And it is good thing that you do. You don’t want to cross us.

New it was a joke. There actually was an infamous Union Match where an SMBC slugged a MTC nancy boy. Apparently this is why each year the SMBC vs MTC is over a game of soccer instead of the Heavenly game.

Re: changing the Creeds – that’s interesting. At the Creeds conference with Carl Trueman, someone asked him about that very thing. He was a slight bit reluctant to fully endorse charging ahead and changing things, but did leave a place for making considered changes under the authority of the church. But he also made another interesting point – more to those who want to rewrite creeds from the ground up – that, do we really think that we could write a better Creed which could stand the test of time better than the ancient ones? That’s a mighty big call, he said.

I suppose I like that way of thinking. There’s a humility to realising the strength of our ancient creeds, but a bit of wriggle room for slow and cautious change.

re creeds
ancient creeds had a particular context did they not. we may rightly reaffirm them now but also need to elaborate on other issues.

e.g in the apostles creed
he descended into hell.

some use ” on the cross he descended into hell”

at St Peters we say “on the cross he suffered the full extend of God’s wrath”

e.g 2
we ibeleive in the holy catholic church
we say
we beleive in the holy and apostolic church ( knowing that if you are apostolic you are catholic.

enjoy his grace
s

re: nervousness… hmm, I can’t quite remember it. But I do remember thinking – gee, this is a topic we’re slightly out of our depths on. particularly with respect to current controversies. I’ve reckon PSA is pretty darn important – but how do creeds help with that? I’m not so sure. Ashley Null was helpful on the Poddy when we spoke about primary and secondary issues – more specifically, how we don’t want secondary issues to become primary issues, BUT how we ought to reject secondary issues which obfuscate or confuse the primary issues. Ie, NPP and no-PSA. Anyway, that’s how I see the lie of the land, but without re-writing creeds for modern times, I’m still not sure how the ancient creeds help with modern debates. Thoughts?

Re: McGrath’s book – I’ve not read it, but from what you mentioned the other night, it might be a good one to read. What does he have to say about these sorts of issues?

did I detect a little nervousness in the creeds discussion with Chris Ashton? Is PSA the more fundamental divide? what do you do with orthodox creeds that weren’t dealing with modern theological controversy?!?

Alistar McGraths ” Christianity’s Dangerous Idea – the protestant revolution” p.460-472 has some curious conclusions on this. (as usual what he doesn’t say speaks louder)

see you at the ACL dinner.

You boys want to do something on global Anglican politics/disaster? Happy to oblige

As always, check with kt-rae.