A leading evangelical bishop will today call for Anglicans to “accept a diversity of ethical convictions” gay sex in order to prevent schism.
The Bishop of Liverpool, the Right Rev James Jones, will use his presidential address to his diocesan synod today to argue that for an end to the battles over sexuality in the Anglican Communion so the Church can focus on mission.
In his address, seen by The Times, he compares the debate over homosexuality to that over going to war, in spite of the commandment “Thou Shalt not Kill.”
Just as the Just War doctrine evolved to allow Christians to reconcile their faith with their civic duty to fight for their country, so those on the conservative side of the gay sex debate should accept those on the liberal side for the sake of Anglican peace.
He also, controversially, takes issue with the conservative line that sexuality is a matter of choice. Instead, he argues that like ethnicity, it is a “given”.
[blockquote]Just as the Just War doctrine evolved to allow Christians to reconcile their faith with their civic duty to fight for their country, so those on the conservative side of the gay sex debate should accept those on the liberal side for the sake of Anglican peace.[/blockquote] I don’t see how one follows from the other. And I don’t even understand the second half of the sentence. I accept those on the liberal side. I just don’t agree with many of their ideas. It seems to me that over and over again unity seems to be the prime directive of liberals and if conservatives disagree, they are schismatics.
So it boils down to social pressure being more important than scripture and tradition- the man is no evangelical that much IS clear! Ordinariate looks even more attractive by the day..
The divisive issue is not about sex so the good Bishop misses the point.
Church of the Word, VA
WOW! Forgive my Lenten breach of etiquette and judgmentalism. But this man is a sorry excuse for a bishop. Accede to heresy in the name of peace? Thank God he was not around at Nicea.
ANAXIOS!!!
I’m puzzled by the claim that homosexuality is a “given.” The last I saw in the media a number of years ago was that the search for a “gay gene” had been abandoned. In addition at the time a group of geneticists (from Harvard, I seem to recall) issued powerful statements claiming that even if a “gay gene” could be found–genes are not determinative of human behaviour. But by then the liberal media had brainwashed Americans to believe there is a “gay gene” and that it is determinative. This pushed polls in the direction of regardingng homosexual behaviour as “normal” for some people instead of a form of mental problem needing therapy or, speaking religiously, conversion.
My first comment was based only on what was on Titus One Nine. Then I read the rest of the story on the link and all I could think was that it is obvious some Anglican high clergy-even “evangelical” ones seem determined to push every Anglican who believes in the Bible and/or the Christian moral tradition into the Catholic Church.
I think his analogy to pacifism/just war is inapt. Pacifism/just war is more analgous to celibacy/marriage. Neither is immoral. The Church debated whether a Christian as a Christian could particpate in war, but the Church never argued that just war was immoral. The issue was whether the Christian should be held to a different standard. When the Church says that homosexual acts are immoral it is not making a distinction between behaviors which a Christian cannot engage in, but non-Chriatians can. The Church’s teaching that homosexual acts are immoral applies to any human person.
James Jones has really drifted from his evangelical moorings. He has been a kindly communicator with a good, softly expressed media presence, as befits a former schoolteacher who went on to work in broadcasting; however, his opinings of recent years have generally been more about soft left ecology and ‘the yearning God’ than salvation though the Cross and the call to die to ourselves and live to Christ.
A few years ago he wrote a careful, traditional piece in ‘The Daily Telegraph’ of London on homosexuality, but since then this erstwhile evangelical has sounded more and more fuzzy – not as far as John Gladwin, formerly bishop of Chelmsford, but in the same direction.
The comparison with ‘just war’ theory is wholly confused and shows Jones’ lack of theological discrimination.
Another illustration of why GAFCon was necessary.
So would the Bishop back paedophilia if that was a ‘given’- for certainly those who suffer in this way and cause such suffering are very hard to turn around and often struggle with such attraction till death….over to you your grace
In this address we see the corrosive effects of the Elizabethan Settlement: that theological differences should be set aside in favor of the appearance of unity and political expedience. I think Elizabethan Heresy is more appropriate. In my view this is the foundation on which Anglican theology is built, far more solidly than the purported “three-legged stool.” Indeed, it is not so much theology as it is opinion given that uninformed personal opinions are allowed to dominate over any attempt to teach true doctrine.
#4
If he had been at Nicaea he’d have been thrown into the Propontis.
RE: “In this address we see the corrosive effects of the Elizabethan Settlement: that theological differences should be set aside in favor of the appearance of unity and political expedience.”
Not at all. For the Elizabethan Settlement is about things indifferent, and not things essential. All Churches — yea, even the RCs — “agree to disagree” about things that are considered minor trifles. There’s not an ecclesial organization that exists where there aren’t “theological differences” that are happily lived with.
You are quite correct with regard to Queen Elizabeth’s own intention. After that you appear to miss the fact that the Settlement is at the heart of Leftist “rationale.” But then, we can agree to disagree.