Mūsdienu Anglikāņu Evaņģelikāļu Euharistiskā Teoloģija: Pīters Jensens Un Džons Stots: Eucharistic theology of contemporary Anglican Evangelicals: Peter Jensen and John Stott.
The purpose of this article is to analyse discursive context and main ideas of two Anglican Evangelicals - Peter Jensen and John Stott. In spite of one-sidedness of their views on Scriptures and Jensen's controversial role in global mobilisation of Anglican conservatives, their understanding of...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | Latvian |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
LU Akadēmiskais apgāds
2019
|
| In: |
Cel̜š
Year: 2019, Issue: 70, Pages: 125-152 |
| Further subjects: | B
Christian Union
B GREEN'S functions B Anglican Communion B Church of England B Catholics B Clergy B Primitive & early church, ca. 30-600 B Religions |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (kostenfrei) Volltext (kostenfrei) |
| Summary: | The purpose of this article is to analyse discursive context and main ideas of two Anglican Evangelicals - Peter Jensen and John Stott. In spite of one-sidedness of their views on Scriptures and Jensen's controversial role in global mobilisation of Anglican conservatives, their understanding of Eucharist as ecclesial and not priestly act is worth to apprehend, and it has ecclesiological implications. Their theological perspectives on Eucharist - resignification, lay presidency are part of inter-play of ideas in various denominations and fractions of churches. For example, transsignification is an idea promoted by Roman Catholic theologians Schillebeeckx and Schoonenberg. It also reminds of the metaphor of the ring of the Queen used by Zwingli. Contemporary liturgical studies (works by P. Bradshaw and others) deconstruct the attempts to construct a singular early Christian proto-liturgy or insistence on 'catholicity 'of certain views or practices as naive and one-sided. From the very beginnings of the history of Early Christianity until today, Christian tradition functions as a source for wide range of often contradictory perspectives on Eucharist. That leads to dead end any attempt to make one particular perspective a part of the 'test on Orthodoxy.' Ecumenical koinonia should not be based on uniform practice or theology. Anglicanism functions as ecumenical fellowship in miniature, where liturgy is a result of compromises between church parties. Liturgical texts offer the space for various sacramentologies to fit in. It raises the question about an identity of contemporary Anglicanism. Various Anglican churches and 'church parties' are united not by common theology or liturgy but by common past. Even then, the ways in which various 'communities of memory' construct history within Anglicanism differs. |
|---|---|
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Cel̜š
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.22364/cl.70.07 |