An interesting Look Back to 2006

If it comes to a split in the Anglican Communion, it is not the fault of the orthodox wing which wants to leave, but of the radical wing that couldn’t wait to make a ‘gay bishop’ and the blessing of gay relationships possible.

Such is the view of the spiritual leader of the Anglican Church, the Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, expressed in an interview with the Dutch Evangelical daily newspaper, Nederlands Dagblad.

Williams himself does not regard homosexuality as an issue on which the Church should split. He says it is a subject ‘we must talk about’. ,,There are enough Christians of good faith in every denomination – Evangelical to Roman Catholic – to whom it is not quite so self-evident, who are not absolutely sure that we have always read the Bible right.”

But that discussion is being foreclosed by people with a ‘radical agenda’ who just can’t wait, says the Archbishop. The Episcopal Church in the United States (ECUSA) three years ago ordained a Bishop who lived openly in a gay relationship. In doing so ,,it has made a decision that is not the decision of the wider body of Christ”, says Williams.

Read it all and read that also.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Archbishop of Canterbury

18 comments on “An interesting Look Back to 2006

  1. DonGander says:

    “He says it is a subject ‘we must talk about’.”

    Thirty years of talking is what got us into the situation in TEC. Another ten years of talking will make the disease systemic throughout the Anglican communion.

    People struggling with homosexuality or other sins deserve compassion – not gossip.

  2. Daniel Lozier says:

    [b]So why did he not say this to the TEC House of Bishops?![/b]

  3. Susan Russell says:

    Ah, yes … that bastion of objective journalism: [i]Nederlands Dagblad.[/i]
    Must be a VERY slow news day

  4. VaAnglican says:

    Susan, a wee bit testy about some of what the Archbishop said? He put the blame for this state of affairs squarely where it belonged. I suppose that is uncomfortable for those he holds responsible.

  5. Daniel Lozier says:

    Susan, there is nothing less objective or close-minded than an American liberal.

  6. Jeffersonian says:

    [blockquote]Ah, yes … that bastion of objective journalism: Nederlands Dagblad. [/blockquote]

    La-la-la-la!!! I can’t hear you!!! Susan, are you suggesting that the ND has invented these quotes?

  7. dwstroudmd+ says:

    He said what he said. Let us hope that he meant the words in a meaningful and not postmodern sense. Likewise, the Primates. So, let’s see, that leaves the ECUSA/TEC HOB to speak.

  8. Br_er Rabbit says:

    I heard none of those 2006 sentiments in the remarks of +++Williams yesterday in New Orleans.
    A fellow blogger here remarked “So, he’s never changed,” since his pro-homosexual views in his pre-primate days.

  9. Connecticutian says:

    Susan, perhaps we should apply the “Orama/NAN” protocol here: “We believe he actually said what it is reported he said, unless and until, and possibly even after both he and the journalist issue three denials and retraction, printed on the front page of the NYT (’cause it’s infallible), AND if AnglicanTV documents them pinky-swearing that it never happened. 🙂

  10. Connecticutian says:

    I almost forgot… even if he didn’t say it, we know in his heart he really meant it, so same diff. 😉

  11. libraryjim says:

    Or perhaps, Deitrich Bonhoffer’s [i]”the Cost of Discipleship”[/i]?

  12. Oldman says:

    TPaine, It grieves me that those of you who are obsessed with the GLBT Agenda have sullied the name of a great Christian Martyr Martin Luther King by trying to identify your movement with Civil Rights for black people. I knew in my heart it would eventually happen, but prayed to our Lord that it wouldn’t. I don’t believe you have any idea what it was like being black in the South and even in the North back then. Please use another example if you must. Being denied marrying a same sex person in a church is far different from being forced to ride in the back of a bus and eat in segregated retaurants. There are churches like MCC which will marry you if you like, but please leave the Episcopal Church alone and don’t try to bring Martin Luther King’s name into it. The movements are no where similar and I doubt seriously whether Dr. King would approve of SSM.

  13. Sarah1 says:

    RE: “Must be a VERY slow news day . . . ”

    Heh.

    No — but a [i]whole[/i] lot of progressive blogs are trying to pretend that it is. ; > )

  14. driver8 says:

    You are quite right torture is appalling and I haven’t heard a single voice in the debate about sexuality doing anything but speaking aginst violence against anybody. Would that some in TEC would speak out as passionately against violence against their brothers and sisters in faith in northern Nigeria or Gujerat…

  15. Oldman says:

    Sorry TPaine if I misread your devotion to the GLBT movement. I wish there was an equal attitude between the treatment of gays and the blacks back then, but there isn’t. Please choose a better example to define your positions. FYI, I have known many gays over the years (my sig indicates my longevity) and none have ever had the treatment that blacks got. You would think that the Matthew Shepherd case was equal to the many lynchings etc. that blacks endured. It was not! It was awful, but was rather isolated when compared to what happened before to black people.

  16. Barry says:

    TPaine wrote:
    Can you or I know what it was like to be Matthew Shepard, to be tortured to death because you are gay? I don’t think so. None of us can.
    …………………………………………………………………………….
    Perhaps some can!

    IN OCTOBER 1998, 21-year-old gay college student Matthew Shepard was viciously beaten and left to die, tied to a fence in Laramie, Wyoming. Shepard’s murder sent shock waves across the country, as millions of people were faced with the deadly outcome of antigay bigotry.

    Published: September 26, 1999

    The two men arrested Sunday in connection with the murder of a 13-year-old Prairie Grove boy in Rogers were ordered held without bond Monday

    Joshua Macave Brown, 22, and Davis Don Carpenter, 38, were in court Monday for a probable-cause hearing in connection with the murder of Jesse Dirkhising.

    Police received a 911 emergency call placed from the residence at 4:53 a.m. Sunday. When police officers and a Rogers Fire Department ambulance arrived, a man later identified as Carpenter met them. Carpenter, described as very upset, repeatedly told the officers, “He’s not breathing.” Dirkhising was found on the floor of a bedroom with duct tape around one wrist. When asked about the tape, Brown reportedly told officers they were “just playing a game.” While being questioned at the scene, Brown allegedly assaulted Cpl. Rick Simmons and was arrested.

    Butler said Monday that the boy had been raped repeatedly over a period of hours, including with foreign objects. While the rapes were occurring, Butler said, the boy was bound with duct tape at his ankles, knees and wrists and also was gagged and blindfolded. Butler also said there is some evidence the boy was drugged, and a quantity of a sedative known as amitryptiline was found at the residence.

    Police found quantities of other drugs, including suspected methamphetamine, along with items commonly used in sexual bondage. Notes making reference to various sex acts and the use of pills and duct tape also were found at the residence.

    Butler said the two men raped Dirkhising at least six times. Each was charged with six counts of rape in addition to capital murder. Butler said the boy was left bound and gagged after the last rape while the two men went to get a sandwich to eat. When the men returned, Butler said, they found the boy, apparently dead, and made the 911 emergency call.

  17. Oldman says:

    #20. I, too, TPaine! But can’t we get back back to all of the Gospel of Jesus Christ not just the easy part that people misread and make up to justify their positions.

    On both sides!!!

  18. driver8 says:

    Swopping stories of violence and mutilation, and the implied claim to moral authority they bring, will not resolve (and not should it) our debate concerning God’s will about human sexuality.