In a plea for unity, the Archbishop of Canterbury has told conservative Anglicans establishing a separate fellowship within the Anglican Communion to “think very carefully about the risks entailed.”
-
(Photo: AP Images / Judi Bottoni, FILE)In this Friday Sept. 21, 2007 file picture, Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, left, and Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, walk into a press conference in New Orleans. Anglican theological conservatives from around the world are convening a strategy summit starting Wednesday, June 18, 2008 as the global Anglican Communion splinters over Scripture, salvation and homosexuality.
Conservative Anglicans wrapped up the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) in Jerusalem on Sunday with a statement affirming their desire to remain within the Anglican Communion but within the structure of a new fellowship headed by a council of bishops. Anglicanism was not, the statement added, “determined necessarily through recognition by the Archbishop of Canterbury.”
In a statement issued in response on Monday, Dr. Rowan Williams, the spiritual leader of the Anglican Communion, said that the final statement from GAFCON leaders contained “much that is positive and encouraging” about their priorities and that the vast majority of Anglicans shared their “tenets of orthodoxy.”
He also addressed concerns over the uniqueness of Christ and the “absolute imperative” of evangelism, stating they were “not in dispute in the common life of the Communion.”
Williams warned, however, that GAFCON’s proposals were “problematic in all sorts of ways.”
“A ‘Primates’ Council’ which consists only of a self-selected group from among the Primates of the Communion will not pass the test of legitimacy for all in the Communion,” he stated. “And any claim to be free to operate across provincial boundaries is fraught with difficulties, both theological and practical.”
U.S. Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori lamented the GAFCON statement. "Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable. This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers."
In recent years, bishops from the Global South have provided leadership to parishes in North America that have split from The Episcopal Church – the U.S. branch of Anglicanism – over the U.S. denomination's liberal drift from Scripture and Anglican tradition. GAFCON leaders said on Sunday that they would continue to offer alternative pastoral oversight to breakaway congregations within the Communion’s liberal member churches.
Williams warned that exercising episcopal or primatial authority over huge geographical and cultural divides would result in an “obvious strain."
He added, “[H]ow is effective discipline to be maintained in a situation of overlapping and competing jurisdictions?”
While Williams urged fellow Anglicans not to “impute selfish or malicious motives” to those seeking alternative oversight, he said that the issue of discerning genuine theological grievances was “becoming very serious.”
“How is a bishop or primate in another continent able to discriminate effectively between a genuine crisis of pastoral relationship and theological integrity, and a situation where there are underlying non-theological motivations at work?” he asked. He pointed to interventions in dioceses with “unquestionably orthodox” leadership not because of theological differences but personal or administrative disagreements.
The Archbishop of Canterbury said the solution to the challenges was “not to dismiss the existing structures of the Communion.”
“If they are not working effectively, the challenge is to renew them rather than to improvise solutions that may seem to be effective for some in the short term but will continue to create more problems than they solve,” he said. Continue >>
RSS
hlerwin -
One of these people I mentioned (Rev Don Piper) was dead for 90 minutes. It was no dream. It was reality. The others, though not dead for as long, were clinically dead; no heart beat, no brains waves, nothing.
Spend 1 hr 37 minutes of your time and look at the video, "To Hell and Back" I suggested. It is well worth the watch. The man who wrote the book and made the documentary is a retired cardiologist who has witnessed many people who have died on him and he was able to bring back to life. Those that he interviewed about what they experienced all talked about life not ending when you die.
Jesus illustrated this truth in a story about a beggar man named Lazarus and a rich man who both died. Lazarus was conforted in the bosom of Father Abraham and the rich man, an unrepentant sinner, went to hell where he was tormented in a flame of fire. See Luke 16:19-31.
The rich man knew he was there because he did not repent. He had 5 brothers that still remained on the earth that also were living unrepentant lives. He did not want them to come where he was. He requested of Father Abraham to send Lazarus back from the dead to testify to them of hell and to repent so they would not come there. Father Abraham answered, "...If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they be persuaded, those one rose from the dead."(Luke 16:31)
Your rejection of the stories of people who have died and came back to life that testify that there is a life after death only goes to validate the Word of God.
Perhaps one day you will hear the gospel of Jesus Christ from your heart and will receive Jesus as Savior and Lord.
AAaaahhhhh, .. dang, gone-it, believer; you just made me spill my V-8
uh, yeah, it's a ... a, uh... filet-o-fish, actually.
rolln, that's not a Big Mac I see in your other hand!?
believer-
Go get'em warrior. I hear the sabers rattl'n and the demons squeal'n.
I'll just be sitting along the sideline with my v-8 (w/umbrella, lawnchair and sunglasses). So don't mind me.
hlerwin, so when it comes to spiritual truth according to you everything is a matter of a roll of the dice, nothing is black or white but a matter of personal interpretation?
