I just ran across these videos and was surprised that less than 100 people have seen them on youtube...they are worth 15 minutes of your time!
~ The Rev. Peter Carey
Part 1 of 2: The Very Rev. Dr. Ian Markham discusses his role as Dean and President of Virginia Theological Seminary, gives an overview of the Seminary and where he hopes to lead it on the future. Go to www.day1.org to listen to Dr. Markham's sermon and additional discussion.
Part 2 of 2. The Very Rev. Dr. Ian Markham is Dean and President of Virginia Theological Seminary in Alexandria, VA. In this segment Dr. Markham discusses his book on ethics in religion. Go to www.day1.org, to listen to Dr. Markham's sermon and additional discussion.
10 February 2009
The Return of Indulgences? New York Times article and Fiat Lux blog
Wow! (What would Martin Luther say?)
My friend, Jim Richardson, who blogs over at Fiat Lux, posted today about a New York Times article highlighting the return (actually they never went away!?) of indulgences...you've got to check it out!
Jim writes:
The New York Times has a curious story today about the return of indulgences in the Roman Catholic Church. It seems they never really went away but the current pope is bringing them back. You may recall from your western civ course that indulgences were a major issue of the Reformation, with Martin Luther contending that we cannot buy our way into heaven. A contemporary Lutheran scholar, quoted by The Times, points out that the basic problem is trying to quantify God's grace. That said, the writer gives this subject a fair treatment. See what you think. You can read the story HERE. The photo is from The New York Times and goes with the story.
My friend, Jim Richardson, who blogs over at Fiat Lux, posted today about a New York Times article highlighting the return (actually they never went away!?) of indulgences...you've got to check it out!
Jim writes:
The New York Times has a curious story today about the return of indulgences in the Roman Catholic Church. It seems they never really went away but the current pope is bringing them back. You may recall from your western civ course that indulgences were a major issue of the Reformation, with Martin Luther contending that we cannot buy our way into heaven. A contemporary Lutheran scholar, quoted by The Times, points out that the basic problem is trying to quantify God's grace. That said, the writer gives this subject a fair treatment. See what you think. You can read the story HERE. The photo is from The New York Times and goes with the story.
John 7:53 - 8:11, "I do not condemn you"
from today's Morning Prayer
John 7:53 - 8:11
53 Everyone went to his home.
8:1 But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2 Early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people were coming to Him; and He sat down and began to teach them.
3 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court,
4 they said to Him, "Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act.
5 "Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?"
6 They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground.
7 But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let
him be the first to throw a stone at her."
8 Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9 When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court.
10 Straightening up, Jesus said to her, "Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?"
11 She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more."
John 7:53 - 8:11
53 Everyone went to his home.
8:1 But Jesus went to the Mount of Olives. 2 Early in the morning He came again into the temple, and all the people were coming to Him; and He sat down and began to teach them.
3 The scribes and the Pharisees brought a woman caught in adultery, and having set her in the center of the court,
4 they said to Him, "Teacher, this woman has been caught in adultery, in the very act.
5 "Now in the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women; what then do You say?"
6 They were saying this, testing Him, so that they might have grounds for accusing Him. But Jesus stooped down and with His finger wrote on the ground.
7 But when they persisted in asking Him, He straightened up, and said to them, "He who is without sin among you, let
him be the first to throw a stone at her."
8 Again He stooped down and wrote on the ground.
9 When they heard it, they began to go out one by one, beginning with the older ones, and He was left alone, and the woman, where she was, in the center of the court.
10 Straightening up, Jesus said to her, "Woman, where are they? Did no one condemn you?"
11 She said, "No one, Lord." And Jesus said, "I do not condemn you, either. Go. From now on sin no more."
09 February 2009
A GOE (General Ordination Exam) Question for Proponents of the GOEs
1) In a three page answer, I would love to hear from proponents of the GOE (General Ordination Exam), what exactly is the purpose of the GOE?
In the answer, please include quotations and comment from at least 10 bishops from across the geographic and theological spectrum offering their perspectives on the GOE, and the ways in which they use the scoring and comments.
2) Also, please comment on the $64,000 question (close to the amount of loan that most seminarians are strapped with upon leaving seminary): Do the GOE's actually ever prevent a person from becoming ordained? and, if not (see question (1)) what exactly is the purpose of the GOE?
Here is a quote from the Rev. Dr. Gary Hall, President of Seabury Western Seminary, from his blog, "Ah, Yes!":
"In all my years of working with these exams—as GOE reader, as Commission on Ministry and Standing Committee member, as seminary dean--I have yet to see any performance on the GOE stop someone from getting ordained. Even the exam’s proponents understand the limitations of the GOE for assessment purposes. So relax. Not only, as John Dally would say, do you already know what you need to know. You are being evaluated by people who want you to succeed. These exams will not kill you. Nor will they stop you from exercising the ministry to which God is calling you."
In the answer, please include quotations and comment from at least 10 bishops from across the geographic and theological spectrum offering their perspectives on the GOE, and the ways in which they use the scoring and comments.
