'Please leave': why the Sydney archbishop's same-sex marriage message has Anglicans rattled

[Steven Beck]

'Please leave': why the Sydney archbishop's same-sex marriage message has Anglicans rattled


For a man renowned for his civility, the language was blunt. During his annual speech to the Anglican Church’s Sydney synod, Archbishop Glenn Davies told supporters of same-sex marriage to “please leave us”.

“My own view is that if people wish to change the doctrine of our church, they should start a new church or join a church more aligned to their views,” he said. “But do not ruin the Anglican Church by abandoning the plain teaching of scripture.”

In a report published on the Sydney Anglicans website, Davies’s media manager, Russell Powell, said the archbishop had received a standing ovation at the end of his address – as indeed he had.

But in pockets of the hall, there was also discomfort, if not with the core sentiment then with the tone. Davies has long been frustrated by what he believes is the excessive liberalism or tolerance of other Australian bishops towards same-sex relationships, particularly among clergy.


Now he watches as two relatively small parts of the church – the dioceses of Wangaratta in Victoria and Newcastle in New South Wales – are moving to bless same-sex marriages.

Pro-gay marriage Anglicans are walking a fine line in the Australian church. Some want a full marriage rite, such as the one that exists in the Episcopal Church of the US. Others, such as the members of the Wangaratta synod, have voted to bless same-sex marriages conducted under civil law. To Sydney’s “guardians” (their word) of orthodoxy, it is a distinction without difference.

More at link: 'Please leave': why the Sydney archbishop's same-sex marriage message has Anglicans rattled | Andrew West

I wonder how the Jensons feel. Good man Peter.

 

[charsan]

apply the GOSPEL not be a social justice warrior.

Many people who think of themselves as Christians are really social justice people instead, creating a whole new religion that is inclusive and accepting of everything. They do not know what real love is but think love means accept all.

 

[Anthony2019]

Then you are the problem not the solution. I give you the scenario. You are a witness at the white throne judgement and it is the turn of a homosexual that you know to be judged. At the end of the judgement Jesus throws that person into the fire and then looks at you. You will feel good because you were INCLUSIVE?

When I stand before the judgement throne of Christ, I would much rather be judged for the amount of love, compassion, care and concern I had shown to my fellow human beings, rather than to be judged for those I had rejected, judged, or pushed away. "Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me." (Matthew 25:45).

 

[eclipsenow]

The matter of blessing of civil marriages has been referred to the Appellate Tribunal, and there is a clear process to be followed there. There is no need, while that process is taking place, to ask others to "please leave" the church.

The Archbishop of Sydney obviously felt there was a need for this action.

Clergy have all sworn an oath to be bound by Anglican polity and canon law. I would say not breaking that oath while remaining in office would be a line in the sand most of us would like to see observed. That basic integrity ought to be part of how we pilgrimage together as Anglicans.

Basic integrity of office might also want to hold to the 39 Articles and at least attempt to endorse the plain teaching of Scripture on this matter.

I would also draw your attention to this part of the rules governing this forum: "Discussion and debate about the morality of homosexuality or same-sex marriage is not allowed." There are aspects of this matter which are off-topic in this forum.

Wording like that might be in this particular subforum but please remember that the main rules governing the entire forum clearly state:

CF Statement on Marriage
CF has taken the stand that marriage was established by God who created us male and female (Genesis 1:27-28). We regard marriage as a sacred institution that symbolizes the mysterious bond between Christ and His church (Ephesians 5:23-24, Ephesians 5:32). We believe that marriage is much more than a civil contract between two persons, it is a sacred joining together of a man and a woman into one flesh, "Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh." (Genesis 2:21-25). Therefore, we only recognize heterosexual marriages here at CF. If you are in a same sex marriage you must select a marital status of either "Legal Union (Other)" or "Private" in your profile.
...
Homosexuality, same-sex marriage, bisexuality, transsexualism and transgenderism may not be promoted* on CF (including member profiles). Several debate forums allow homosexuality, same-sex marriage, bisexuality, transsexualism and transgenderism to be discussed from a political, legal, historical, and civil rights point of view. Please check the Statement of Purpose thread for individual debate forums before posting. Homosexuality, same-sex marriage, bisexuality, transsexualism and transgenderism may be discussed, without promotion*, in the Congregational in line with each group's beliefs there. You may post without promotion* in the Struggles with Sexuality and Ask a Chaplain forums solely for the purpose of seeking support with personal struggles related to these issues.​

Please note that I support the mission of Liberty Ministries, an Australian ministry established with pastoral aims in line with Christian Forums Statement on Marriage and chaplaincy goals as I highlighted above in bold.

 

[Daniel C]

Sexuality is a very divisive subject amongst Anglicans and there is often strong disagreement over theological and ethical issues.

