"...in a communion governed entirely by trust, its order and coherence - indeed, its Christian witness to the world - is only as good as its most corrupt member is trustworthy... and when that member is the Episcopal Church, the bar of order and coherence isn't merely lowered, it's broken, chopped into pieces, burned and its ashes scattered to the wind."
Greg Griffith
Whatever one believes about a) homosexuality and b) its status in the Christian church, one would have to be either clueless, dishonest or maybe some of both to argue that it is OK to ordain actively LGBT clergy without changing the church's formal teaching on marriage or seeking wide Christian consensus for so extreme a change in church practice.
What made Anglicanism attractive to many was its lack of uniformity: unity was in "bonds of affection" instead of top-down government. The Episcopal Church, with its word games, appeals to ignorance and outright lies, has rolled this hopeful expression of Christianity in a sewer. Activists have no use for bonds of affection. They are all about temporary expedients. Everybody and everything is expendable - the polar opposite of the Way of Christ.
2 comments:
"single-issue activism": I step carefully on thin ice to ask whether that last paragraph could apply to some churches' activism on abortion?
That can indeed happen. In fact, the Southern Baptist Convention is engaged in a self-study on how its penchant for political activism on the right has displaced its spiritual mission, reducing its once prodigious growth rate.
My one caveat is this: beyond Christians, what significant group is left to question abortion's morality?
In contrast, there are plenty of advocates for LGBT rights - and even many of us who are against LGBT advancement in the church have no quibble with protecting their civil rights.
Post a Comment