A motion is going before this week’s Synod in London calling for a review of the ‘parliamentarian’ way in which its debates are conducted. The Daily Telegraph’s religious affairs editor, John Bingham, reports that the critical views of the revisionist Bishop of Salisbury, the Right Revd Nicholas Holtam, about the style of Synod have inspired those pushing for a review.
Ironic that, given that Bishop Holtam recently likened opponents of gay marriage to supporters of apartheid. Now the Holtam brigade apparently want to extinguish the fires of odium theologicum with a pile of indaba-daba-doo.
………………………………………………
If every member of the General Synod were an orthodox Anglican who upheld the biblical doctrine of the Church of England as expressed in our Book of Common Prayer, 39 Articles of Religion and Ordinal, then there would be no false teachers to oppose.
Without false teachers getting up to trumpet revisionist views sanctioning immoral life-styles, General Synod would be a much better decision-making body than it currently is and its disagreements, inevitable in any council of sinful human beings, would be much more agreeable.
But that is not the present reality of Synod. So parliamentary has got to be a lot better than indaba-daba-doo, otherwise it really would be ‘win-win’ for the false teachers.
Ah, I read that article which Kendall posted about the “rude and unchristian” Synod, and here’s the back story. Synod is bad because it won’t just roll over and endorse the New Thing. Sounds like Synod, as this author suggests, needs more members dedicated to the apostolic faith, and then things would be better.