john clapton - 03 July 2008 12:14 AM

I am sorry that you so easily write off the many Christian people whose views of scripture differ from your own.  The Church of God is much bigger than that.

Broad road for you then, John.

God speed. Sorting hat says ‘Slytherin’.

Sounds to me like you already left the Anglican Church

It’s actually the opposite, John. Gafcon marks a point in time where evangelicals decided to stay in the Anglican Communion.

I am pleased to hear it, and I pray that we will stay together rather than part company and further divide the Body of Christ.

John
Gafcon is a response to the tear in the Anglican Communion occasioned by the consecration of Gene Robinson and the institution of same sex blessings in Vancouver. It is a broad coalition of Anglican christians who would like nothing better than to restore their errant brethren to fellowship in the spirit of 1 Corinthians 5.

The ABC’s Religion Report has devoted their entire report today to GAFCON.

Jerusalem and Global Anglican Futures - following the money & the leaders

You may be surprised to discover that they’ve managed to do this without interviewing anybody who was actually at GAFCON.

Instead, we get 3 interviews. The first is a re-run a 2006 interview whose link to GAFCON could be charitably described as tenuous, followed by an interview with a rep from the Episcopal church, followed by an interview Bishop Brian Farran from Newcastle. The result? We’re left with the impression that GAFCON was designed and run by a bunch of ultraconservative (politically) Western fundamentalist homophobes who are merely using the Africans as patsies, as the Africans get nothing out of it. What else would you expect from the ABC religious affairs department, particularly from a show whose presenter dispensed with all pretense of impartiality on this issue a long time ago.

As churches argue about homosexuality, the congregation moves on

And John, Jim Naughton, the Episcopal church’s rep, showed why the break with the North American churches has had to happen:

I mean I think one of the things that GAFCON has done is demonstrate that whatever concessions you make to these folks, they will want more. I mean the notion that we all need to go back to the 1662 Prayer Book and the 39 Articles of Religion from Elizabethan times is kind of whacky, yet that’s at the core of their movement. So we can’t give up enough to please them, and yet retain any kind of identity. Another point that we need to make is that every church in the Anglican communion has its own identity, and its own domestic situation.

Roger,
1) Let me agree with you that Jim Naughton, PR for the diocese of Washington, had a bad day. When he said that 1662 +39 was kind of wacky, he probably did not realise that those two documents are embedded in the Constitution of the Anglican Church of Australia. Did he mean to call us all wacky? Naughton came across as moderate compared to Crittenden, who seemed to want to outdo one of TEC’s best spin-doctors.

2) But the link with Ahmanson and GAFCON is hardly tenuous. He is a significant funder of evangelical causes including the Oxford Centre for Mission Studies, which is linked to a couple of significant Gafconites. Naughton massively overplays the significance of Ahmanson, but we should avoid going to the other extreme.

Gafcon is not a return to the sixteenth century. In the sixteenth century the Church of England held that the marriage of divorced persons ( indeed divoce ) was unbiblical.

Furthermore women were not ordained to any degree of Holy orders.

There was no Synodical Government and the only lay people who directed the church were MPs in parliament, coerced by a semi-tyranical monarchy.

The 1662 Prayer Book contains phrases which many evangelicals would be uncomfortable with, particularly the thanksgiving for the regeneration of the child after baptism. CESA has eliminated this in their updated alternative prayer book.

[quote author="Tim D Foster” date="1214964155"
John, Jesus did not criticism morality or moral codes. He condemned the hypocrisy of the Pharisees. To suggest that Jesus repudiated morality or moral codes, if that is what you are saying, fails to recognize that he implemented his own moral code that exceeded the demands of the Torah and internalized them.

Tim

There may have been an element of morality code to the pharisees but there was also a purity code by which they went to extreme lengths to ensure they did not become ritually contaminated.  Jesus condemned this world view in word and deed by touching the hemorrhaging woman and the leper.

We do this as Christians when we disengage from those with whom we differ because we fear they might contaminate us.

Hi John, thanks you for your response. I agree, in addition to condemning their hypocricy the Pharisees are condemned for their refusal to engage and embrace the marginalised on the gournds of ritual purity.

Do you think this is what the GAFCON bishops and others who oppose the consecration of practicing homosexuals are guilty of? What has been said that indicates that they fear ‘contamination’ by associating with such people?

Regards

Tim

Gordon Cheng - 03 July 2008 12:29 AM

Broad road for you then, John.

God speed. Sorting hat says ‘Slytherin’.

Gordon,
I don’t mind being called a liberal or even a heretic, but I take exception to being condemned to the house of Slytherin.  That was below the belt.

To me, Tim, the talk of alternative oversight whether on the basis of the gender of the Bishop or the sexual orientation of the Bishop is about separating oneself from those with whom we disagree.

Now I understand that we do this everyday with our denominational separation, but I still think we need to be engaged with each other.  GAFCON seems to me to be about standing aside until the wayward lot decide to put their wrong behavior aside and return to the true fold.

Both sides in this debate firmly believe they have a right understanding of the Scriptures, so it is not as easy as to say they are in error - go away until you come around to our view.

john clapton - 03 July 2008 12:23 PM

GAFCON seems to me to be about standing aside until the wayward lot decide to put their wrong behavior aside and return to the true fold.

Isn’t that what 1 Cor 5 suggests is the right way to interact with someone who calls themselves a brother but is unrepentant of their sin?

Those at GAFCON aren’t withdrawing from the world - just those who call themselves followers of God, but aren’t.

Mike

John
are you suggesting that we can’t know what God thinks on these matters?
Di

john clapton - 03 July 2008 12:18 PM

Gordon Cheng - 03 July 2008 12:29 AM

Broad road for you then, John.

God speed. Sorting hat says ‘Slytherin’.

Gordon,
I don’t mind being called a liberal or even a heretic, but I take exception to being condemned to the house of Slytherin.  That was below the belt.

Oh I don’t know John. Severus Snape was my favourite Harry Potter character and something of a role model for me. Him, and Daffy Duck.