I see my ministry as one of connecting pieces, reminding people of a variety of points of view, that they don’t have a corner on God’s truth. God’s truth has many dimensions. The Anglican tradition has always … been a tradition in which widely divergent points of view have been held together not by one point of view capitulating to another but by common prayer, focusing beyond opinions on the person of Christ.
This is the kind of vaccuous claptrap that really rankles. Can anyone sympathetic with Bp. Griswold's perspective explain what he is talking about? If its true that no one person has "a corner on God's truth", is that true for Griswold? What is the pluriformity of God's truth supposed to be like? How can we assess the truth value of a statement asserting (as true, presumably) the pluriformity of "God's truth"? I just can't see how (A & ~A) is anything but absurd. Help.
"Person A is apostate" say the Connecticut 6.
"It is not the case that person A is apostate" says Bp. Smith.
Is the hierarchy really interested in "living in tension" here? Actions speak louder than words, as Fr. Mark of St. John's, Bristol, I'm sure, will tell you.
Maybe ++Griswold isn't talking about the kinds of doctrinal differences on display in Connecticut. But if not, what's the point? And what, pray, is he talking about?
Read the whole thing here.