Will the Archbishop of Canterbury finally say "enough is enough"?

[gray100]

I must missing something. In what way are you being used as a puchball?

While the Anglican communion bickers amongst itself whether my sexual orientation is 'moral' and whether people like myself should be granted the full range of civil rights given to other human beings, I have to put up with it in the privacy of my own home. If you can imagine what it is like to put up with discrimination and having it shoved in my face all the time, in the newspaper headlines, TV news, and on the radio, you can begin to understand what I mean about gay people being treated like punchballs and guinea pigs in a controversy they do not wish to be part of.

 

[MKJ]

I find myself wondering if many people have actually bothered to read the Windsor Report, which covers a lot of the same ground that has been discussed here, in some detail.

 

[wayseer]

While the Anglican communion bickers amongst itself whether my sexual orientation is 'moral' and whether people like myself should be granted the full range of civil rights given to other human beings, I have to put up with it in the privacy of my own home. If you can imagine what it is like to put up with discrimination and having it shoved in my face all the time, in the newspaper headlines, TV news, and on the radio, you can begin to understand what I mean about gay people being treated like punchballs and guinea pigs in a controversy they do not wish to be part of.

Thank you.

I take your points which have some validity.

However, at least the Anglican communion is acknowledging that there is a problem. Many other churches have not reached that threshold as yet.

Whatever happens in the privacy of your home is something beyond the auspices of the Anglican communion.

The other alternative is to maintain the status quo. Is that what you are proposing?

On the other hand, it appears you are not an Anglican so I really don't understand you position vis a vis the Anglican communion.

 

[Polycarp1]

CatherineAnne,
What I do agree with you on is the way Rowan Williams has tried to keep the communion together, he has shown great integrity on his part. What I would question is whether that does him any credit. Scripturally in a dispute the matter is taken to the elders, in this case the majority gave rise to Lambeth 1.10. Lambeth 1.10 has been ignored by the TEC and liberals. So the TEC and liberals not only do not believe the scripture on homosexual practice, but they don’t believe it on the authority of the church leadership either.
The leader is supposed to teach and correct according to the apostolic faith once delivered. These TEC people don’t even believe the apostolic faith once delivered when it comes to matter of sexual relations, they think they know better. But the ABC should be correcting them or disciplining them, even expelling them (1 Cor 5) … long time overdue.

Phinehas... we have been at odds before in this and other areas of CF. I want to ask three questions of you, not polemically but because they seem to me to get at the root of these disputes.

1. What precisely do you understand Lambeth 1.10 to be? As in, what effect does it have on, say, the Anglican Church of New Zealand/Aetoeroa (to pick a church at random that is not in the middle of the disputes)?

2. What do you believe the limits of national autonomy and autocephaly to be in the Anglican Communion? E.g., what authority does a Primate, say ++York, have in, for example, the Scottish Episcopal Church? Does the Lambeth convocation of all (or almost all) bishops have authority that an individual primate does not?

3. What authority does ++Rowan have over the member churches of the AC outside England? How precisely can he "correct them or discipline them" as you suggest he should?

These are not asked to provoke argument or lay traps. They're a good faith effort on my part to understand what you're suggesting, to "reach across the battle lines" and see what it is you conceive should be done. I'll humbly and gratefully appreciate a serious answer.

 

[gray100]

On the other hand, it appears you are not an Anglican so I really don't understand you position vis a vis the Anglican communion.

I take that as an invitation for me to go and sling my hook.

And yes, I have been part of the Anglican church for most of my life.

Thanks for responding anyway.

 

[Phinehas2]

ebia

The global communion has handled it, Lambeth 1.10., Windsor etc, the revisionist simply have taken any notice.

 

[Phinehas2]

Polycarp1,
There is no need for me to answer any of your questions as they just indicate exactly the lack of acknowledgment of authority either of the scripture or the church. The Communion as a whole produced Lambeth 1.10, how come you and the likes of the TEC don’t seem to know what it means?

 

[Polycarp1]

Nt

 

[Phinehas2]

Polycarp1,
Lambeth 1.10 does say ‘in view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage’. It does say ‘recognises that there are among us persons who experience themselves as having a homosexual orientation. Many of these are members of the Church and are seeking the pastoral care, moral direction of the Church, and God's transforming power for the living of their lives and the ordering of relationships.’ ‘rejecting homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture’
and
‘cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions nor ordaining those involved in same gender unions;’
Where is the insult, if you don’t accept what Lambeth 1:10 says then that’s the case.
As to serious dialogue, I do not accept rank disbelief of the scripture as affirmed by Lambeth 1.10 as serious dialogue but rank disbelief.

 

[ebia]

Phinehas2: you will note from earlier in this thread that I have not supported the recent action by TEC and have supported Windsor, the Pentecost response by +Rowan and the potential Covenant. However, I find little in your posts that allows for a useful, respectful, dialog about any aspect of the issue.

 

[Phinehas2]

ebia,
There is no aspect of the issue that needs discussing, discussion rather than acknowledgment and compliance is all that is lacking.

 

[ebia]

ebia,
There is no aspect of the issue that needs discussing, .

Then what are you hoping to achieve in posting in a discussion thread on a discussion forum?

 

[kiwimac]

The Anglican communion is not the RCC. We have every right to discuss and to decide for ourselves whether or not to comply.

 

[ebia]

The Anglican communion is not the RCC. We have every right to discuss and to decide for ourselves whether or not to comply.

"we"? I didn't think you were in the Communion.

 

[kiwimac]

The OCC has been in full communion with the AC for over 100 years.

 

[Phinehas2]

'we' ah no I am not... was baptised and confrimed in Anglican church in the past

 

[ebia]

The OCC has been in full communion with the AC for over 100 years.

Yes, but being in full communion with, is not the same as being part of the Anglican Communion (TM).

 

[ebia]

'we' ah no I am not... was baptised and confrimed in Anglican church in the past

Unless you self-identify as a member of an Anglican, Old Catholic, or associated church then you post here as a guest.

 

[RestoreTheRiver]

This returning of insult for attempt at serious dialogue is why STR has become nowhere most practicing Anglican Christians would find comfortable. Unfortunately, nobody seems to have any desire to correct the problem according to the rules.

I agree that the tone of this discussion has become inappropriate. If I have said anything to contribute to the downward spiral, I do apologize. As you say, surely we can disagree without resorting to insults.

Michael

 

[higgs2]

The real question is "when will TEC say enough is enough". We need to walk away from where we are not wanted. I cannot see that not being part of the "AC" will diminish TE, the gospel, or our love for Jesus. It will free up time, resources and people to do the work that God has given us to do, instead of tap dance around trying to please those who will never accept us. It's time to go.