Yes.....in your opinion, believer.
hlerwin, you're right God is not a liar and therefore God's Word in its' original autographs is true as well. And Christ is not a liar and when He declares in God's Word that He is the Life, the Truth, and the Way and no one can go unto the Father but through Him He is telling the truth as well. So then the only way a person can enter into a personal relationship with God is by God's grace alone, through faith alone, in Christ alone because God is not a liar.
None of us is powerful enough to make God a liar. That's just finite human thinking. He's a lot bigger, I expect, than any of us can imagine. Still, I think lots of you posters limit Him and think He shared the same prejudices and cultural biases that some of us do. Besides, I could never idolize a printed book.
hlerwin, black and white thinking is only a problem when we try to use it in gray areas. And when it comes to the Word of God as I've said before, "God said it that settles it!" period. And if we say that the clearly black and white issues of the Bible are not true then as wb said we make God a liar and we remain hopelessly lost.
hlerwin,
With Christ, it IS all or nothing. Either He was sent by God to live a sinless life, suffered and died to pay the price of our sins, or He did not.
If He did not, then we are all doomned and His death was in vain. Because He would then be a liar, not a good man or someone who could be trusted. And if you cant trust Him in one area, what makes you ble to discern what areas you COULD trust Him in?
Psalm 34:8 "O taste and see that the LORD is good: blessed is the man that trusteth in him. "
A message From God to all unbelievers. Try God and see for yourselves who he is! A little Trust goes a very long way with God.
Matthew 17:20 "And Jesus said unto them, Because of your unbelief: for verily I say unto you, If ye have faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye shall say unto this mountain, Remove hence to yonder place; and it shall remove; and nothing shall be impossible unto you."
You only need Faith Jesus is who he says he is.
John 6:29 "Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent."
It's "all-or-nothing" thinking, like "black-and-white" thinking and "you-are-either-with-us-or-against-us" thinking, that causes such strife in this world. That last mode of thinking, espoused by a dry alcoholic, is what got us into thsi wretched war in Iraq. Spare me leaders who think like that! I don't think McCain or Obama think this way. Thank God!!!
He did not die in vain. We have learned so much from Christ's suffering and death. This statement from you reflects the "all-or-nothing" attitude that some simpleminded (and some not-so-simpleminded) religious people get into.
hlerwin, yes it is my firmly held conviction, but more importantly it's God's truth and I just don't see how a person who claims to be a Christian can get around that fact. But if Christ is not the only way then He died in vain and God, His heavenly Father, allowed Him to suffer a death He did not need to suffer.
believer, I think you have misread me. I don't subscribe to all those other (Eastern or whatever) views. I was born into a Christian home, so I hope I have bloomed where I was planted. (Is that the right metaphor?) I have no interest in "hedging my bets," though I am aware of many who do that. As far as "....but from the God of the Bible's perspective that is not an option because Christ Himself proclaims that He alone is able to save us and bring us into a personal relationship with the God of the Bible," that is your firmly held conviction. Butthat does not make it true. If the scripture itself does not convince me of that view, certainly your well intentioned opinion about salvation will not persuade me, either.
hlerwin, at college I knew an agnostic whose view of God was that he wasn't sure if there was a God or not but he wasn't gonna do anything to get Him mad. With all respect it sounds like you do much of the same with your view of God and your view of the afterlife is a good example. I'm not sure if there is or isn't an afterlife but just in case I'll fill certain squares in my life to do ensure if there is I'll wind up in the right place. So I'll keep all my options open by agreeing with just about everybody. So I'll become a Christian but also hold on to the beliefs of Eastern religions and so on. And from a human perspective that makes all the sense in the world, but from the God of the Bible's perspective that is not an option because Christ Himself proclaims that He alone is able to save us and bring us into a personal relationship with the God of the Bible. My hope is that one day you will see and embrace that truth. That salvation comes by grace alone, through faith alone, in and by Christ alone.
star, there are similar testimonies of Buddhists who "came back from the dead," as well as from Hindus and Daoists. Every culture has these stories. One writer I recall (but whose name is lost) stated that all religion springs from these "dreams" we have, whether overnight or in a hospital coma or a twenty-minute "dead zone." Still, none of these is really death. When you are actually dead, you do NOT come back. My father had the same experience in 1932 in a hospital. Before I was 10 years old, I had heard my father describe the whole scene, as I later read it in so many "back-from-death" testimonies. My father was a Christian before that experience and a Christian afterwards. But it did not turn him into a street preacher! He maintained his quiet faith the rest of his life but never tried to convince anyone else to believe the way he did. I heard him tell his physician cousin once that he died and came back, but the doctor said, "You were not really dead yet." My father believed his cousin. No one has ever really come back from the dead. (I just realized what a loaded phrase "back from the dead" is, in the context of this post. So, I will state that I put Jesus in that same category. To me, it was not even necessary for Jesus to come back to life, except to fulfill some wierd and outdated "atonement" concept. How strange a god would require that? I guess I agree with one of the best "Christians" I know, who said, when discussing her religion, "I believe all of it except Easter.")
hlerwin
Life does exist after you are dead. You memory, your senses, and your ability to talk and reason do not cease to exist.
