If this turn of events doesn't signal the eventual demise of the Anglican communion, I don't know what does.
"Dozens of conservative parishes will start ordaining their own clergy in an open revolt against their bishops if the Church of England continues its liberal drift, the Archbishop of Canterbury has warned.
"Dr Rowan Williams was told that evangelicals would increasingly defy Church rules and their own bishops by parachuting in outsiders to carry out irregular ordinations of "orthodox" candidates.
"The warning came from Reform, a 1,700-strong evangelical network, which is setting up structures to allow it operate as a resistance movement within the Church.
"The Rev Rod Thomas, Reform's chairman, [Pictured] said that members must prepare for 'courageous action' as the Church became driven by an increasingly pro-gay agenda."
For the full article, see here
And it all has to do with love and sex! Forget the Gospel of grace; forget love; forget the mandate given us by Jesus to not judge or condemn anyone!
Demonize the Gays, and sabotage and splinter, if not obliterate, the whole Anglican communion on the sole basis of condemning those whose affectional-sexual orientation presumably differs from those who are instrumental in further fostering a climate of hate, both within their "communion" and within the larger society as well.
Here is an excerpt from Reform's web site:
"Our understanding of God's way of life for his people includes:
"The special teaching responsibility of ordained leaders within the every-member ministry of the body of Christ, and the need to provide for its continuance.
"The unique value of women's ministry in the local congregation but also the divine order of male headship, which makes the headship of women as priests in charge, incumbents, dignitaries and bishops inappropriate.
"The vital importance of monogamous life-long marriage for the care and nurture of children, and the well being of human society.
"The rightness of sexual intercourse in heterosexual marriage, and the wrongness of such activity both outside it and in all its homosexual forms.
"The urgent need for decentralisation at national, diocesan and deanery level, and the need radically to reform the present shape of episcopacy and pastoral discipline, to enable local churches to evangelise more effectively."
And, given their understanding of "God's Way of Life," that condemns homosexuality, and prohibits women from being "priests in charge, incumbents, dignitaries, and bishops," they characterize themselves as not being "Some sort of correctional institution"; not being "Men in black suits being stern." See here
Believing women to be subordinate to men, and believing in the "wrongness" of homosexuality in "all its homosexual forms," whatever those are, sounds like they're running a "correctional institution,"and being "men in black suits being stern," to me!
If they truly believe that they are showing the love of God, given their attitudes toward women and Gay people, they are nothing short of delusional, and have absolutely no idea of what comprises the Christian life!
And, yet, given their negative and hostile attitudes toward women and Gay people, and given their willingness to violate the appropriate protocol and procedures of the Anglican communion, and even being instrumental in the sabotage and likely breaking up of that communion, they still have the temerity to call themselves "Christians!"
2 comments:
Jerry, these people are not Christians but Paulists. They worship Paul as some form of Co-savior. I'm amazed when evangelical/fundamentalists quote the Bible its Paul they refer to most frequently to support their discriminatory beliefs on women and the GLBT community. Paul is not Jesus. He was not crucified. Why do these conservative Christians follow him and not Christ? Has Christ's message of love and peace been overshadowed and replaced by Paul's own writings on how HE views the church should be? Paul is only a Man and he even says so himself. We know how he viewed women. However, we are not exactly sure how he truly viewed gay people. His writings point to idol worship which is very clear in Romans 1. And Romans 2 is completely ignored by conservative Christians. Go figure.
Once we begin to point this out to them they get irate. Jesus is Lord. Not Paul. Wealth is a SIN but they seem to claim otherwise gathering up money and buying expensive homes and cars and other luxury items. Divorce and remarriage is a SIN (except in cases of adultry) but they have no problems with divorce anymore because its a "heterosexual thing" and acceptable in their eyes. They have perverted the true Gospel and they are blind to it all.
Simply amazing!
Thanks Ken R. The other reason the "Bible-believing" clergy don't rail against those who are divorced and remarried is the fact that they'd lose about half their congregations and THEIR MONEY
Also, I'm one of those who question whether or not Paul actually wrote those parts where he allegedly wrote that women are to keep silent in the church, and that they are not allowed to teach men. The reason I question whether he wrote what are, from our cultural context, misogynistic statements like these is they don't seem to jibe with Galatians 3:28, where he wrote that in Christ there is no difference between men and women.
It could be that the misogynistic statements attributed to Paul were added by later scribes to justify why women "must be kept in their place." Paul well knew that the very first Evangelist was a woman, Mary Magdalane, and I have trouble reconciling his knowledge of that fact, and his clear statement of the equality of men and women in Christ in Galatians 3:28, with the misogynistic statements attributed to him.
What is ironic is that other than Jesus, we know more about the Gospel of God's grace from Paul than we do from any other Bible writer. Just reading the Book of Galatians shows his disdain for legalism and exclusion, and his commitment to grace.
I agree with Martin Luther when he said that he was "married to the Book of Galatians." It expresses the very heart of the Gospel of grace and, of course, it was written by Paul.
Post a Comment