Showing posts with label bishop. Show all posts
Showing posts with label bishop. Show all posts

Monday, August 6, 2012

Christianity must change or die, but not like Gene Robinson suggested

I've been told that the church must change in order to continue as a living organism. But the people who tell me that, usually belong to churches that are dying, exactly for implementing the changes they suggest to me.

Ross Douthat, has written a good piece dealing with this issue in the New York Times, where he deals with this issue. Liberals have been telling us for years that the church must change in order to stay alive, but the churches lead by liberals are the ones dying because of their misguided change.


Can Liberal Christianity Be Saved?IN 1998, John Shelby Spong, then the reliably controversial Episcopal bishop of Newark, published a book entitled “Why Christianity Must Change or Die.” Spong was a uniquely radical figure — during his career, he dismissed almost every element of traditional Christian faith as so much superstition — but most recent leaders of the Episcopal Church have shared his premise. Thus their church has spent the last several decades changing and then changing some more, from a sedate pillar of the WASP establishment into one of the most self-consciously progressive Christian bodies in the United States. 
As a result, today the Episcopal Church looks roughly how Roman Catholicism would look if Pope Benedict XVI suddenly adopted every reform ever urged on the Vatican by liberal pundits and theologians. It still has priests and bishops, altars and stained-glass windows. But it is flexible to the point of indifference on dogma, friendly to sexual liberation in almost every form, willing to blend Christianity with other faiths, and eager to downplay theology entirely in favor of secular political causes.

Spong was wrong then, and is wrong now. He wants to kill of Orthodox Christianity, so it doesn't stand in the way of his sinful life, but at the end, he seems to had inflicted a wound to his own type of christianity. The issue was then, and is now, that those who should have known better, did nothing, instead went on to dismantle the Episcopal Church in order to be in the good graces of today's society and culture.  So there's no interest in defending the truth of the Bible against a society that needs it so much, rather, picks up their political fights, which contradict the Gospel at its core.


Yet instead of attracting a younger, more open-minded demographic with these changes, the Episcopal Church’s dying has proceeded apace. Last week, while the church’s House of Bishops was approving a rite to bless same-sex unions, Episcopalian church attendance figures for 2000-10 circulated in the religion blogosphere. They showed something between a decline and a collapse: In the last decade, average Sunday attendance dropped 23 percent, and not a single Episcopal diocese in the country saw churchgoing increase.

Well, there's nothing they can offer but the same thrush that the young people are facing outside the church. We don't see a great increase in the audience they intended to target. In Australia, the Uniting Church, is experiencing something similar. Yet, the churches it was meant to replace, seem to either thrive (the Methodist), or at least survive (the Presbyterians).


This decline is the latest chapter in a story dating to the 1960s. The trends unleashed in that era — not only the sexual revolution, but also consumerism and materialism, multiculturalism and relativism — threw all of American Christianity into crisis, and ushered in decades of debate over how to keep the nation’s churches relevant and vital. 
Traditional believers, both Protestant and Catholic, have not necessarily thrived in this environment. The most successful Christian bodies have often been politically conservative but theologically shallow, preaching a gospel of health and wealth rather than the full New Testament message.
My sentiment as well. But I wouldn't call prosperity Gospel people "traditional believers". They are as far from the Gospel as the Mormons or Jehova Witnesses. They have a total different religion. These churches thrive, not because they are Gospel driven, rather, because they are money driven. People want money and wealth, so they go to these churches to get a hand of how to obtain it, or make it.

But if conservative Christianity has often been compromised, liberal Christianity has simply collapsed. Practically every denomination — Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian — that has tried to adapt itself to contemporary liberal values has seen an Episcopal-style plunge in church attendance. Within the Catholic Church, too, the most progressive-minded religious orders have often failed to generate the vocations necessary to sustain themselves.
Not all Methodist, Lutheran or Presbyterians are going the way of the dinosaurs, but those denominations that have adopted the Episcopal way, are going the way of the Episcopal church.

Both religious and secular liberals have been loath to recognize this crisis. Leaders of liberal churches have alternated between a Monty Python-esque “it’s just a flesh wound!” bravado and a weird self-righteousness about their looming extinction. (In a 2006 interview, the Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop explained that her communion’s members valued “the stewardship of the earth” too highly to reproduce themselves.) 
Liberal commentators, meanwhile, consistently hail these forms of Christianity as a model for the future without reckoning with their decline. Few of the outraged critiques of the Vatican’s investigation of progressive nuns mentioned the fact that Rome had intervened because otherwise the orders in question were likely to disappear in a generation. Fewer still noted the consequences of this eclipse: Because progressive Catholicism has failed to inspire a new generation of sisters, Catholic hospitals across the country are passing into the hands of more bottom-line-focused administrators, with inevitable consequences for how they serve the poor. 
 Liberals don't want to accept their peril. As we see in the case of Katherine Jefferts Schori, she wants to window dress their declining numbers by passing it as a way of "stewardship of the earth". This type of denial would not be allowed in other quarters. And in the case of "progressive" Catholicism, it just won't get people inside their orders. If some progressives nuns wants to affirm somebody's homosexuality, why would, they in turn, would quit being a lesbian in order to turn into a life of celibacy?