I knew of four people who died and came back to life. One was an associate at work who was a Jew. Before he died he did not believe in God; he was an atheist. He told me that when he died he said that he was traveling down a dark tunnel. Then all of a sudden he was brought back to life. After the experience he said he knew that there was an afterlife and that there was a God. He didn't know whose God to believe in. He searched all the major religions of the world and settled on Judaism.
The second person I knew was a personal friend of mine. She was a Catholic at the time; later she became a born-again Christian. She got hit by a car and died on the way to the hospital. At the hospital the doctors were able to bring her back to life. She experienced a heavenly place. There were streets of gold, beautiful flowers and etc just like the Christian Bible describes.
The third person was a stranger I met at a McDonalds while traveling from Houston, Tx to Ft. lauderdale, Fl. We were in line waiting to place our order. I felt compelled by God to witness to him the Lord Jesus Christ. He recounted to me how he died and had come back to life. Before he died he said that he was afraid of death. He said that he didn't believe in a life after death. When he died he went down a dark tunnel. He talked with a being of light that said that he could go to heaven if he lived a righteous life. Afterwards he was brought back to life. He said he now is no longer afraid of death, knows that there is a life after death, and believe he will go to Heaven if he lives a righteous life. Of course, this is false. What he encountered was Satan, who transformmed himself into an angel of light, to deceive him into believing that all he needed to do was live righteously to go to heaven. I told him that he needed Jesus to go to heaven. He said, "I don't need your Jesus." I just shook my head and asked God to save him..
The fourth person is a Baptist minister. His name is Don Piper. He gave his testimony in my Church of what he experienced in Heaven when he died. He was killed in a head on collision with an 18 wheeler. He was dead for 90 minutes before he came back to life. He recounts his experiences in a book he wrote entitled "90 Minutes in Heaven-A True Story of Death and Life". You can read something about his book at http://www.amazon.com/90-Minutes-Heaven-...
Dr. Rawlings wrote a book and made a documentary called "To Hell and Back". The documentary gives five testimonies of which 4 of them are from atheist, who died, went to hell and came back to life. All five became born-again. The documentary is well worth the watch. You can view it free at
http://spiritlessons.com/Documents/Rawlings/Dr_Rawlings_Near_Death_Experiences.htm
hlerwin, this life is just a short one compared to what God has prepared for us! you can have that too, it must be wonderful in Heaven and in God's presence. No more pain or worries. Just pure joy. Nothing can top that.
hlerwin, I agree keeping track of several conversations at once can get rather confusing, but I did get your response with regards to lina at the clergy ban site, so I'll continue with you there, thanks.
But for people for whom the idea of an afterlife is a real comfort, I'm happy for them.
believer, just as you, I answered about lina's being a Christian and your question "Do you believe any parts of the Bible?" at another CP site. (Where THAT is, your guess is as good as mine. I get lost in this place.)
wbmoore, no, I do not believe in an afterlife. Or maybe I should say I don't KNOW whether there is one or not. But, furthermore, I don't give it much thought. I think the life we have here on earth is so rich (with its ups and downs and joys and tragedies and good times and bad times and in-between times) that its seems grasping and greedy to me for people to expect more.
hlerwin,
I was not sure what your answer would be, which is why I asked. I was wondering if there were parts of the Bible you consider to be true. Reading your posts, I see there are not.
Do you believe in an afterlife?
hlerwin, as I said at a different site lina is not a Christian and she professes to be anything but a Christian. And once again I ask you are there any doctrines of the Christian faith or Bible that you do believe in and if so what are they?
How should I put this? Our children do not "worry" about whether the Bible is true or not. They honor the example of many Christians, though (especially their mother), and live honest, loving lives.
I believe that the spirit of the scripture is true, but I cannot idolize the written word. Humans were religious long before the Bible came into being and will be so when the Bible ceases to be useful. "God, help us to depart from the paths that are no longer helpful." I think the Bible is beginning to be viewed as "not helpful" by many people, many because of the way Christians (some of them, anyway) idolize the book. Jesus on His return would bring a sword to such idolatry.
hlerwin,
You did in that post give a plain answer; is that better for communication?
As I read your other posts, perhaps you can clear up questions comes to mind: why follow scriptures that you do not believe are true? And does your family agree that they are not true, nor authoritative for everyone?
wbmoore, I think, already knew perfectly well how I would view Romans 3:23 and Romans 6:23.
Check out my post from 8:12am today. Do I seem afraid to give a straight answer?
Why do some people answer a question with a question? Are they afraid of giving a straight answer?