The way I see it, no one is trying to change the "doctrine" of the Anglican church or abandon the "plain meaning of scripture". There are simply many Anglicans who feel that isolating and stigmatising the LGBT community is damaging the witness and ministry of the church. My local diocese, which is known for being inclusive and accepting of LGBTs, has stated that they wish to exemplify the "radical Christian inclusion founded in scripture, in tradition, in theology and the Christian faith as the church has received it".
They state that "the basic principle is that all people are welcome in God’s Church: everyone has a place at the table. There is no theological problem with simply providing welcome, an extension of the welcome that God continually offers to each of us".

I am sorry to disappoint Archbishop Glenn Davies, but I am an Anglican who believes in radical Christian love and inclusion and I have no intention of leaving the church.

I would say your church doctrine is just man made and not the preserved word of God. A Self-serving regime that just wants to please the predominately heathen culture around them to avoid criticism.

In the context of the church,sodomites should be excluded and in culture Gods will is for them to get the Leviticus law.

Why would this archbishop be disappointed by not getting an Amen from you? I would be worried if you agreed with my theology based on the unBiblical"radical" things I've heard from your post.

 

[Anthony2019]

I would say your church doctrine is just man made and not the preserved word of God. A Self-serving regime that just wants to please the predominately heathen culture around them to avoid criticism.

In the context of the church,sodomites should be excluded and in culture Gods will is for them to get the Leviticus law.

Why would this archbishop be disappointed by not getting an Amen from you? I would be worried if you agreed with my theology based on the unBiblical"radical" things I've heard from your post.

I have not discussed doctrine here and I have not even proposed anything that is "unbiblical". I am simply stating the fact that I believe that the church should be a place of welcome for all.

 

[Daniel C]

I have not discussed doctrine here and I have not even discussed anything that is "unbiblical". I am simply stating the fact that I believe that the church should be a place of welcome for all.

Your Quotation is from who? Your local church? You?

 

[Steven Beck]

When I stand before the judgement throne of Christ, I would much rather be judged for the amount of love, compassion, care and concern I had shown to my fellow human beings, rather than to be judged for those I had rejected, judged, or pushed away. "Truly I tell you, whatever you did not do for one of the least of these, you did not do for me." (Matthew 25:45).

So you would rather see people you know burn in Gehenna forever then apply the truth. Also that makes you a coward as you fear people more than you fear God. Paul got stoned with real rocks for the sake of the Gospel and you just want to feel good.

 

[SkyWriting]

You mean like a leper coming to Jesus seeking healing? Heal them.

The rest of us are not so well gifted.

 

[Steven Beck]

I have not discussed doctrine here and I have not even proposed anything that is "unbiblical". I am simply stating the fact that I believe that the church should be a place of welcome for all.

1Co 5:1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father's wife.
1Co 5:2 And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.
1Co 5:3 For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing.
1Co 5:4 When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus,
1Co 5:5 you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.
1Co 5:6 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?
1Co 5:7 Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.
1Co 5:8 Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
1Co 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—
1Co 5:10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.

Homosexuality is sexual immorality.

 

[section9+1]

I'm no Anglican thank God but I do applaud what this archbishop has said. I treat everyone with the golden rule. I want some people to avoid me so I avoid some people.

 

[dqhall]

1Co 5:1 It is actually reported that there is sexual immorality among you, and of a kind that is not tolerated even among pagans, for a man has his father's wife.
1Co 5:2 And you are arrogant! Ought you not rather to mourn? Let him who has done this be removed from among you.
1Co 5:3 For though absent in body, I am present in spirit; and as if present, I have already pronounced judgment on the one who did such a thing.
1Co 5:4 When you are assembled in the name of the Lord Jesus and my spirit is present, with the power of our Lord Jesus,
1Co 5:5 you are to deliver this man to Satan for the destruction of the flesh, so that his spirit may be saved in the day of the Lord.
1Co 5:6 Your boasting is not good. Do you not know that a little leaven leavens the whole lump?
1Co 5:7 Cleanse out the old leaven that you may be a new lump, as you really are unleavened. For Christ, our Passover lamb, has been sacrificed.
1Co 5:8 Let us therefore celebrate the festival, not with the old leaven, the leaven of malice and evil, but with the unleavened bread of sincerity and truth.
1Co 5:9 I wrote to you in my letter not to associate with sexually immoral people—
1Co 5:10 not at all meaning the sexually immoral of this world, or the greedy and swindlers, or idolaters, since then you would need to go out of the world.
1Co 5:11 But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.

Homosexuality is sexual immorality.

It is good to flee from sexual immorality. Homosexuality is immoral. Churches in America are granted freedom of religion. They may set their own standards up to a certain point.

Jesus taught if one divorces for any reason other than marital unfaithfulness, it is adultery and those who are divorced should not remarry. The Catholic Church used to excommunicate members who divorced and remarried. They were losing people who left to join Protestant churches after remarrying. The Catholics made a provision for annulment. They would call the dissolution of a marriage an annulment and let their members who remarry remain in the church.

Jesus ate and drank with sinners. He taught those who went to hear him. Jesus made efforts to exclude the unrighteousness from his inner circle. One of his students betrayed him.

 

[Albion]

Sexuality is a very divisive subject amongst Anglicans and there is often strong disagreement over theological and ethical issues.

