The archbishop’s thoughtful letter is helpful, and his defense of the Communion’s structures is persuasive. I am particularly grateful to hear him say that “the conviction of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as Lord and God and the absolute imperative of evangelism are not in dispute in the common life of the Communion.” This slanderous bit of boilerplate has been repeated frequently by the opponents of the Episcopal Church, and it is heartening to know that the archbishop realizes that it false.
‘I am quite concerned however that Archbishop Williams seems not to understand that there are primates, bishops, and others in the Communion who are actively seeking to undermine his office. He says that we should not “input selfish or malicious motives to those who have offered pastoral oversight to congregations in other provinces.” But there is no doubt that extending such oversight is an effort to foment discord, and punish those who argue on behalf of the full inclusion of gays and lesbians in the life of our Communion. Peter Akinola is unwilling to articulate a simple condemnation of violence against homosexuals. What more does he have to do to persuade the archbishop that his views are dangerous, malicious and un-Christian?’
‘I am quite concerned however that Archbishop Williams seems not to understand that there are primates, bishops, and others in the Communion who are actively seeking to undermine his office.’
Newsflash to +Chane: ++Rowan is undermining his own office without the help of others.
—-
‘Peter Akinola is unwilling to articulate a simple condemnation of violence against homosexuals.’
Newsflash to +Chane: ++Peter has saved the lives of homosexuals by working for their incarceration in lieu of their execution. Even we benighted Nigerians* can see the value in that trade-off. Have you been to Nigeria to see if anythig more can be accomplished? What are you contributing besides arrows at the man who actually has to deal with the problem?
—-
* I was born in Texas with English, Scottish, Irish, and Cherokee blood, but your neighbor bishop, +Lee, insists on calling me a Nigerian. I am so grateful to be under the oversight of ++Peter, that I consider it a special honor to be called a Nigerian. I hope all the others in CANA feel the same way.
Who was it that invited Khatami, the former president of Iran, to the National Cathedral? Did Chane so much as mention Iran’s human rights abuses?
Hypocrite. Liar. Fraud.
I can’t help but see a not-so-subtle racism in +Chane’s reference to Africans. Shame on you, Bishop, and shame on those who put up with you!
In saying “Peter Akinola is unwilling to articulate a simple condemnation of violence against homosexuals” Bp. Chane bears false witness against his brother bishop.
Bp. Akinola has condemned such violence numerous times. This is not something I maintain a list on, but all you have to do is see his assent to Lambeth 1.10, the Statement of the Primates of the Anglican Communion at Dromantine, February 2005 (“The victimisation or diminishment of human beings whose affections happen to be ordered towards people of the same sex is anathema to us.”) and his letter to the CANA congregations, 2006, available here: http://tinyurl.com/5kqc3x
See also, the report from George Conger at GAFCon:
http://www.religiousintelligence.co.uk/news/?NewsID=2209
This calumny must stop and Bp. Chane owes Bp. Akinola an apology.
CanaAnglican,
Oh, a Nigerian jail is SOOOO much better. So the choice essentially comes down to beating, torture, and death my a mob or beating, torture, and death in a jail. Gee, sorry if people don’t sound grateful.
Why is it so hard to for you people to make a clear and unqualified condemnaiton of violence against people based on sexual orientation?
Though, I guess you’re right. We should be grateful that the lynch mob is properly deputized. Please forgive us for getting all uppity and forgetting our place.
#5. You’re forgiven. LM
Kevin, you make no sense. Only those who have failed living the Gospel do harm to others. Every day people harm other people and I’m sure homosexuals are among them. No Christian who is Christian hurts a brother or sister who is in Christ or not of the Faith and when/if they do, repentance is required. This is not the issue, hurting homosexuals in Nigeria or anywhere else in the world. The issue is the sin of same sex sex. And same sex sex is a problem with humans and God.
No, the issue is that people are being beaten, tortured, raped, and killed because certain societies see them as an “other” that is the supposed cause of all sorts of problems and needs to be dealt with. Not only is committing it a failure to live up to the Gospel, but so is condoning it whether openly or even tacitly.
Again, why is it so hard to condemn violence against us, period, full stop?
