The depth of the split between the progressive and traditionalists appeared during a debate over the section that would allow the induction of ministers and deacons “ordained before May 2009 who are in a same-sex relationship”.
Traditionalists claimed that the section was a “Trojan horse” which could pull the church apart.
The Rev Andrew Coghill, of the Presbytery of Lewis, described the section as a “hand grenade”. He said: “I believe it will be ruinous for unity of the church, potentially multiplying homosexual inductions the length and breadth of the country. The church almost pulled apart over one such induction.”
[blockquote] In delivering the report, the commission’s convener, Lord Patrick Hodge, acknowledged the lack of unity within the Kirk but said that it was important to embrace the breadth of opinions.[/blockquote] Of course, only one of those opinions can actually be instantiated in church practice. Homosexuality is either a sin or it is not a sin. It cannot simultaneously exist as both sin and not sin. So how then do you “embrace the breadth of opinions” when the opinions are mutually exclusive? Will one part of the church be allowed to ordain unrepentant homosexuals even as another part puts them out of the church in accordance with 1 Cor 5? That situation is inconceivable. In practice only one of the two “opinions” can actually be embraced. The minority side will be allowed to hold its opinion but the minority side will never be allowed to act upon its opinion. With this thin gruel it must be content.
It’s a lie of course, and a self-interested lie. The revisionists want the change without the consequences of the change. Yet they should receive the full consequences of their rebellion – pressed down and overflowing. Or perhaps in modern parlance we could say they deserve both barrels. Right in the face.
carl
Jumping off the cliff so soon after their American cousins.
But why? The church only stands to lose, obviously. Who wins and for what reason? In short, why jump off the cliff? This doesn’t make any kind of sense. Are we to believe that “social justice” even when suicidal – maybe especially when sujicidal, for then it shows one’s committment – overrides both the gospel and common sense? Larry
This is about a program of the Enemy to destroy the Church through people whom he has deluded into thinking they are doing good.
carl, I have said a similar thing for years–ie, if TEC and/or C of E and/or the Anglican Communion ordains, or will not discipline, actively gay clergy who are “married” and/or in civil partnerships, is homosex now the undisputed teaching of the Church?
And, once again, if it is, then they have succeeded at remaking God in the image of man. To me, that’s heresy; but, that’s just me.
Even from a purely secular management point of view, what did the leaders of the Kirk think would happen when they endorsed the ordination of practicing homosexuals? They can see what happened in America. They can see what almost happened in England (Rowan Williams stepped back from nominating Jeffrey John after Reform threatened to walk all its ministers out the door).
Who on earth thought that this could be anything but a divisive adverse step for the Kirk to take?
Liberal activists set on a predetermined goal in opposition to the revealed will of God. Who else knows better than Him?
I wonder if I could be right – something new on T19. Do you suppose that this suicidal program exists PRECISELY because of the martyrdom complex. To show that one is committed, one sacrifices one’s “life.” IOn an age in which commitment is broadly avoided, this may be the only approach left for commitment to take. If this is true, we can understand why TEC is doing what it is: For a cause to be valid, one must die for it.
Sacrificing a church for an agenda? One can put it that way – as I have before, I guess. But this is a different emphasis, though the results look the same. The difference is that they are not being thrown to the lions in the usual martydom death, they are setting themselves on fire to exhibit their integrity. Only the unworthy avoid the flames. The have chosen the homosexual cause because, by debasing themselves, they glorify themselves. Larry