Which to many makes it all the more baffling to understand why Michael Nazir-Ali, the Bishop of Rochester has decided to boycott the Lambeth conference. He has become a champion of traditional Christianity in Britain, yet his action – along with that of the other 250 bishops – will be seen as a direct challenge to the authority of Dr Williams; as fermenting division rather than bringing healing. Rather than promoting a Church that has a message of hope and love, they seem to be reinforcing views that it has now come to stand for intolerance and bitter recrimination.
Yet this would be to misunderstand Bishop Nazir-Ali. Well-respected and valued in the Church, he is a man of deep conviction, but his decision is borne out of desperate frustration that the liberals have been able to advance their agenda – from electing a gay bishop to carrying out homosexual blessings – without any real attempt made to keep them in check. The fact is that the conservatives feel powerless to stop the liberal tide, and their statements betray this desperation.
There is in effect little that they can do, and also little that Dr Williams can do because of the autonomous nature of the various churches in the worldwide Communion. But their boycott of this summer’s conference and their attacks on the pro-gay moves in the Church have pushed them to the fringes of the communion and damaged their image in the eyes of wider society.
The Bishop of Jerusalem, Suheil Salman Dawani, had asked the organisers not to meet in the city: “We don’t agree with what happens in the Episcopal Church but this doesn’t divide us. Unity is at the heart of the gospel of Christ.”
Oh really?
“Do you suppose that I came to grant peace on earth? I tell you, no, but rather division;
for from now on five members in one household will be divided, three against two and two against three.
They will be divided, father against son and son against father, mother against daughter and daughter against mother, mother-in-law against daughter-in-law and daughter-in-law against mother-in-law.” (Luke 12:51-53) Matthews account adds: “He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.” (Matthew 10:37).
God demands-first and foremost-allegiance to Him and to His word. Unity based on anything else is a false unity. Christ did not hold Himself to a lesser standard: “Then his mother and his brothers came to him, but they could not reach him because of the crowd. And he was told, “Your mother and your brothers are standing outside, desiring to see you.” But he answered them, “My mother and my brothers are those who hear the word of God and do it.”
What has become of the [i]Telegraph[/i] of old?
I sense no desperation among GAFCON participants; only confidence in the truth.
Is this a news story or an opinion piece? The story makes some assertions that just simply are not true unless they are opinions in the mind of the writer. The modern liberal protestant churches in their thoughtless embrace of the culture have become increasingly irrelevant and are losing membership faster than glaciers are losing ice to global warming. If the “culture” views the church as intolerant that is their problem and it means that the faithful churches are being authentic to their counter cultural calling. I wouldn’t expect this calling to popular. Jesus never called us to be popular with the world around us he called us to be faithful in the midst of its corruption. The world has never embraced the authentic message of the church and, possibly, it never will but that shouldn’t stop us from proclaiming it. The alternative is submission to the tyranny of evil.
“But their boycott of this summer’s conference and their attacks on the pro-gay moves in the Church have pushed them to the fringes of the communion and damaged their image in the eyes of wider society.”
Oh dear – a phrase masquerading as a sentence in a proper Brit newspaper!
Does the writer even know that the AC is more than the CoE? If so, how can the majority of the AC be considered “the fringes”?
One wonders what the Telegraph is getting at here since the Church of England made itself irrelevant to English society more or less a century ago.
[blockquote] …yet his action – along with that of the other 250 bishops – will be seen as a direct challenge to the authority of Dr Williams; as fermenting division rather than bringing healing. Rather than promoting a Church that has a message of hope and love, they seem to be reinforcing views that it has now come to stand for intolerance and bitter recrimination. [/blockquote]
This passage could just as easily been written as, “…yet his action – along with that of the other 250 bishops – will be seen as a direct challenge to the authority of Dr Williams; as reinforcing 2,000 years of Christian teaching rather than allowing the Church to drift with the zeitgeist. Rather than promoting a Church that has a message indistinguishable from a fortune cookie, they seem to be reinforcing views that it has now come to stand for the love of Christ and bedrock Christian theology.”
But that would require someone who actually believed in the faith once delivered, not exactly what one finds in newsrooms anymore.
This is an opinion piece, not a news report.
Yes, and a poor opinion piece at that!
But note that opposition to liberals is divisive while what they do is the inevitable march of history and not to be resisted. By definition liberal agenda is never divisive. It can’t get more self-serving than this.
The Telegraph is Britain’s most conservative serious newspaper by far – and the best selling. You may not like it telling you that making hostility to homosexual relationships our number one message to the public is seriously damaging the Church of England, but you ought to believe it because it comes from an ally.
Badman is both right and wrong. Is there nothing we can do? In the secular world, this is a crippling truth, that is, crippling to us. We ARE impotent. But does this opposition damage us? Well, what does he suppose that fostering homosexuality will do to us, if not show that we have no principles, no fixed beliefs, no core doctrine – in short, as as spiritually empty as the culture we oppose. No indeed, we stand by our principles, our core beliefs because, in a world of haste and waste, careless thought, ephemeral novelty, and the belief that immediate gratification is not soon enough, we can be the rock on which these waves break, the harbor of calm water and sound anchorage. There will always be people who, will they nil they, need that anchorage and will go where it is to be found. Larry
#12 Larry, what I and many think we should do is preach the gospel (I know you think that too). The gospel has a powerful and difficult message, but our present internal bickering is well short of covering it, or promoting it. In fact, in the Church of England, it obscures and discredits it. That’s a problem. Saying “we’ve got this point right” does not address or solve the problem. If you’re in a hole, stop digging.
Badman, then we are in essential agreement. And may we not hope that it is precisely this concrete goal that GAFCON must reach? And are we not sure that this is precisely that which Lambeth will skirt?
Larry