Andrew Raines
banner
makeitraines.bsky.social
Andrew Raines
@makeitraines.bsky.social
SC farmboy from the Pee Dee. Episcopal Candidate for Holy Orders in Dio of Upper SC. DPhil student at Oxford. Dogmatic Universalist. Vinegar BBQ enthusiast.
It’s a good solution! I’m actually really enjoying the CW DO lectionary
November 26, 2025 at 3:39 PM
(is joke, obvs I do too) But at first I was like, why are we reading different parts of the same book not in order?? And then I remember historical criticism. Alack.
November 26, 2025 at 2:38 PM
A more exact translation would be Begetter and Begotten.

John of St Thomas, Cursus Thelogici D. Thomae, I-IIae, Question XXI, Disputation XII, Article III (Metternich, vol. 4, p. 519).

books.google.com/books?id=2-N...
Cursus theologicus
books.google.com
November 26, 2025 at 2:12 AM
For clarity, he writes: “For example, speculatively it may be probable that a child could be baptized in the form “In the name of the Parent, the Offspring, and the Proceeding One,” nor would it be illicit, because the truth or meaning of that expression signifies the same.”
November 25, 2025 at 4:33 PM
Frankly, I myself don’t see a situation where this would ever be necessary. The demand for it could be approached in other pastoral ways I would think.
November 25, 2025 at 4:33 PM
He says the gender neutral formula is a case of speculation—there’s no reason you’d ever have to think about using it. But now that this is something people actually wonder about, it’s an interesting question whether John would move the debate to the prudence category.
November 25, 2025 at 4:33 PM
In this particular article, John’s drawing a distinction between speculative probability (“maybe it's valid”) and practical/prudential probability(“can I safely do this now?”). Only the latter justifies action, especially with something important like sacraments.
November 25, 2025 at 4:33 PM
(I, however, am not.)
November 19, 2025 at 10:10 PM
You’re on the ball!
November 19, 2025 at 10:08 PM
Paul Zach I’m pretty sure. Really good!
November 15, 2025 at 10:04 PM
Which new hymnal?
October 31, 2025 at 5:48 PM
Few seem to have heard of mustum! I hadn’t before seminary
October 4, 2025 at 8:04 PM
I don’t believe so, but bishops have typically not resorted to the penal measures of their Victorian predecessors
October 4, 2025 at 12:57 PM
Very good! Much more gnashing of teeth to go around anyway
October 3, 2025 at 8:07 PM
I’m sorry if I seemed uncompassionate and incurious! My whole DPhil is about how God saves people through other religions’ sacraments too. But our denomination’s whole schtick in contradistinction to other Reformed folks is an emphasis on tradition and liturgy. We don’t get to make it up wholecloth
October 3, 2025 at 7:03 PM
“Song of Songs, welcome, inclusion, vibes”
October 3, 2025 at 2:31 PM
Liturgical diversity is a very different thing from reading non-Christian texts alongside the Bible as if they were of equal authority in our community. I’m a let a thousand flowers bloom kind of person, but we do have a religion. It’s not bad to think our departed fam should have a say in our life
October 3, 2025 at 11:19 AM
A very unenviable position. People I respect say she’s a fabulous pastor and manager. I’m sure there will be great speech writers to come.
October 3, 2025 at 9:43 AM
I hate to be read as mean-spirited or something. I’m sorry if it was uncouth given the medical emergency that happened. But there really is no special NY context that makes non-Christian readings in a church service make sense in our religion, and I just can’t be made to feel ashamed for that.
October 3, 2025 at 9:13 AM
I’ve heard so many opinions about her so idk either
October 3, 2025 at 9:09 AM
What do you think?
October 3, 2025 at 9:04 AM
I’m pretty perennialist in certain ways, and I believe that God has relationships with folks outside the visible Church. But that doesn’t mean I have the right to dissect other religions’ holy texts for bits and bobs that I find poetic and proclaim them alongside the Bible.
October 2, 2025 at 9:29 PM