A PLACE WHERE THOSE WHO LIVE IN THE ANGLICAN CONTINUUM, OR WHO ARE THINKING OF MOVING THERE, MIGHT SHARE IN ROBUST, IF POLITE, DISCUSSION OF MATTERS THEOLOGICAL AND ECCLESIOLOGICAL. QUOD UBIQUE, QUOD SEMPER, QUOD AB OMNIBUS CREDITUM EST
Pages
▼
Saturday, September 09, 2017
Friday, September 08, 2017
"Gender" Confusion in Holy Orders
Those who do not remember the past are condemned to repeat it.
-George Santayana
I have tried to abstain from saying much about the fairly new Anglican Church in North America (ACNA). But in light of the news about them at this time, it seems that a few words are in order. Clearly, one cannot tell, despite their name, if they are a church or a confederation of churches. In reality, it is confusing even to many on the inside; actually they are both in certain ways.
The tragedy of their decision regarding Women's Ordination is that they are following on the same road, in the same direction as the Episcopal "Church" from which they claimed independence only eight years ago (although absorbing two other Anglican church bodies that were older, the Reformed Episcopal Church and what used to be called the Anglican Mission in America, later renamed Province de l'Eglise Anglicane au Rwanda in the USA). Once again they have imitated the Episcopal "Church," which years ago had decided that the ordination of women would be accepted, or not, by each local diocese. That is exactly what the ACNA bishops decided to reaffirm for their church just one day ago.
"September 7, 2017
PREAMBLE In an act of mutual submission at the foundation of the Anglican Church in North America, it was agreed that each Diocese and Jurisdiction has the freedom, responsibility, and authority to study Holy Scripture and the Apostolic Tradition of the Church, and to seek the mind of Christ in determining its own convictions and practices concerning the ordination of women to the diaconate and the priesthood."
Later in the same paragraph they say:
"It was also unanimously agreed that women will not be consecrated as bishops in the Anglican Church in North America."
Such was also the rule of the Episcopal Church until 1988, and of the Church of England until the 1990s. Once the idea of women's ordination is accepted at all, it is arbitrary at best merely to limit it. So, do not expect this to last.
Then, with telling irony, they declare:
"We agree that there is insufficient scriptural warrant to accept women’s ordination to the priesthood as standard practice throughout the Province. However, we continue to acknowledge that individual dioceses have constitutional authority to ordain women to the priesthood."
Learning from history
A brief history lesson is in order. What the ACNA bishops have reaffirmed is exactly the official position that the Episcopalians took concerning Women's Ordination throughout the late 1970s, into the 1980s and 1990s, before becoming heavy-handed and dictatorial about it when the new century began. Furthermore, this is the position taken by the Episcopalians at their General Convention in 2000 about the Blessing of Same-Sex Unions (they stopped short of saying "Same-Sex Marriage" at that time only for legal reasons. But the meaning was clear enough to anyone who knows that the ministers of Matrimony are the man and the woman. The role of the Church, through the clergy, is only to bless, not to effect, the Union of a married couple). In 2003 they repeated that, but have, since then, become quite solid in their affirmation of Same-Sex marriage. Their most recent General Convention was little more than Satan worship, reveling in heresy, apostasy and immorality in an open manner that was rebellious and brazenly malicious against Almighty God.
Ten years ago, when the ACNA was not yet even a gleam in Bp. Robert Duncan's eye, I wrote the following for this blog:
"The fact is, once the 'ordination' of women was accepted, the movement to bless same sex unions was inevitable. The arguments for Homosexualism are not merely similar to the arguments for women's 'ordination.' Rather, they are the exact same arguments. The blessing of same sex unions, practiced now throughout the heretical but official Canterbury Communion, is performed as a church rite by sincerely lusting couples under the direction of clergypersons of both sexes and all genders, to be as close to the semblance of marriage as the Law of each state, province or nation makes possible. In short, it imitates the sacrament of Holy Matrimony, and does so on the newly understood basis that the sex of a person has no significance in a sacrament. If Shirley and Maggie can be "ordained" they can also be married, and so can Adam and Steve.
