I just remembered some wisdom Wright shared at the conference. He said that if you thought he was preaching works righteousness, you didn’t need to see an exegete. You need to see a psychiatrist.

Just something to keep in mind…

Well, things are starting to settle down here, and I’m just trying to evaluate what’s going on.

I really enjoyed seeing old friends at the conference. We had Sara Shank, Adam Brink, and Jonathan and Rachael Companik oer on Tuesday night.

I met Deacon Paul and Barb finally. I met all sorts of other non-blogger folk too.

We had Dennis and Sharon Bratcher stay with us for the conference.

I had strep which didn’t really affect me except I got a steroid shot in the butt on Monday and it made all of my muscles get tight and then get sore.

I bought $200+ of books (why?!).

Rachel got her ACT scores back. She made a 35 on her English, so she just gets to skip her freshmen English courses.

I’m really depressed about the tsunami victims, and I feel like our society’s priorities are out of whack.

Two days later I’m just now founding out that my beloved Sooners were routed by USC.

I am wearing my Strongbad Your Head A Splode shirt, and it offers a tiny bit of comfort.

I’m hungry. Bye.

Well, I guess I’ll give a short review of the AAPC Pastor’s Conference. I’m sure my report will be found wanting by those wanting to either find something wrong with Wright or wanting him to vindicate their own views. In fact, as far as the theological stuff, I’ll just avoid talking about it. I didn’t really learn anything new theologically from Gaffin or Wright, but I learned a lot about who they are.

A group of about 15 of us took Wright to lunch on Tuesday. He was sandwiched between Jon Amos and me, and we were outside, and it was hard to hear (I think Jon and I were about 2 of 4 people that could!), so I apologize to you for picking that place if you were one of those people who couldn’t hear.

One of the first things we talked about was the Windsor Report and the future of conservative Anglicanism. I was surprised to hear Wright say that he thought that if the primates did not act decisively next month, there would be a lot of people that would leave the Anglican Communion. He seemed to think that the primates would take care of the homosexual bishop fiasco soon. That was encouraging (Sorry, if this isn’t coming out clearly…I have a lot on my mind).

We also asked him about the AMiA and how the Windsor Report handled it. Wright made it very clear that his interpretation of the report was that it was not at all coming down on the AMiA as hard as it had come down on the ECUSA. That too was encouraging. He basically said the American Anglican church is in a mess and he wasn’t sure how it was going to play out, but that their goal is for it to clean up as quickly and nicely as possible. Whether that means endorsing the AMiA or trying to do something else, he didn’t know.

One thing I really enjoyed about Bishop Wright (I asked him what his proper title was, and he told me I could call him “My Lord” heh) is that you can just tell that the man has a love for Jesus and for the faith. Somehow we got to talking about WWJD bracelets, and Wright mentioned a few years ago how some profs at Regent were concerned that some of their kids were trying to answer this WWJD question because we really shouldn’t do exactly what Jesus did…He had a specific call as the Messiah. Wright’s reply was that he wished with all his heart that young folk in England would give a rip about what Jesus would do. Anything that brings someone closer to Christ can be a useful tool.

See, this is where I really have to agree with Wright and part ways with someone of the Wilsonian serrated edge criticisms of modern evangelicalism. It’s not that I don’t agree with Wilson, but I think the answer is slowly leading those Christians into maturity, not harshly rebuking them and satirizing their positions.

Another thing I like about Wright is his willingness to accept postmodern “accomodations.” He seems to have a very good grasp on what is going on and he’s willing to talk in those categories. I appreciated his answer when he was asked about inerrancy and infallibility because it’s the same I’ve given as well as the same answer I’ve been written of on. Those are American modernist categories and they miss the point. We need to think Hebraicly; I’m sorry if that looks like postmodern Christian accomodationism.

Oh, and I just noticed that Wilson posted something else on postmodernism. He specified that the pomo-ers he was attacking were the ones claiming no metanarratives, etc…and if he’s attacking that, fine. I’d be interested is seeing what he does with some of those that are not quite like that.