Why do fundamentalists often seem so obtuse?
wbmoore, what is your "best guess" on what I think about those last two verses?
wb, is this a serious question?
hlerwin,
Ok, you believe the Bible is wrong, and man is NOT condemned if they do not believe God sent Christ. So it is not applicable to you.
What then do you do with the verses
Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
wbmoore, in rereading over recent posts, if anyone's need re-posting, it's Lina's. She may not be an "acceptable Christian" for many on this Web site, but Christians need to seriously consider the points lina makes. Here are two.
Lina’s comments from 7/2/08:
And Prophet - I find it no substance in the Bible. Just orders. Like the Koran. An attempt to control the masses. It works for you. Great. Not for me. There is just no enough evidence for the claims of the Bible. There is much evidence in the works of Darwin, Einstein, and Watson (at least to me). The direction of our species has seemingly been heading in the right direction but at the expense of religion. Religion only comes to terms with scientific evidence stubbornly and often by conveniently reinterpreting its own texts to fit the new realities - essentially to save its own skin and retain a shred of legitimacy. Think of the world we're in. Evangelicals are obsessed with pro-life, anti-gay, anti-stem cell research, pro-Israel anti-diplomacy, anti-science issues (evolution, contraception, vaccination against HPV). They seemingly believe that failing to support these initiatives will bring out the end of the World. Can you think of anything more delusional? What 2 mature adults do naked in the privacy of their own home trumping fighting poverty? Consequently, not only do I find religious belief delusional, but harmful. That's why it should be privatized. The secular world doesn't need your picketing, your whining, your end-of-Western-Civilization-as-we-know-it doomsday scenarios. We don't need to be reminded of God's word or the Rapture. Not only do I know your texts well, I freely disbelieve in them.
and
I'll never get this. I will never understand god's purpose/need/want for creating a universe he will destroy, and so many billions of people, most of whom will burn in hell forever. Considering the vast amount of unbiased research conducted by the secular world, for the benefit of all humanity, religion has, in my eyes, been severely weakened; almost to the point of absolute dismissal. I really dislike the requirement for morality the religious ascribe to their texts. The world is less violent today because of the increasing absence of religion. That is obvious. Let's just take God out of the equation and privatizing him. There is no hope in weaving together the diverse beliefs of 6 billion into one universal religion. Muslims, Jews, and Hindus believe as strongly in their god(s) as you all do. So much so, they fear your afterlife. At one point do you say: I just have faith in my religion. I don't need to bark orders at anyone else. My faith has done little for the benefit of humanity (perhaps only for me in that provides me solace in the face of impending death). Humanity has been the only real driver of beneficial change. That is a fact.
hlerwin,
Ok, you believe the Bible is wrong, and man is NOT condemned if they do not believe God sent Christ. So it is not applicable to you.
What then do you do with the verses
Romans 3:23 for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God,
Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
No
hlerwin,
But the passage says that who ever does believe that God gave His Son has eternal life, and who ever does not believe is condemned.
So it is in the Bible. Is what the verse says true?
hlerwin, so you believe that those verses from John only speak to a certain group of people and how people respond to the truths of those verses will not impact their eternal destiny. Then I go back to a question I asked you on another site, what led you to become a Christian as opposed to a Buddhist or Taoist? You mentioned you liked the changes you saw in your wife after she became a Christian, but I'm more curious to know what did God say to or show you that convinced you to become a Christian?
But....rollin4him (a name that sounds like Christianity reduced to a CB handle) had a memorable and helpful remark. He wrote: "All right, put up your cyber dukes you wuss. Your a fake and a bully by coming on to this site and trying to push us around. Repent from your scornful life and become a warrior for the Lord."
Memorable, for all the wrong reasons...
And helpful, as it reminded me to try to steer clear of people like rollin4him....
wbmoore: I think that is a beautiful verse from the Christian Bible. This is the scripture that my family and I follow. But this scripture has no authority over my neighbor, who may be a Jew or a Daoist or an athiest. And your statement, wb, "That's OK. We know the truth" is certainly not as memorable (or helpful) as what John said, as I'm sure you realize.
And I will continue to do what God has asked me to. Warn the church of their courting of harlots (false doctrines). And spread the Good News of God's love. And if that happens to step on anyone's toes, I'll be sure to tell them to take it up with God. He's the boss. Not me.
hlerwin,
What do you make of the following passage?
John 3:16-18
16 For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life. 17 For God did not send his Son into the world to condemn the world, but to save the world through him. 18 Whoever believes in him is not condemned, but whoever does not believe stands condemned already because he has not believed in the name of God's one and only Son.
I appreciate your thoughtful response, wbmoore. I can see, just as you do, that "never the twain shall meet," on this bulletin board, anyway. I can be prideful. And you can be smug. ("Its perfectly OK, because we know the truth.") I guess I will go back to MY corny old saw: "You go to your church, and I'll go to mine."