"The 'conservatives' among the Anglicans have failed to understand the gravity of logic. It works the same way as this illustration. If I stand at the top of a thirty foot hill with a big round rubber ball, and decide to roll the ball only ten feet down the hill and no farther, like it or not, the ball will roll the entire thirty feet to the bottom before it stops after rolling even farther still. It does not matter that I intended only to roll it ten feet. Once I let go, gravity will take the ball the whole way. This is how a premise works in relation to logic. Once you let go of the ball, that is, once you state or merely accept a premise, the gravity of logic will take over. Perhaps you only meant to let women be priests, but not to let the premise take its own logical course to the final end. However, the premise itself is subject to the gravity of logic, and must keep rolling until you are "blessing" Adam and Steve in the imitation sacrament of Unholy Unmatrimony. Those who want to argue that this was not inevitable have two problems facing them: First, we predicted this would happen, and second, it has.
"So, with all due respect to our conservative and principled Anglican friends who want to keep their priestesses, and make new ones, we cannot surrender the doctrine that the sacrament Holy Orders is, by God's revealed will, reserved to men. Otherwise, we only slow the process down instead of preventing it. We don't need to be ECUSA part II, waiting to happen again."
In light of our plans
I invite the bishops and people of PEARUSA (formerly the AMiA), and those in Forward in Faith North America to consider those of us in the Continuing Church, despite our own obvious failing to stay together in unity in the past. It is not because we are perfect that I ask them to look at us seriously, because, indeed, we have been all too often ignorant of Satan's devices (II Corinthians 2:11). But that history is behind us, very much consigned to a previous time. This newer generation of bishops is working to repair every breach made by some who caused divisions in the early days. The upcoming Provincial Synods being held jointly in Atlanta merely make official what has been reality for years.
Human flaws are everywhere to be found, of course. The problem with false doctrine, however, creates a greater danger than mere human failing. It takes people down a destructive path, and at a pace that they cannot control, no matter how much they may feel in control. As I wrote ten years ago, once the premise is released, it shall go all the way to its inevitable end. Nothing can stop it, because it exists in the realm of ideas, and is committed to each new generation.
Gender Identity Confusion
Is it not obvious that "Gender Identity" is the great new deception of this time, and that its main victims are children and youth? The lie is spread everywhere that contradicts one simple fact: "God made them male and female (Genesis 1:27)." Children are suffering abuse at the hands of adults who actually force this confusion on young minds, incapable of putting up a defense. This can lead to the plastic surgery falsely called a "sex-change" operation, after which a patient becomes twenty times more likely to commit suicide.
The issue of women's ordination is part of the entire struggle, no less than same-sex marriage and "Gender Identity" confusion. It is part of the same overall deception that is harming the future of the whole society, and creating confusion for children and youth about basic human nature. I see it as part of the great spiritual warfare against the powers of darkness. My position may seem radical; but, I fear that nuance is never called for when people are racing to the edge of a cliff, or even merely plodding along at a somewhat slower rate than those who are racing. The destination is the same, and ultimately it is worse than rolling down a hill.
Friday, September 01, 2017
Twelfth Sunday after Trinity 2017
II Cor 3:4-9 * Mark 7:31-37
Many years ago,
back in the 1970s, some of the notable figures of the Charismatic movement- the
popular “neo-Pentecostal” movement that spread across all denominational lines-
would address the burning question “why does God not heal everybody?”
The truth is, miracles of healing can and do happen every once in a while, but,
to be honest, not most of the time. The reverse question that ought to have
been obvious, but that no one seemed to ask, was: “Why, considering that ‘all
have sinned,’ has God ever healed anybody?”
In popular
religious movements it is all too easy for false doctrine to arise.
Furthermore, one of the insidious results of false doctrine is to hide true
doctrine from view. People become obsessed with the demands of false teaching.
In the case of the healing and faith emphasis of popular Charismatic ministers,
the concept was introduced that people can receive healing for any and all
ailments (as if they could never die) if only they would embrace methods to
work their faith up to such a level that all things would be possible on
demand. This mistaken notion of faith carried with it no moral implications,
and this kind of faith itself was the substitute for all of the virtues. In
this whole mess of confusion, the truth that was lost was the Gospel itself. I
am not saying that everyone in that movement was guilty of this; however, the
right question was not asked. Why has God ever healed anybody?
Indeed, why did
Jesus heal this man in this portion of the Gospel of Mark? Why does He give to
him ears that hear and a tongue that speaks? Why did the Lord heal people? Why
did he show compassion? If He had handed out what was due, he would have slain
everybody; “for all have sinned.” But, instead we see His ministry described in
the words of St. Peter: “God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and
with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of
the devil; for God was with him. (Acts 10:38).” The purpose of the Incarnation
includes this fact: He does not deal with us as our sins deserve. If we repent,
He forgives us.