Why is it so hard for Chane to condemn Iran for EXECUTING homosexuals?
[blockquote] I am particularly grateful to hear him say that “the conviction of the uniqueness of Jesus Christ as Lord and God and the absolute imperative of evangelism are not in dispute in the common life of the Communion.” This slanderous bit of boilerplate has been repeated frequently by the opponents of the Episcopal Church, and it is heartening to know that the archbishop realizes that it false.[/blockquote]
The “bishop” of DC has obviously not been keeping up with the much publicized views of Ms. Schori. I have said this before, but it bears repeating, the underlying issue is not sex or sexual attraction. We all struggle with various forms of sin. The issue is theological orthodoxy vs. heterodoxy. TEC is an institutionally heretical church presided over by an apostate.
ICXC NIKA
John
#5. Kevin,
I add my forgivness to that of Larry. I ask you to consider that ++Peter is doing the best he can to lessen persecution of homosexuals in the Muslim areas of Nigeria. His first job there is to present Christ to the people. Then Sharia law and mob rule can be pushed back, and fairer treatment can be brought to all people on many issues including homosexuality.
No one proposes that jail is an appropriate solution; it is only a stopgap replacement to execution. Further steps can be taken when Sharia law has been beaten down. Let’s support ++Peter in getting that job done! At least, let’s hold back the arrows of lying and backstabbing.
Now to answer your question:
‘Why is it so hard to for you people to make a clear and unqualified condemnaiton of violence against people based on sexual orientation?’
I give you my assurance that I condem violence against people based on sexual orientation. May I add that I condem violence against people for any reason? I believe that is also the position of CANA and the Church of Nigeria. The only reason anyone might think otherwise is the lies spread by +Chane and a few others in TEC.
Hey Kevin. I am a traditionalist and I condemn violence against gay people, full stop. Complete and unqualified. I hear you asking for that and I am happy to give that. I agree with you that everyone on this thread should be willing to do that too.
Jon,
Thank you.
If I start hearing that from Akinola, Orombi, et al., then I’ll start to reevaluate them. However, that will probably be the day when Hell drops below 0 degrees C. (That is assuming that’s the correct temperature. Does anyone here know the freezing point of Hell at whatever pressure Hell is currently at?) Until, then I will have to disagree with CanaAnglican; Akinola probably doesn’t give a flip about lessening violence against gays, nor do his international associates.
Btw, Cana,
I’m most grateful for your forgiveness. We sub-people, being lower than dogs, are not worthy even of the crumbs you toss at us from Massa’s table. I’ll just keep on smiling. Would you like a dance too? 😀
Keep your sarcasim to yourself, Kevin. Your point is not to gain sympathy for harm done – violence – but to gain permission to do your thing. Ad Orientem, this is a sexuality and sexual question and an orthodoxy question. We can address both and must. Intrensic disorder must be identified as such. Yes, we all struggle and all fall short. We all sin. But Kevin is not addressing sin when reflecting the lifestyle of same sex sexually active persons. Heterosexuals are killed everyday as well. Murder is sin. In prison or out. Don’t cut yourself up and put yourself down, Kevin, and blame it on the orthodox Christians of the world. You are only persecuting yourself.
#14, there are two links provided in #4, above, in which Abp. Ackinola condemns violence against gay people. It is difficult for me to read those statements as anything other than the condemnation you seek. Those who say he refuses to condemn violence against gays are: (1) ignorant of what he has actually said, despite the relative ease of finding out what he actually has said; (2) deliberately lying; or (3) dissatisfied with his condemnation of violence against gays for some technical reason that is opaque to me.
Rick, until you say it’s ok to behave in a same sex sexually active way, you will have this constant diatribe against those – you – who are not able to see a normal God given birthright for those that are active in this way. This accusation of violence is the one favored by those who cannot hear and cannot see. Archbishop Akinola is speaking truth and the truth has set him free. Others are in the prison of their own choosing.
I totally agree with what AO said in post #10. But I’d go much further (and my guess is that AO would agree with me): it’s not just one errant bishop in the person of KJS. It is crucial to remember two things:
(1) that her theology was well known PRIOR to her election, e.g. her strong support of Spong’s theological views was well known.
