As I slowly begin returning to painting landscapes the question of light arises. For most of my artistic career I have not been that interested in light in paintings, though I enjoy it in the works of other artists. However in landscape painting light is very important, so lately I've been examining the use of light by various landscapes painters, all of whom would be called "realists." What I found in closely studying their paintings is that they are not strict and mathematical, if you will, about where the light hits. In fact in many realist paintings – those of Andrew Wyeth come to mind – the light is very natural looking at a glance, but then upon closer examination is highly invented. I find nothing wrong with artists taking this liberty. The key to light in landscape painting seems to be to make an effort to simply include it in the work, and not obsess over where everything lines up and how it strikes each object in a uniform way... almost like a Bob Ross paintin
Comments
Fr. Glenn
Mr. Packer is a LatCon in the worst sense. To him the Prayerbook is a proof text subject to his own scholarly authority whatever that may be.
In an article concerning regeneration Mr. Packer had this to say, "The Fathers did not formulate the concept of regeneration precisely. They equated it, broadly speaking, with baptismal grace...The Fathers lost the Biblical understanding of the sacraments as signs to sir up faith and seals to confirm believers in possession of the blessings signified, and so came to regard baptism as conveying the regeneration which it signified (Titus 3:5) ex opere operato to those who did not obstruct its working."
We should shake of the dust off our feet when dealing with this man and those that associate with his teaching.
In general, I agree with DH... shake the dust off our feet and go about our own business!
1. sensational, and
2. either partially or completely false
The man needs to go away.
And your new blog's approach to the Faith and the world in which we live it looks like a good endeavor. I will check back often!
I am a traditional Anglican, but not an Anglo-Catholic even though for a period of time I did attend a church which, for lack of a better term, was quasi Anglo-Catholic. I found many sincere and genuine Christians there; however, I also encountered some Anglo-Catholics which seemed to be more interested in "form" than "substance", and were very condescending towards Anglicans that were not Anglo-Catholics.
It is my opinion that many Anglo-Catholics can dish out criticism on others, but call for charity and can not take it when it is directed at them.
Apparently, Dr. Packer was not the author and it was removed from the website. Does anyone know who actually wrote the article and why this mixup (or deliberate deception) about the author happened?
This is the website of The Protestant Alliance where this article can be found under "Traditional Anglicanism".
www.reformer.org