2) Also, please comment on the $64,000 question (close to the amount of loan that most seminarians are strapped with upon leaving seminary): Do the GOE's actually ever prevent a person from becoming ordained? and, if not (see question (1)) what exactly is the purpose of the GOE?
Here is a quote from the Rev. Dr. Gary Hall, President of Seabury Western Seminary, from his blog, "Ah, Yes!":
"In all my years of working with these exams—as GOE reader, as Commission on Ministry and Standing Committee member, as seminary dean--I have yet to see any performance on the GOE stop someone from getting ordained. Even the exam’s proponents understand the limitations of the GOE for assessment purposes. So relax. Not only, as John Dally would say, do you already know what you need to know. You are being evaluated by people who want you to succeed. These exams will not kill you. Nor will they stop you from exercising the ministry to which God is calling you."
Ever wonder how sausage is made? GOE Reader blogs about the process
Read it all HERE over at the Ember Days blog
GOE Readers Conference Part I
The shuttle from the airport has collected several readers. The author of a liturgical manual that forbids everything I like to do has just hopped on. I've already seen one guy I know, and we catch up briefly on the acquaintances we have in common.
Talk turns to the exams. "How were your exams this year?" "Two were really good, two were OK, and one was awful." "Oh, you did better than I did. I had one good one and four in varying degrees of bad." "I had a guy who kept quoting Latin. And getting it wrong." I express my surprise that so many people wandered quickly from the topic, never to return. "It's a common problem," says my friend; "remember how it was for you writing them last year -- the pressure, you get nervous . . ."
Everyone else in the shuttle has done this before, most of them several times. This reassures me that this will be a good experience. I need the reassurance, because my lingering cold hasn't taken kindly to traveling, especially to colder weather. After we arrive, a helpful colleague shows me where things are. "And there's a bar," she points out. "Believe me, it's busy."
I should hope so.
The list tells me that I know three other people here, besides the one I've already seen: two priests from my diocese and a bishop who was a grad student in theology at the University of Barchester when I was a grad student in philosophy. Chances are very good that he won't remember me -- I would in fact be stunned if he did -- but a familiar face is a familiar face. Dinner tonight is my chance to get to know some unfamiliar ones. Then it's right into reader training. The evening will end with Compline.
GOE Readers Conference Part II
(In my defense, there's nothing in the Rule that explicitly prohibits blogging after Compline.)
Reader training began with background information and grading criteria for the first three questions. We were also shown three sample answers, which we were to read and then evaluate with our partners. On two of the three, our evaluation agreed with the chaplains'. On the third, we were off: we thought it deserved a 2, but the chaplains had given it a 4. There was a lot of discussion after that one, and my liturgical scholar from the shuttle raised precisely the objection that I had raised with my partner.
It's clear that everyone is giving this work very careful attention. We all want to evaluate these exams intelligently and fairly. Hashing out our disagreements, getting clear on why certain essays are evaluated in certain ways, is an important part of that effort. Getting 100 Episcopalians to agree about how to read theological essays is not a particularly easy task.
GOE Readers Conference Part I
The shuttle from the airport has collected several readers. The author of a liturgical manual that forbids everything I like to do has just hopped on. I've already seen one guy I know, and we catch up briefly on the acquaintances we have in common.
Talk turns to the exams. "How were your exams this year?" "Two were really good, two were OK, and one was awful." "Oh, you did better than I did. I had one good one and four in varying degrees of bad." "I had a guy who kept quoting Latin. And getting it wrong." I express my surprise that so many people wandered quickly from the topic, never to return. "It's a common problem," says my friend; "remember how it was for you writing them last year -- the pressure, you get nervous . . ."
Everyone else in the shuttle has done this before, most of them several times. This reassures me that this will be a good experience. I need the reassurance, because my lingering cold hasn't taken kindly to traveling, especially to colder weather. After we arrive, a helpful colleague shows me where things are. "And there's a bar," she points out. "Believe me, it's busy."
I should hope so.
The list tells me that I know three other people here, besides the one I've already seen: two priests from my diocese and a bishop who was a grad student in theology at the University of Barchester when I was a grad student in philosophy. Chances are very good that he won't remember me -- I would in fact be stunned if he did -- but a familiar face is a familiar face. Dinner tonight is my chance to get to know some unfamiliar ones. Then it's right into reader training. The evening will end with Compline.
Labels: GOE
GOE Readers Conference Part II
(In my defense, there's nothing in the Rule that explicitly prohibits blogging after Compline.)
Reader training began with background information and grading criteria for the first three questions. We were also shown three sample answers, which we were to read and then evaluate with our partners. On two of the three, our evaluation agreed with the chaplains'. On the third, we were off: we thought it deserved a 2, but the chaplains had given it a 4. There was a lot of discussion after that one, and my liturgical scholar from the shuttle raised precisely the objection that I had raised with my partner.
It's clear that everyone is giving this work very careful attention. We all want to evaluate these exams intelligently and fairly. Hashing out our disagreements, getting clear on why certain essays are evaluated in certain ways, is an important part of that effort. Getting 100 Episcopalians to agree about how to read theological essays is not a particularly easy task.
Labels: GOE
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)