And the reason for the strange markings for the apostrophe is due to the fact that I am using a Spanish language keyboard with which I am not familiar.
These postings are probably already on the back burner.
However: to igh, both Acts and some passages in Paul´s various Epistles refer to this first disagreement. The disagreement is also the subject of several books by noted scholars who go back to the original Greek in which the New Testament was first written. All the following theological disputes are a matter of historical record as noted in the writings of the early Church fathers.
To rolln4him: Why are you so angry? I do try to write within the block but don´t understand why you consider my postings "lame". Is it because I don´t indulge in vituperation and name calling, not to mention snide sarcasm (re your comment about my being¨"so brilliant.")
Can´t people disagree in a civil manner.
I appreciate the civil reply and explanation of john14-6.
Why can´t the various postings be half that courteous?
hlerwin,
Given what you have posted, and the 'camp' you have placed yourself in, I realize God's word is not very important to your every day life. Since you quote everything BUT the Bible, it is evident that empty philosophy is more important to you than what God says. I realize you do not believe the only God is sufficiently powerful enough or loving enough or caring enough or gracious enough or wise enough to have written what He wanted written through the use of God-led men and then keep its message unchanged for centuries. I realize you are incaapable of understanding that GOD sets the rules for how things work and what people SHOULD do or not do, and not you or even society as a whole. I understand that you do not think the Bible should take precendence over your feelings or thoughts, which is to say you know more than God does (by the way, that is called pride). But many people DO believe ithe Bible is the word of God and DO believe people should base their lives and choices on what God says, and to top it all off the Bible calls people who seek to do what Gods says to do wise.
However, God calls people to name sin as sin. God calls people to rebuke sinners - most especially those who call themselves Christian. As such, we are required to recognize and point out falacious thinking (such as yours) concerning sin. Any 'church' or demonination that embraces what God calls sin needs to be rebuked. Their mistakes need to be studied and avoided by other churches.
Concerning authority, CHRIST gave us authority to name sin as sin. People can accept what God has said or not. They can ignore what God has said, but to their peril. You and the entire world are free to decide true Christians (people who believe the Bible is God's word and Christ died to save us from our sin, and that there is no other way to get to heaven but to believe in Christ as savior) are boring, or lazy, or superstitious, or ignorant, or crazy. Its perfectly OK, because we know the truth. Christians suffer today simply for calling Christ savior (that's crazy isnt it). The persecution will continue to grow. We know this. We expect it. And while we do not want to suffer, we also welcome it as an honor and a signal of what is to come.
It is a shame you can not get the fact that a believer is called to a higher standard than the world. But then you yourself have said you maybe you are not of the 'elect' and perhaps you are right. I pray you are not. I pray you will repent and truly believe, or if you do believe (which is certainly not clear) that you will have the confusion concerning what God taught removed from you.
hlerwin -
Did you just demean my brother WBM you big bully by saying "I beginning to wonder [if you get it]"
All right, put up your cyber dukes you wuss. Your a fake and a bully by coming on to this site and trying to push us around. Repent from your scornful life and become a warrior for the Lord.
Stick with your own church, where you can have a vote that will be counted.
And your opinions (or what YOU think God's opinions are) have no authority over these Christians. Can you get this? I'm beginning to wonder.
What I meant was: You have no authority over the Episcopalians, wbm. Honest people have struggled with difficult questions in the PECUSA. You were not there for the discussions. You don't get to vote.
In this instance, wbm, I think you have got Episcoplalians confused with some other people who care what you think.
The problem is, that Episcopalian/Anglican church has allowed sin to not just come into the church, rather than rebuke it, as they should.
1 Timothy 5:20, Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning.
Hebrews 3:13, But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called Today, so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin
But people have gotten to the point where they do what they want - chasing evil instead of surrendering to God.
2 Tim 2:1-5
1 But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2 People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3 without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4 treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God - 5 having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.
People have forgotten that we should live lives surrendered to Christ and not sin.
Hebrews 5:9
and, once made perfect, he became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey him
1 John 1:5-6
5 This is the message we have heard from him and declare to you: God is light; in him there is no darkness at all. 6 If we claim to have fellowship with him yet walk in the darkness, we lie and do not live by the truth.
When we live sin, we dont have life. This happens with churches too.
quetzal said:
"In all this name calling, let us remember that Christians have been arguing about theology and the real meaning of Christ and His Church since Peter (and James) argued with Paul about including (sorry, loaded word) Gentiles in the community of believers."
what Scripture is this? ty
quetzal -
It would be helpful if you'd post directly in the box so that we don't have to struggle reading you lame post.
Anyway, if Pelosi or Clinton are a sampling of what a woman as President would be - then we're toast. These women are pathetic.
By the way, since your so brilliant, tell us why women couldn't vote in the first place.