Some people
misread the Lord’s words: “Thy faith hath made thee whole." All too often,
this is presented as if faith worked like some kind of magic charm, or, as if
faith becomes the one work that brings salvation. Such an idea would invert the
great teaching of St. Paul
that faith does for us what our own works cannot do. It is not the one human
merit that earns either healing, blessing or salvation, but instead is the
doorway by which we may receive God’s gifts.
In today’s
Epistle reading we see two curious phrases: “the letter” and “the Spirit.” We
learn that the letter, which refers to the Law, kills; but the Spirit, which is
the life of Christ given to us in the New Covenant, gives life. The letter, the
Law that God gave in the Covenant of Sinai when He revealed His commandments to
Israel in the days of Moses, is “holy and just and good," as St. Paul
tells us in another Epistle, the one to the Church in Rome. The glorious
ministry of the Law is condemnation, and the severity of that condemnation
justifies no one. Our Lord is the one who brought this fact out most clearly.
For example, in the Sermon on the Mount each of us learns that he has received
the sentence of death, utter condemnation- damnation. The parable of the
Pharisee and the Publican that we looked at only last week demonstrates the
folly of anyone pleading for life by the letter that kills. Only a
self-deceived man living in a fantasy of self-inflicted and extraordinary
delusion, pleads the Law of God, expecting to be justified by it. The Pharisee
deceived himself into believing that he was not a sinner “even like this
Publican.”
The
glorious ministry of that Old Covenant revelation of the Law is that it slays
each of us; it condemns each of us. “All have sinned, and come short of the
gory of God.” So, then, why did Jesus go about and do good to sinners? Why did
he heal anybody ever? Because the glory of the ministry of the New Covenant is
even greater than the glorious ministry of condemnation. In
the night in which he was betrayed, our Lord spoke of the blood that would be
shed from his own body as “the blood of the New Covenant which is shed for you
and for many for the forgiveness of sins.” The disciples understood this from
the prophecy of Jeremiah, in which the greater glory of the ministry of the
Spirit of life was foretold:
“Behold, the days come, saith
the LORD, that I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with
the house of Judah: Not according to the covenant that I made with their
fathers in the day that I took them by the hand to bring them out of the land
of Egypt; which my covenant they brake, although I was an husband unto them,
saith the LORD: But this shall be the covenant that I will make with the house
of Israel; After those days, saith the LORD, I will put my law in their inward
parts, and write it in their hearts; and will be their God, and they shall be
my people. And they shall teach no more every man his neighbour, and every man
his brother, saying, Know the LORD: for they shall all know me, from the least
of them unto the greatest of them, saith the LORD; for I will forgive their
iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more.” ( Jer. 31:31-34)
The promise of
forgiveness was demonstrated by the works of Jesus, and supplied only by way of
the cross. Not one person that Jesus healed deserved that healing. But by
healing Jesus showed that he forgives sins. Every time he healed someone,
and every time he spoke the words of forgiveness to a repentant sinner, he knew
that it was all due to the pain he would endure as he would pour our his soul
unto death, with the nails through his hands and feet, and the thorns piercing
his brow. It was not free of charge, for he would pay the price. The burning
question “why does God not heal everybody?” can be answered only by
saying, in terms of God's perfect will, "but he does"- if only
because all who believe in the Son of God, all who eat the Bread of Life, all
who live by the Food and Drink of eternal life, will be raised up on the Last
Day, when Christ comes again in glory.
We need the
ministry of condemnation in order to appreciate and understand the mercy of God
in Jesus Christ. Jesus never approved of sin; he was far more condemning than
Moses, speaking of Hell in a way no other preacher ever did. Forgiveness
requires condemnation. Churches that approve of sin cannot meet the greatest
need of the human heart; and they cannot bring healing. For, there is no
acknowledgment of the wound among them. Forgiveness itself is very condemning,
for what is approved cannot be forgiven. Jesus condemned all sin on the cross
in the most powerful way possible. Justice and mercy met where the cross
intersected, where he hung beneath the charge of the Roman governor. But, St. Paul , in another
place, tells us that the real charge that hung over the Lord was the Law of God
(Colossians 2:14). There He paid the full price of sin for you and me. Then He
rose the third day, and overcame death. So, the letter kills, but the Spirit
gives life.
And that my
friends, is why God has ever healed anybody.