that his point is that Old Covenant reality was incarnational reality, no less than our post-Word-made-flesh reality is. In context, it is important to note that Addleshaw here stresses the continuity between the church prior to Christ's coming, and its development and continuing perfecting since. He obviously doesn't deny the "ordered process" "working toward the restoration of all things in Christ," so doesn't belittle the Incarnation, but that statement, "The Incarnation is not something new," is jarring nonetheless.
Incarnational reality of the Old Covenant. Something to think about.
posted by trawlerman at 10:17 PM
1 Comments:
Great post, John. I, like you, had difficulty with Addleshaw's comment on the incarnation.
I like giving authors a little bit of wiggle room, especially when not understanding the direction they've come from (or sometimes are going). So I too think it would be wrong to 'woodenly' interepret Addleshaw.
I've read the post several times and I still have trouble with
'...the Church is civil society when through the baptism of all its members it has reached the terminus of its potentialities.'
Is this the Great Commission for Anglicans? He's been reading too much LaHaye. I can't fathom anyone writing about the 'terminus' of the church's mission, not becuase it won't happen but rather who but God will know?
Matt | Homepage | 04.21.05 - 9:25 am | #
Post a Comment
<< Home