"Complimentarian" simply means the traditional orthodox Christian teaching that men and women, according to scripture, have defined roles within the body of Christ. It is not a doctrine of superiority, but it does define *authority* (Paul says he does not permit a woman to teach or have authority over a man, etc). Women are not to exercise authority over men, or teach with authority over men, within the body of Christ. That role is reserved for men (the reason Christ had twelve *male* apostles. The position of deacon, priest, bishop, etc, is a person who stands in the role of the apostles, exercising the authority designated to them in that position.)
This has nothing to do with the secular world, or women working, or women running for President (though I have my own opinions on that, but that's neither here nor there when it comes to scripture).
A complimentarian is someone who believes that certain authority and certain roles are for men, and certain roles for women. This is as old as the church itself. This is why the Catholic Church and conservative Protestant denominations do not permit women to be deacons or elders, or to be ordained as pastors, ministers, reverends, priests, bishops, etc. It comes from Biblical teaching (1 Timothy 2:11-12).
"Complimentarian" is a new term for me. It doesn't sound very complimentary to anyone, either to those who label themselves with this term or those they are railing against. By extension, does this also mean that
a woman cannot be President of the US since women could not vote (much less be elected to any position) according to the Constitution as originally written, despite all those amendments, since they were politically and culturally motivated (and I won´t even get into the issue of slavery)? "Saved sinner" has a point about KJS´s previous experience but that´s a different argument.
In all this name calling, let us remember that Christians have been arguing about theology and the real meaning of Christ and His Church since Peter (and James) argued with Paul about including (sorry, loaded word) Gentiles in the community of believers. I don´t think the arguing is going to stop anytime soon. How blessed we are that The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost have such mercy and love for us all.
The issue with KJS isn't that she's a woman....its that she is totally unqualified for the job! Anyone see her curriculum vitae before she got this gig???? Come on! She never served as a Rector of an Episcopal church and now she's running the whole shebang! In Christ, there is no male or female, however, in leadership there are definite requirements and required fruit for the qualifications.....
This broad (uncomfortable) spectrum of anglicanism is quickly putting itself out of business. In my diocese were closing 6 churches this year....in the name of honoring the life cycle of a congregation.....please! People want JESUS not an organization!!!!
The problem is, regardless of how you interpret scripture, Jesus is not the focus! As the ABC says, "evangelism is imperative".....that's not happening because there is no clear message of what we're supposed to share...Jesus, Pagan rituals, Humanism....no one will evangelize until they understand and believe in what the cause is.
Sheesh....okay, off my soapbox now....
It is absolutely imperative for California voters to get out and vote on Proposition 8 in November (an amendment to ban same-sex marriage in California - again). Go to ProtectMarriage.com and see how you can get involved.
Already, the ACLU and others are in a feverish desperate attempt to get the judges to NOT ALLOW VOTERS TO DECIDE. We must do everything we can to help our Californian brother and sisters to stop this insanity.
wb-
Right on brother. The Pegans used to "be in the closet" (if I'm allowed to borrow this term in this case), but they're starting to pop up without too much of a fight anymore. Snakes! The Bible is peppered with stories of nations obeying God and rising to be great nations, then as they slide to immorality and worshiping of false gods the nation crumbles. America is dangerously close to seeing her doom. God help us!!!
Schools are also teaching pagan religious rites. I know, because many years ago I used to be one, and a teacher I knew was pagan, and she often bragged about how she would teach the kids to worship nature and the 'goddess' and they didn't even know it.
hlerwin-
I agree with you, but you're just hitting the tip of the iceberg. Schools are also pandering to the homosexual agenda by allowing time in the schools for gay propaganda and tolerance training. Parents are fighting, but the NEA (controlled primarily by liberal democraps since its existence) gives absolute no heed to parents. Sex education now begins in kindergarten in some radical districts despite the parents objections. Often, notices are not even issued to parents to inform them of this waste of tax money and time. I recall my sex education class in public high school and I remembered thinking "what a waste of time" - it didn't help that the teacher also threw in some meditation to boot.
Honestly, there is a silver lining. Parents are starting to take control. Sacrifices are being made to either home-school or send the kids to private schools that don't promote evil and perversion. And guess what, they're finding that home-schooled kids do better academically. You know why? Because mom/dad are spending time with their kids - yes, reading ...
I think quetzal is correct. Years ago, I complained about our youngest son's college roommate's refrigerator magnet. It read: "I spent my summer vacation at Bible camp learning to be more judgmental." After visiting this bulletin board, I feel like calling that old roommate and apologizing. I just didn't know.
Test scores are falling, rollin4, because children are not reading the Bible or having it read to them before they themselves can read (so they also miss being comforted by the soothing rhythms of King James English). The students also are not reading Wind in the Willows, Kidnapped, Mother Goose, Nancy Drew, Tom Sawyer or (most of them) even Harry Potter. They just aren't reading, period. They only "watch" listlessly. One side effect of this is interesting: My friend who teaches Faulkner in college must spend 3 or 4 days at the beginning of each semester going over Bible stories with students who scored 1500+ on their SATs! These "bright" students have no idea who Solomon was, much less Absalom.