(2) That her election by GC represents a RATIFICATION of that theology. She is the symbolic head of TEC and her election over and against many other nominees represented TEC as a whole saying in essence: we agree with her theology.
But even if that weren’t the case, it simply is true today that most TEC priests and lay leaders disbelieve one or more of the core Christian claims that have characterized people as wildly different as Luther and Cardinal Newman, Saint Teresa and Calvin, Cranmer and Saint Francis, and so on. And I am not talking here about the presenting issue of human sexuality. I am just talking about doctrines like a bodily risen Lord, an afterlife, the blood atonement for sin, the Virgin Birth, sola Christus, and so on.
Honestly I would say that about 75% of the TEC priests or lay leaders (e.g. Sunday School teachers, etc.) I meet have grave doubts about at least one of these classic doctrines.
It follows therefore that the statements of the ABC and later of Chane are wildly removed from reality. It would be like saying, shortly after Pearl Harbor, that nearly all Americans favored non-involvement in the war. That would be a claim so wildly removed from the actual mood of the country that one would wonder if the person was insane.
And given THAT, here’s a question I have. It’s an honest question and I ask in advance that we approach it with as much charity as we can muster, while still trying to be accurate. When the ABC or Chane says something as utterly crazy as this, are they in a state of extreme delusion (approaching schizophrenia), or are they deliberately lying, or some combination of the two? I know the elves dislike us speculating on motives but I think in this case it is worth doing, because it is relevant to how best to talk to someone. It matters whether someone already knows a thing and is just spinning it, or whether they are just deluded. In the former case there’s no point in try to persuade them because they already know what you are saying is true; in the latter case there might be a chance of convincing them.
COLUMCIL,
I’m addressing the sin of advocating violence against others, whether explicitly or implicitly. That’s the topic at hand. The “accusation” of violence is made because it’s happening and church leaders are either condoning it or standing by silently, essentially the same thing. Then we have some of their supporters basically saying, “Well, I suppose we shouldn’t be beating up the qu**rs even though they have it coming to them.” (Interestingly enough, such violence is often an attempt to deflect attention from certain, um, inner conflicts; but that’s a totally different subject.)
Hi Kevin. I am happy to take your word for what you want to talk about: violence against gay people. You aren’t in this thread trying to speak (one or the other) on the subject of SSBs or ordination of gay clergy etc. I think that’s great, and frankly it should be something that would cause everyone on the thread to come together. In keeping with that, however, I’d suggest that we keep the focus on explicit anti-gay violence — and avoid the word “implicit violence.” Integrity and other groups often claim that saying “homosexuality is sin” or opposing SSBs or whatever is “implicitly violent” — in which case “opposition to violence” is being tricked out as a way of silencing all opposition to a gay rights agenda. My guess is that you oppose that kind of verbal sleight of hand, so that’s why I’d suggest just focusing solely on anti-gay violence.
In which case, I’ll be happy to say (in keeping with my own conscience and Lambeth 1998) it is a real problem and a VERY bad thing.
Re # 20
I unreservedly endorse Jon’s comment and similarly condemn without reservation any act of physical violence against any human being because of sexual preference or any other reason (excepting of course self defense). Now that we have gotten that out of the way can we return to the subject at hand, namely the rampant heresy which Chase and the ABC seem to be rather blind to.
ICXC NIKA
John
AO… you are too funny.
Hello again Kevin,
I see you did not note my CONDEMNATION OF VIOLENCE against gay people. It was unequivocal. It was extended to any kind of violence against any person. It was in post 11.
You seem to know ++Akinola and ++Orombi better than do I. Can you provide some references as to their support of violence toward gays?
Here is some evidence contrary to your (and Chane’s) view:
—-
Conservative leaders oppose violence against homosexuals
Thursday, 26th June 2008. 12:43pm
By: George Conger.
JERUSALEM: Violence against homosexuals is an abomination, and is rightly condemned by all Christians, the leaders of the Global Anglican Futures Conference said in Jerusalem this week.
“Any violence that occurs against a person is wrong,†Sydney Archbishop Peter Jensen said in response to Church questions about its alleged silence in the face of homophobic violence. Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria, Archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi of Kenya, Archbishop Henry Orombi of Uganda and Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini of Rwanda noted their assent to Dr Jensen’s condemnation of persecution.
