May 06
Classifying ecclesiology
Halden attempts to plot ecclesiologies on a simple matrix. I found this a fascinating set of descriptions. What raises a question mark for me, however, is that I know my ecclesiology is high because it is strong, and that the two are interrelated. I wonder if this means that for the others there is a dominant component in the pairings also? Perhaps those who hold to different ecclesiologies could reflect on which their dominant trait is also.
May 7th, 2008 at 1:44 am
I’d have to say that I’m a Low-Weak, which is undoubtedly the result of growing up in a Restorationist Church of Christ environment; I presently attend a Baptist church for many of those same qualities.
In reading the matrix descriptions, the key question I gravitated toward thinking about was whether the work of the Holy Spirit is bound to the Church (strong) or not (weak). I tend to hold the position that it is the Church’s responsibility to proclaim the gospel, but that everything beyond that, including conversion, is the work of the Holy Spirit and we ought not try to take credit for that.
May 7th, 2008 at 2:04 am
[...] Ecclesiology matrix Published May 6, 2008 Uncategorized HT: MetaCatholic [...]
May 7th, 2008 at 6:42 am
I think I’m somewhere between a high-weak and low-weak. I guess that makes me a medium-weak.
May 7th, 2008 at 9:48 pm
I’m definitely low-weak, like most of my fellow evangelical charismatics in the Church of England. Halden claims the Anglican Communion is high-strong, which perhaps explains why we don’t seem to fit in. But the problem with the Communion, perhaps even more fundamentally than the current disputes over sexuality, is that three if not four of these ecclesiologies are strongly represented in it.