As far as I can tell, Archbishop Rowan Williams is nothing more than a wishy washy leader. In his efforts to please everyone and keep the current Anglican structure united he has unwittingly brought about the destruction of his own authority and of the Anglican Communion.
He of all people should know that it is impossible to please everyone and that never taking a stand and giving vauge remarks is no way to deal with a problem such as this.
Attempted unity at the expense of Truth never brings unity. As a Bishop he should know this. Take a stand Archbishop and stop being wishy washy!
Is there a correlationship between the supposed "open-mindedness" that is taking place in our society and Biblical ignorance and decline of tests scores in public schools. UMmm, there's got to be a study here. The dumber we get there's more room for an open-mind, eh?
For complimentarians, like myself, it is not acceptable for a woman to hold the office of pastor, minister, reverend, bishop, etc. We believe it violates the order of the established church as based on Paul's instruction in the New Testament.
I do not lob the term "apostate" around loosely. Jefferts Schori presided over the installment of an openly homosexual bishop who is living in a sinful relationship according to scripture. Any "bishop" or any other head of a denomination that would allow such a bald-faced defiance of scripture to take place within their denomination, and worse, would condone it and give it their stamp of approval - who would tell those who were outraged that it was *they* who were wrong, and not "open minded" enough - is not walking in the Spirit and not guided by the truth.
Such a person, male or female, is an apostate and their denomination is apostate. They are in open violation of Christian orthodoxy - two thousand years of tradition and the clear teaching of scripture.
What else would you call someone who said that scripture didn't say what scripture really says? Who said that what God calls evil, is in fact good, and that what God calls good, is in fact evil?
Heretic, apostate, the term doesn't really matter. What matters is that they are in opposition to God's word, and to established Christian orthodoxy. The fact that Jefferts Schori is female simply means that complentarians don't recognize her position as being valid in the first place.
I think philomath777 and John 14-6 are reading statements through the lens of their own biases. Why such bile and vehemence against PB Schori? Sounds more like misogyny than orthodox Christianity. Apostate? Heretic? Goodness gracious, relax before your blood pressure goes sky high.
I think philomath777 is right on the money.
Does anyone else see Jefferts Schori's statement the way philomath does? I think he misread it. I don't think she would even claim that she and her church were the only "true believers." You are much more critical of her than she probably is of you.
U.S. Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori lamented the GAFCON statement. "Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable. This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers."
Notice how she hides behind that statement her belief that she is the true believer - that her apostate views are the right way for "true believers"! What hypocrisy!
Williams says Bible-believing Christians should 'think carefully about the risks entailed' and rather not form a conservative alliance. For me there is just one risk which I must avoid: Being untrue to Jesus, my Lord. And that is exactly why I call Bishops Williams and Shori false leaders, leaders who risk to be found wolves in sheep clothes.
hlerwin-
I agree wholeheartedly with John14-6 that women in church leadership roles such as Schori is contrary to the Word of God - sorry, but you'll have to talk to God on that one. Read through Timothy or the Bible for that matter. Again, we have to overcome common sense reading to side step a prejudice of women in leadership roles such as pastors, priest, elders and such. It wasn't until recently that you'd even hear about a woman in leadership - and that's the worlds way. Not God's way.
Alas! We do agree on something: the "random rape and murder of homosexuals" or for that matter anyone is disgusting and evil. That's the problem with supposed "hate" crimes laws. It's bias to categories of people. So if I "as a Christian" protest a gay pride event (say in Philadelphia), I could be charged with a "hate" crime because I'm opposing a group of people that if they feel "threatened" by this opposition, could charge me with a crime. Which in turn lead to a conviction and jail time. However, if homosexuals go to a church and protest their message of intolerance and if the church feels threatened, nada!
I agree with many comments said here. The African Episcaopal church has begun a reformation that should have taken place long ago. The Anglican church was created as a compromise between the "radical" Calvinist influenced Protestant forces within England and the fractured conservative Catholic remnant, by Elizabeth I. Now after centuries of compromises and stagnation, this Body has come full cicle. Repent and take the "path through the narrow gate" before it's too late.
quetzal:
Maybe Africans can learn to stand up on their own when funds stop flowing from liberal American churches. Then the African churches won't elect leaders, like Bishop Akinola, who act like spoiled, colonial children.
rolln4him:
Akinola a man of great honor????? Please, give us a break. If you don't like women in leadership roles, ok.