…
Archbishop Orombi noted the issue of homosexuality in Uganda was also tied in with Christian martyrdom. Between 1885 and 1887 the King of Buganda, Mwanga II had several dozen Christian converts executed after the young men refused his homosexual advances. Every year over a million Roman Catholics and Anglicans travel to the shrines of the Uganda Martyrs, he said.
—-
Jensen went on to say: “any such violence or behaviour against gays and lesbians is condemned by us†and is contrary to Christian principles, and was utterly rejected.
CONDEMNED and UTTERLY REJECTED. What part of this are you and Chane unclear on? I do not think either you or Chane will get the tar and feathers to stick to these men of God. Both of you need to give it a rest.
Best wishes, — Stan
Kevin, what are those inner conflicts? I’d say the conflict is coming from you, within you. Ok. Let’s simply say, as others have said well and better, no one should act violently towards another person because of their disagreement, theological or otherwise. If there is a declaration of war, then one must take orders and that’s different. No one has delared war on same sex sexually active individuals in the Christian family no matter how you try and phrase it. It is shame when anyone does. Now, can you say “shame” as well when the Gospel – Good News – of Jesus Christ is displaced by self desire and when theology of Holy Matrimony is made over in an image Christ himself did not speak about in any way, shape or form? Bishop Chane needs to resign, along with Schori, and take with them others – you? – who believe in post modernism and unitarianism more than Christ Jesus, Son of God. Jon, you’ve told like it is. Please, Kevin, depart.
4. William P. Sulik wrote:
[blockquote]In saying “Peter Akinola is unwilling to articulate a simple condemnation of violence against homosexuals†Bp. Chane bears false witness against his brother bishop.[/blockquote]
“A lie told often enough becomes truth†Vladimir Lenin.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it..†Joseph Goebbels.
I am unaware that ++Akinola or ++Orombi have ever spoken approvingly of violence against homosexuals. So, they are to me judged for not condeming it? When Scripture itself advocates it in the OT that seems a tall order. You cannot ask godly men to condemn Scripture.
It seems that, according to God, Sin deserve death, but the Christian Gospel also proclaims that Mercy is better than Law. Nevertheless, Mercy never condemns the Law. When Jesus forgives the sinner He never reproaches the Law that would condemn him. He died to satisfy that Law and bring Mercy to us all.
++Akinola and ++Orombi are aware of a greater danger to homosexuals than beating and death by mobs or government persecution. And they are tireless in fighting to spare homosexuals that greater danger. It’s called the Final Judgment. Maybe you queers should start focussing on what really matters. Maybe all of us bent human beings should.
No. 24 – How do you know that Kevin believes in post-modernism and Unitarianism more than in Christ?
it’s a question for Kevin, rob k
No. 28 – Are you asking Kevin if he does, in fact, believe in Post-modernism and Unitarianism?
24. COLUMCIL: You are confusing, I believe, Unitarianism with Universalism. They are not the same thing. Belief in many pathways to the one true God is universalism, and that belief can be held by people who believe in the divinity of Christ Jesus as well as by a Buddhist (or other). Unitarian belief would deny the divinity of Christ and the Trinity. ++Schori has never done that. Never.
Wow, Chane is even more arrogant and duplicitious than I had believed. The ABC does not in any way indicate that he is convinced that the uniqueness of Jesus Christ is not in dispute in the Episcopal Church. In fact, I understand that in private conversation he has indicated that he is deeply concerned about theological teaching in much of TEC. This is not a defense of the ABC, but he has very little in common with Bp. Chane except on matters of sexuality.
Furthermore, simply read Bp. Andrus’ (Dio of CA?) comments in a London Times (I believe) editorial highlighting liberal and conservative differences on key doctrines. He all but embraces the idea that Christian evangelism is really unnecessary. Now that doesn’t exclude proselytizing for peace and justice progressive religion mind you, simply any attempt to persuade regarding anyone’s personal need for Christ and His Church. The PB has stated a similar order of priorities on a number of occasions. I am quite certain that Bp. Chane is intimately acquainted with their views.