This article is over a year old but was so well written, it remains timely.
From the Washington Post
By The Rev. John Yates and Os Guinness
Monday, January 8, 2007; A15
When even President Gerald Ford's funeral at Washington National Cathedral is not exempt from comment about the crisis in the Episcopal Church, we believe it is time to set the record straight as to why our church and so many others around the country have severed ties with the Episcopal Church. Fundamental to a liberal view of freedom is the right of a person or group to define themselves, to speak for themselves and to not be dehumanized by the definitions and distortions of others. This right we request even of those who differ from us.
The core issue in why we left is not women's leadership. It is not "Episcopalians against equality," as the headline on a recent Post op-ed by Harold Meyerson put it. It is not a "leftward" drift in the church. It is not even primarily ethical -- though the ordination of a practicing homosexual as bishop was the flash point that showed how far the repudiation of Christian orthodoxy had gone.
The core issue for us is theological: the intellectual integrity of faith in the modern world. It is thus a matter of faithfulness to the lordship of Jesus, whom we worship and follow. The American Episcopal Church no longer believes the historic, orthodox Christian faith common to all believers. Some leaders expressly deny the central articles of the faith -- saying that traditional theism is "dead," the incarnation is "nonsense," the resurrection of Jesus is a fiction, the understanding of the cross is "a barbarous idea," the Bible is "pure propaganda" and so on. Others simply say the creed as poetry or with their fingers crossed.
It would be easy to parody the "Alice in Wonderland" surrealism of Episcopal leaders openly denying what their faith once believed, celebrating what Christians have gone to the stake to resist -- and still staying on as leaders. But this is a serious matter. [the article continues]
Read it all here.
5 comments:
Too bad you insist on projecting the unorthodox views of some onto "the American Episcopal Church." I bet you cannot come up with direct quotations (other than, maybe Bishop Spong) to substantiate your claims that we "no longer believe the historic, orthodox Christian faith."
I am weary of these declarative, unsubstantiated statements by you folks. I think you are deliberately misleading the Christians under your care, and the world at large.
The fact is, if you left the Episcopal church for good reason, you would not continually re-visit, and attempt to justify the decision. The fact you publish garbage like this betrays your own discomfort with what you have done.
This is a Washington Post article - we didn't write it. It was written by former Episcopalians in Virginia who wanted to clarify why they left TEC. No one I know in San Joaquin is suggesting that ALL Episcopalians are teaching heresy. I hope the average Episcopalian holds to Biblical and orthodox teaching. It is the leadership of the Episcopal Church who is responsible for heresy - whether teaching it or failing to discipline those who teach it. Bp Spong is not alone - he is just the most famous. The reason for reinforcing our relationship with the Anglican Communion was best presented by Abp Venables in the videos posted above.
"This is a Washington Post article - we didn't write it. It was written by former Episcopalians in Virginia who wanted to clarify why they left TEC....."
So, Van, are you saying that it is okay for you to publish this because someone else wrote it?
"No one I know in San Joaquin is suggesting that ALL Episcopalians are teaching heresy..."
Come on, Van, this article that you chose to include here infers just that. By doing so, you are tacitly approving of this nonsense, then sitting back and claiming that no one in San Joaquin believes it. It is at best inflamatory, and misleading.
I have also heard of people who left TEC because they didn't believe the Episcopal Church's official teachings about the Trinity (as published in the Prayer Book.) Why don't you publish some of THOSE stories.
Speaking of the Prayer Book, why is it that all you Southern Cone guys are still using the 1979 version? If TEC is all that heretical, you should dump that version and write your own.
Alan, I'm sorry that you find this article so inflammatory. The remainder of the article continues on to identify five problems with "Episcopal revisionism", which identify real concerns (in my opinion). As I read the article, it seemed obvious that the authors were writing about systemic problems, which have been introduced and perpetuated by "Episcopal leaders openly denying what their faith once believed, celebrating what Christians have gone to the stake to resist -- and still staying on as leaders." The indictment is with Church leadership. By the way, I appreciate your suggestion to post articles about the doctrine of the Trinity. I will keep an eye out for that topic.
Van
We should ALL be concerned with issues currently in the church. I, for instance, disagree with TEC officially adopting what appears to be a pro-choice stance on abortion.
What I am objecting to in this article is the inference that the entire TEC leadership ( and the body of lay people by extension) is heretical. We still have some very fine bishops (Ed Little, Mark Lawrence, etc...), who have chosen to remain in TEC.
The article in question would be more credible if the authors drew upon personal experience with their local church leaders, and could quote what they thought was heresy.
Instead, the claims represented in the article as factual (people saying the creeds with their fingers crossed, etc....) cannot be substantiated. It seems to me the authors reached a considerable distance to make them.
Post a Comment