If you believe in a literal interpretation of the Holy Scriptures, ok. But don't confuse true people of God (including, gasp, women) with power mad, dictatorial pharisees. This is a man who is against homosexuals because of the Bible. Well, ok. But when he is asked to at least issue some call to stop the random rape and murder of homosexuals, he says this has to be understood with its "cultural context." Is this a case of talking out of both sides of your mouth, or not? The whole shift of Gafcom to explain itself using the "colonial past" as an excuse sounds unfortunately like Mugabe. And what will these African churches do without the money flowing in from the liberal US and Canadian churches? Chances are they'll still have their hands out.
I'm tired of the Episcopal Church acting like they've taken the high road in this. Jefferts Schori says, "Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable." Nope. It's just the Episcopal Church. At the last Lambeth conference, the proposal to ordain active homosexuals was voted down 506 to 2. The Episcopal Church rejected the Anglican Communion first. At that moment, an ultimatum should have been issued to the rogue province.
In other words what this article is really saying is: "Don't do what the Word of God says, even if it brings division (Jesus said: "I did not come to bring peace, but a sword" by the way."), we want to live in open rebellion against God and His Word and if you 'conservatives" (as if there is such a thing - there's only ONE Christian, a biblical one) bring Truth into the equation, that might just cause our plans (to undermine the Faith) to be exposed and thwarted."
Ephesians 5:11 And have no fellowship with the unfruitful works of darkness, but rather reprove them.
And again, I say, "Amen."
A Primates Council which consists only of a self-selected group from among the Primates of the Communion will not pass the test of legitimacy for all in the Communion, he stated. "And any claim to be free to operate across provincial boundaries is fraught with difficulties, both theological and practical."
I say, he's right.
U.S. Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori lamented the GAFCON statement. "Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable. This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers."
I say, she's right.
Oh, and Jefferts Schori is no more a bishop than I am, since the role of priest, pastor, bishop, etc, is restricted to men in the New Testament, and the reason for this is clear given her statements.
Jefferts Schori, in my opinion, is an outright apostate, and her snide, radical, liberal comments only reinforce the opinion that she has no place at the head of any denomination.
Rowan the Druid is the most weak and feckless leader the Church of England has ever seen. He is a very educated man, but he is not a leader, not in the least. He is wishy-washy and milquetoast on every issue of importance to the Church, whether it be gay marriage, gay clergy, or dealing with Muslims.
The Bible believing Christians in the Church of England (because that's what they, they aren't "conservatives" - they are simply the faithful, and everyone against them is nothing but a radical liberal) should simply split from this apostate denomination altogether and align themselves with the African bishops to form a new hierarchy.
Unfortunately, Williams is typical of many church leaders today. They fall into the trap of "did God really say..." They other trick they've fallen into is not using their God given authority to rebuke sin; rather they succumb to the trick of thinking they have to be "tolerant" of sin otherwise they're not godly. Many of our leaders failed us in their silence from the pulpit on issues such as homosexuality and they need to stand up like Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola who has called sin for what it is - evil and contrary to God!
Katharine Jefferts Schori = heretic and imposter
Rowan Williams = Coward
Archbishop Peter Akinola = a hero of our faith who will go down in history as a man of great honor!
In WWII since a good part of the protestant church in Germany aligned itself with the natzies, those who were faithful to the Gospel established the Confessing Church. Now the church in the west seems to be under the presure of secularism, relativism and a bunch of other ideologies that want to conform the Gospel to their message. On one hand I pray for faithful churches to opose strongly as unbiblical the gay ordination thing, on the other hand I hope that the another schism would be avoided.
williams says: "Blah blah blah blah etc.... well he gots words and no actions. But the Gafcon has got actions for Jesus to Save as many as possible from evil works of the episcopalian/Anglican apostates. Jesus says to separate yourselfs from the False brethren no matter who they are and if williams and schori dont like it so what. Look at Scripture as it is applied to real life; do you want a false Gospel preached to sunday school children by a false brethren in your Church? Are some of them even your children! Do you want these children to be Damned because you didnt have the guts to stand up and say " that is a false Gospel and we will not hear it!" What about your friends in Church will you let them be led astray?? Who do you think you are to keep silent while many are led to the Slaughter?? Find some Courage in Christ and speak the Truth and speak it loud!! Otherwise your cowardly silence only emboldens satan and leads many to death and eternal separation from God. Think about it the next time you hug your children and tell em you love them, or see even the stranger on the street, do you want them in Heaven or not?? And who's servant are you anyways?? Think about it.
Rev 21:7 Those who win the victory will receive this from me: I will be their God, and they will be my children.
Revelation 21:8 But cowards, traitors, perverts, murderers, the immoral, those who practice magic, those who worship idols, and all liars---the place for them is the lake burning with fire and sulfur, which is the second death."
A Primates Council which consists only of a self-selected group from among the Primates of the Communion will not pass the test of legitimacy for all in the Communion, he stated. "And any claim to be free to operate across provincial boundaries is fraught with difficulties, both theological and practical."
I say, he's right.
U.S. Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori lamented the GAFCON statement. "Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable. This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers."
I say, she's right.