The way I see it, no one is trying to change the "doctrine" of the Anglican church or abandon the "plain meaning of scripture". There are simply many Anglicans who feel that isolating and stigmatising the LGBT community is damaging the witness and ministry of the church.

In fairness, that is not the issue, and almost no Anglican wants to do that.

 

[Steven Beck]

It is good to flee from sexual immorality. Homosexuality is immoral. Churches in America are granted freedom of religion. They may set their own standards up to a certain point.

Jesus taught if one divorces for any reason other than marital unfaithfulness, it is adultery and those who are divorced should not remarry. The Catholic Church used to excommunicate members who divorced and remarried. They were losing people who left to join Protestant churches after remarrying. The Catholics made a provision for annulment. They would call the dissolution of a marriage an annulment and let their members who remarry remain in the church.

Jesus ate and drank with sinners. He taught those who went to hear him. Jesus made efforts to exclude the unrighteousness from his inner circle. One of his students betrayed him.

Jesus knew Judas would betray Him from the beginning since the Father told Him. Judas was there for a reason. Yes Jesus ate and drank with sinners but He always preached the Gospel whilst with them. He would tell them about their sins and that they should repent. Our churches are not doing this. They admit sinners into the church then give them leadership positions when they have not repented and are still living in sin.

 

[Ignatius the Kiwi]

The Anglican Church should have more leaders like this guy. God bless him.

Time for Anglicans to pick a side. They can't co tune to pretend to tolerate two contradictory views.

 

[GingerBeer]

would say your church doctrine is just man made

Is that not true of every denomination?

 

[charsan]

The Anglican Church should have more leaders like this guy. God bless him.

Time for Anglicans to pick a side. They can't co tune to pretend to tolerate two contradictory views.

Amen!!

 

[Anthony2019]

Also that makes you a coward as you fear people more than you fear God. Paul got stoned with real rocks for the sake of the Gospel and you just want to feel good.

I do not see anything cowardly about taking up Jesus's commandment to follow the Golden Rule.
It is very easy to argue with others and avoid those we don't agree with. It is much harder to befriend those we don't get along with with because they challenge our own prejudices and make us feel uncomfortable. It is very easy to dismiss someone on the grounds that they are mistaken, but it takes an incredible amount of grace to listen to another's story and to develop empathy with someone whose journey we have never walked. It takes a lot of courage to forgive someone who has offended us, but it takes even more work and effort to accept, love and care for someone as a brother or sister in Christ.
I seek to love Christ and to love my neighbour. It is the standard by which I live and by which I will be judged. I don't always succeed in getting it right, but living by the Golden Rule is by no means a soft option and certainly not what I would describe as being "cowardly".

 

[JacksBratt]

I really don't understand why a homosexual couple would want the "nod" from a church, to the extent of being married in a church... Why not just go to the justice of the peace or any other government office that can legally marry two people.. Why go to a place that is traditionally against your life style and try to get acceptance of your choice?

It is beyond me...

The only thing that I can think of is that Satan is trying to divide and conquer.

I think that churches, for the most part, will accept anyone, the way they are, if they come for forgiveness, teaching, repentance, salvation... whatever.... As they should.
Long as people are not distracting from the service or the peace of the church, anyone can come and observe, and participate in the functions... as they are set out.

But to come to a Christian church and ask to be joined as a marriage, in a place of God that states that a marriage is between a man and a woman... is a bit odd.

That's like going to a vegan restaurant and demanding some meat... it doesn't make sense.

The church should, under the statutes of the right to religion, be allowed to refuse this action.... Try going to a mosk and demanding it... or anything else against that religion.... the government won't go down that road... not a chance..

So.................why with Christians? HUH.....

I'll tell you... White, male and Christian.......any of these three and you are fair game for anything that would be discrimination to others that are not White, male and Christian....You have no support... and it's gunna get a lot worse.

 

[Steven Beck]

I really don't understand why a homosexual couple would want the "nod" from a church, to the extent of being married in a church... Why not just go to the justice of the peace or any other government office that can legally marry two people.. Why go to a place that is traditionally against your life style and try to get acceptance of your choice?

It is beyond me...

The only thing that I can think of is that Satan is trying to divide and conquer.

I think that churches, for the most part, will accept anyone, the way they are, if they come for forgiveness, teaching, repentance, salvation... whatever.... As they should.
Long as people are not distracting from the service or the peace of the church, anyone can come and observe, and participate in the functions... as they are set out.

But to come to a Christian church and ask to be joined as a marriage, in a place of God that states that a marriage is between a man and a woman... is a bit odd.

That's like going to a vegan restaurant and demanding some meat... it doesn't make sense.

The church should, under the statutes of the right to religion, be allowed to refuse this action.... Try going to a mosk and demanding it... or anything else against that religion.... the government won't go down that road... not a chance..

So.................why with Christians? HUH.....

I'll tell you... White, male and Christian.......any of these three and you are fair game for anything that would be discrimination to others that are not White, male and Christian....You have no support... and it's gunna get a lot worse.

Satan wants to destroy the church and make Christians irrelevant. That is the reason.