The editors at the Post really needed to ask if Cardy was saying that his church (as in his parish) does not believe in the Virgin Birth or if his Church (as in the Anglican Church in New Zealand) no longer teaches this ancient doctrine.
Either way, the story is that a congregation or a national church in the Anglican Communion put up a rather shocking billboard ”” at Christmas ”” attacking ancient doctrines about the Virgin Birth. The heart of the story should consist of Cardy and other members of his parish explaining why they believe what they believe and why they did what they did.
In other words, don’t bury the lede.
Great piece. The mainstream media are constantly giving a HUGE pass to left wing clerics in interviews and reportage by failing to press them with follow-up questions about the implications of their revisionist doctrines or preposterous “arguments” for them. This happened constantly, for example, in the interviews of KJS and VGR (especially by National Public Radio).
And I really feel this is inexcusable. You don’t need to be a traditionalist Christian — just a good reporter. And as a good reporter don’t let people you are interviewing get away with crap. You don’t have to be cruel or aggressive or rude — you just politely keep asking them followup questions.
There’s a beautiful and powerful movie about journalism called SHATTERED GLASS. I won’t give away any of the details, except one quote that is something I’d love to tell all these reporters when it comes to interviewing our PB and Gene Robinson and so on. It’s between two reporters, one of whom is allowing the fact that she likes a guy not to investigate what are almost certainly gross distortions by him.
“If he were a stranger to you, if he was a guy you were doing a piece about, pretend that guy told you he’d ‘only done it once.’ Would you take his word for it? Of course not, you’d dig and you’d bury him! And you’d be offended if anybody told you not to.
(pause) You’re a good reporter. You’ve always been a smart, thorough reporter. Why can’t you be one now?”
It would be good to know just how many people go to this church, age profile etc, since it seems to be deeply influenced by Tec-type non-theology.
I know that another nearby church in Auckland, St Paul’s Symonds Street, was relaunched by Holy Trinity Brompton people, after years of decline from its Anglo-Catholic and charismatic heyday, and it claims c. 1000 attend its Sunday services.
Maybe any readers down under can fill us in with more details?
I don’t know anything myself but the Auckland Diocesan profile for their recent Bishop search is available online here:
http://www.auckanglican.org.nz/dox/Diocesan Profile (web).pdf
It shows (on page 29) total attendance for the year 2007 of about (I am reading from a graph so these are only approximate) 9000, with almost 6,000 acts of communion. I don’t know how that works but assuming that it is reasonable to split both across 52 Sundays, then it implies about 175 at worship and 115 taking communion — quite a gap which is a bit of a puzzle. The St Paul’s mentioned by azusa has about 24,000 in attendance but still only 7,500 (ie 460 and 145 respectively).
There is a graph at the top of the same pages showing the overall size of the parishes on the basis of the number of acts of communion and on that basis St Matthews looks like it is about at the bottom of the top third of parishes in the diocese.
There is no doubt that St Matthews is a very extreme liberal parish — its website pays homage to every liberal cause from gay rights to the environment to other religions. They also are clearly enjoying controversy their billboard has created .. its website has a modified billboard of the same bed — now empty. No doubt that has Enormous Significance but what it is escapes me.
http://stmatthews.org.nz/index.php
#3: that link has now been removed. Is it cached anywhere? I wonder if Auckland diocese, in appointing a new bishop of evangelical background, wants to move in a new (orthodox) direction. I guess there are numerous non-Anglican evangelical churches in the city, but the Anglicans haven’t been on much of a crest.
The Bed of Enormous Significance: maybe it’s a Procrustean bed – lopping off what it doesn’t want, stretching what it does, either way it’s death for those who make their bed there.
I followed the link given by #3 and went on to read the sermon preached on 12/27, the First Sunday of Christmas. All I can say is, may God have mercy on the souls of all who are being led into heresy and unbelief by this false shepherd.
Read it for yourselves:
http://stmatthews.org.nz/nav.php?sid=503&id=1006
Katie: Thanks for the link. What a pompous, self-important, ignorant hack.
I, too, have read the sermon. I do not understand why he masquerades as a Christian minister. If you don’t believe it why not just start your own thing. Oh yeah, they have.
If they would only develop their own vestments, architecture, etc. something that would clearly mark them as not from the Church.
I read the sermon also and it interests me to read yet another brilliant “thinker” say he would have to hang up his brain to believe a basic creed of the church. Funny how the I AM of the universe isn’t limited by the logic the good minister is so proud to wield from his intellectual arsenal.