From: bpayne15@juno.com
Date: Tue Nov 11 2003 - 22:22:49 EST
Burgy wrote: That there are those who hold the
consecration ought to be opposed on moral grounds and are not influenced
by Ahmanson is not contested; I know some and they are my friends. In
point of fact I myself have no position on the consecration; there are
rational and persuasive arguments on either side (obviously) and, not
being Episcopal, I have not studied them sufficiently to take a position.
I write: Here's a cogent argument against ordination of homosexual
bishops. Ken Ham would argue that this vector has a common root with
OEC.
Bill
Subject: Dr. Peter Jones-Christian Witness to a Pagan Planet
From: CWIPP [mailto:perejones@sbcglobal.net]
Website: www.cwipp.org
NewsCWIPP #5
Homosexual Bishops: A Theological Oxymoron
Just when we thought things couldnít get worse, they did. American
Episcopalian bishops celebrated our cultural moral collapse by receiving
a divorced, openly-practicing homosexual into their august ranks. These
meddlesome priests are out ahead of the cultural curve. Can marital
status be refused to gays when those with the spiritual authority to
administer the rite of marriage are already gay?
This radical sector of the Church has abandoned any objective moral
standard for sexual behavior. Doubtless lesbian bishops are already
waiting in the wings. A homosexual Roman Catholic priest states that the
ìonly authentic spirituality is gay spirituality.î Some in mainline
Protestant churches declare polyamory (ìcommittedî group sex) to be
ìholy.î Will we soon see be-robed bishops ordaining a man accompanied by
his adoring bi-sexual family of three ìwivesî and the other ìhusbandî?
Such an act will be lauded as a unique statement ìof the unity of the
churchÖ[that] none of the rest of us can make,î to quote Douglas Theuner,
retiring bishop of New Hampshire, reflecting on the unique ìChristian
witnessî of Gene Robinson and his male lover.
The Anglican communion is in shock, but this state of affairs became
inevitable when doctrinal discipline was abandoned. Broad churchmen could
be lax when eccentric bishops denied ìonlyî the doctrines (the divinity
of Christ, his physical resurrection and even the biblical doctrine of
God). But theological deviance often precedes moral degeneracy. Ideas
have consequences. We react once the moral cat is out of the theological
bag, but by then, there is little to be done. An unbiblical view of God
inevitably leads to the justification of homosexuality.
People are bending over backwards to be polite. Some optimistically
speak of separated brethren who will come ìback together.î English
Primate Rowan Williams declares both that the ordination of Robinson was
done in ìgood faith,î and that ìthe effects will have to be confronted
with honesty.î Will he ever ask the impolite but necessary question:
ìwhat is the nature of the ëgood faithí of the American bishops?î A
previous ìprimate,î the apostle Paul, named two kinds of faith: ìthe good
teaching of Jesus Christî and ìthe teaching of demonsî (1 Timothy 4:1,6).
Paul used strong language because the false teaching he denounced in the
Ephesian church eventually rejected the biblical doctrine of God and the
very nature of Redemption itselfówhich is what the demonic world has
always done. Todayís theological justification of homosexuality grows out
of a similar apostasy. Honoring homosexuality fails to respect the
structures of difference (night and day, waters and dry land, male and
female) that God as Creator placed in the world. Such distinctions are
dismissed as mythological nonsense of no theological importance.
Normalizing homosexuality redefines the notion of sin and thus nullifies
the Gospel account of Christís atoning death for sinners. It renders
meaningless the biblical doctrines of repentance, holiness and
sanctification and makes a mockery of the church as salt and light to the
sinful world.
We are not dealing with another good faith version of Christianity, but,
as Archbishop Williams should know, its antithetical opposite. A lesbian
pastor, commenting on the conflict with the conservative wing in her
church, said: ìMaybe we are talking about a different god.î There are not
too many gods about whom to talk. There is the transcendent God of theism
and there are the nature gods of paganism. The espousal of homosexuality
is certainly a ìgood faithî position if oneís belief system is that of
pantheistic spirituality. But such apostasy cannot serve as a basis for
re-established communion within the confines of a meaningful Christian
confession. The apostle Paul refuses such a mixture: ìWhat fellowship is
there between the temple of God and idols?î
The issue of homosexual bishops brings us to an historic moment, with
only two realistic options. 1. Either worldwide Anglicanism will split
definitively over the issue of truth, on the basis of Scriptureís
exclusive ìone Lord, one faith, one baptism,î and the Creed's ìone holy,
catholic church,î or, 2. the old ìlive and let live compromiseî will
bring everyone back together on the basis of pseudo-Christian syncretism.
In the final sermon at the Convention in August, 2003, when Robinson was
voted in, presiding bishop Frank Griswold said: ìThis Convention has been
about loveÖsomething has happened that is larger than any one
perspectiveÖî Here, in perfectly Postmodern fashion, truth and falsehood
have become ìperspectives,î and a new kind of church unity is unveiled.
Citing not the Bible but the Sufi (pagan) poet Rumi, Griswold declared:
ìOut beyond ideas of wrong-doing and right-doing there is a field. Iíll
meet you there.î
ìBack togetherî on this basis would be a momentous victory for unabashed
paganism. The unifying field is no longer Christian truth but pagan
oneness. Lutheran historian Frederic Baue's prediction would become a
reality. Baue asks: ìWhat comes after the Postmodern?î He answers: ìa
phase of Western/world civilization that is innately religious but
hostile to ChristianityÖor worse, a dominant but false church that brings
all of its forces to bear against the truth of Godís Word.î
Peter Jones
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.4 : Sat Nov 15 2003 - 00:34:30 EST