<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: CoGS asks church leaders to encourage marriage canon discussion in provinces, dioceses	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/</link>
	<description>National News from the Anglican Church of Canada</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2017 17:30:08 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.9.4</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: Tony Houghton		</title>
		<link>https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-4056</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tony Houghton]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2017 17:30:08 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anglicanjournal.com/?p=152687#comment-4056</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-4033&quot;&gt;Curt Gesch&lt;/a&gt;.

You are right liturgies change, canons change but Gods standards ,like God Himself , do not change. Heaven and earth will change but not Gods word. If Gods word is our benchmark then when liturgies and canons change they change either to the better ,meaning they are becoming more in line with Gods word ,or for the worse where they depart from the standard set in Gods word. The marriage canon changes for the worse.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-4033">Curt Gesch</a>.</p>
<p>You are right liturgies change, canons change but Gods standards ,like God Himself , do not change. Heaven and earth will change but not Gods word. If Gods word is our benchmark then when liturgies and canons change they change either to the better ,meaning they are becoming more in line with Gods word ,or for the worse where they depart from the standard set in Gods word. The marriage canon changes for the worse.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Curt Gesch		</title>
		<link>https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-4033</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Curt Gesch]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 23 Nov 2017 01:52:33 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anglicanjournal.com/?p=152687#comment-4033</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In relation to things changing--marriage canon, view of Eucharist, ordination-- I&#039;ve found that The Book of Common Prayer: A Biography by Alan Jacobs helps me to see how matters of liturgy and practice are not static but changing as a community works through these matters.  I particularly refer to the inclusion, then exclusion, of The Black Rubric, in the early days of the Anglican communion.  Seeing how matters change, and with what motivation and results, is something we also read about in the book of Acts, especially in relation to the matters brought up in the first council at Jerusalem in which St. Paul differed from St. Peter.  It shows how the church reacted without division.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In relation to things changing&#8211;marriage canon, view of Eucharist, ordination&#8211; I&#8217;ve found that The Book of Common Prayer: A Biography by Alan Jacobs helps me to see how matters of liturgy and practice are not static but changing as a community works through these matters.  I particularly refer to the inclusion, then exclusion, of The Black Rubric, in the early days of the Anglican communion.  Seeing how matters change, and with what motivation and results, is something we also read about in the book of Acts, especially in relation to the matters brought up in the first council at Jerusalem in which St. Paul differed from St. Peter.  It shows how the church reacted without division.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Tony Houghton		</title>
		<link>https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-3810</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tony Houghton]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2017 22:43:29 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anglicanjournal.com/?p=152687#comment-3810</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-3779&quot;&gt;Paul Bunnell&lt;/a&gt;.

First of all it should be done in a way that does not violate scripture. The church seem to give more credibility to the musings of the world then it does to scripture. I seem basic doctrine has been hammered out pretty well through the last 2000 years. Now a days people take issue with something because it may rub them the wrong way People want to get rid of the creed and in its place say the Shema in its place ,which is not a declaration of faith  but a general statement about God. They do this because they have a problem with the  deity of Christ ,the virgin birth, and the bodily resurrection of Jesus,again they want to violate scripture so that is more inline with their perspective, conforming it to their viewpoint. Scripture has the final word on all things pertaining to the faith we are to conforn to it not it to us.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-3779">Paul Bunnell</a>.</p>
<p>First of all it should be done in a way that does not violate scripture. The church seem to give more credibility to the musings of the world then it does to scripture. I seem basic doctrine has been hammered out pretty well through the last 2000 years. Now a days people take issue with something because it may rub them the wrong way People want to get rid of the creed and in its place say the Shema in its place ,which is not a declaration of faith  but a general statement about God. They do this because they have a problem with the  deity of Christ ,the virgin birth, and the bodily resurrection of Jesus,again they want to violate scripture so that is more inline with their perspective, conforming it to their viewpoint. Scripture has the final word on all things pertaining to the faith we are to conforn to it not it to us.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Paul Bunnell		</title>
		<link>https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-3779</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Paul Bunnell]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 16 Nov 2017 05:06:26 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anglicanjournal.com/?p=152687#comment-3779</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[In reply to &lt;a href=&quot;https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-3722&quot;&gt;Tony Houghton&lt;/a&gt;.

Perhaps, Tony, you could constructively suggest how we might change our process for considering doctrine (assuming you accept there has to be such consideration from time to time).  

Your &quot;layman&#039;s terms&quot; seem nothing at all like a description of the process in place and being followed.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>In reply to <a href="https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-3722">Tony Houghton</a>.</p>
<p>Perhaps, Tony, you could constructively suggest how we might change our process for considering doctrine (assuming you accept there has to be such consideration from time to time).  </p>
<p>Your &#8220;layman&#8217;s terms&#8221; seem nothing at all like a description of the process in place and being followed.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Tony Houghton		</title>
		<link>https://anglicanjournal.com/cogs-asks-church-leaders-encourage-marriage-canon-discussion-provinces-dioceses/#comment-3722</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Tony Houghton]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 14 Nov 2017 20:59:42 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://anglicanjournal.com/?p=152687#comment-3722</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[So to put it in layman&#039;s terms, do by whatever means necessary to persuade everyone  that changing the marriage canon is the only logical course of action ,and above all silence any opposition.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>So to put it in layman&#8217;s terms, do by whatever means necessary to persuade everyone  that changing the marriage canon is the only logical course of action ,and above all silence any opposition.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