But if liberals need to come to terms with these failures, religious conservatives should not be smug about them. The defining idea of liberal Christianity — that faith should spur social reform as well as personal conversion — has been an immensely positive force in our national life. No one should wish for its extinction, or for a world where Christianity becomes the exclusive property of the political right.

May the Lord deliver us from the right to take the face of Christianity!!!!

What should be wished for, instead, is that liberal Christianity recovers a religious reason for its own existence. As the liberal Protestant scholar Gary Dorrien has pointed out, the Christianity that animated causes such as the Social Gospel and the civil rights movement was much more dogmatic than present-day liberal faith. Its leaders had a “deep grounding in Bible study, family devotions, personal prayer and worship.” They argued for progressive reform in the context of “a personal transcendent God ... the divinity of Christ, the need of personal redemption and the importance of Christian missions.” 
Today, by contrast, the leaders of the Episcopal Church and similar bodies often don’t seem to be offering anything you can’t already get from a purely secular liberalism. Which suggests that per haps they should pause, amid their frantic renovations, and consider not just what they would change about historic Christianity, but what they would defend and offer uncompromisingly to the world.Absent such a reconsideration, their fate is nearly certain: they will change, and change, and die.

I wonder then, how these "liberals" couldn't pass on their faith to the next generation. There's still much we have to learn. 

Thursday, January 19, 2012

Make me a bishop, or I will sue. Gay priest wants to be a bishop, no matter how

When people see ordination more as a right, and not like a privilege, there must be something wrong with them. But even worst when there's a person who is living or promoting a sinful lifestyle, and yet, demands to be ordained. This is exactly the case of The Very (I)Reverend Jeffrey John, Dean of St Albans. The Daily Mail reports:

A controversial gay dean has threatened to take the Church of  England to court after he was blocked from becoming a bishop.The Very Rev Jeffrey John, Dean of St Albans, has instructed an eminent employment lawyer to complain to Church officials after being rejected for the role of Bishop of Southwark.Sources say the dean, one of the most contentious figures in the Church, believes he could sue officials under the Equality Act 2010, which bans discrimination on the grounds of sexuality. Such a case could create a damaging new rift within the CoE.

See how this works. We all remember how Gene Robinson was elected the first practicing homosexual priest by the Episcopal Church USA (ECUSA). The leaders in that "church" say that they were led by the Holy Spirit to take such a decision (I wonder how the Holy Spirit will contradict himself so blatantly, but then again, the ECUSA are like the Mormons, they believe in a different Holy Spirit as it seems). Now, it seems that they don't need the guidance of an spirit, these people want to get ordained, because it is, apparently, their right!
Dr John was at the centre of a storm in 2003 when forced to step down as Bishop of Reading by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams after it became known that he was in a gay, though celibate, relationship. The furore fuelled a bitter civil war within the Anglican Church that has dominated Dr Williams’s decade in office.The dean was again a cause of infighting in 2010 when he was a candidate for Bishop of Southwark. A respected theologian and former canon at Southwark Cathedral, he had strong backing from senior Church liberals and it was said even David Cameron was supportive.
David Cameron? Isn't he supposed to be from the Conservative Party? Anyway, he is a politician, therefore, no real moral position. But Dr. John, has already being a bishop before, but needed to step down because of his gay celibate relationship. Ok, let's say he was truly celibate, it seems that he was seeking affirmation, and didn't get it, so he was diposed.

But this time around, he is not taking things sitting down, he is taking action:

Dr John has instructed Alison Downie, partner and head of employment at London lawyers Goodman Derrick, to write to the Commission to suggest it risks breaching gay equality laws if it is blocking the dean over his homosexuality
Well, I wonder if he is in a homosexual relationship today. The issue with this man is that he doesn't care if the Bible bars him, if he is practicing homosexual, from practicing ministry, period.
I Corinthians 6:9 Or do you not know that wrongdoers will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor men who have sex with men 10 nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God. 11 And that is what some of you were. But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of our God. 
We have a lot of other sins, but in this post, I want to single out the sin of homosexuality, and how this man is so blind, that he wants the position of bishop, and he has actually cut himself from the body of Christ, but promoting such a lifestyle in the church.

So there you have it, somebody demanding to be ordained, or else, he will go to the courts. He is so blind that he can't see that God is not going to call him, unless the Church of England follows this new spirit that ECUSA is following.

Totally shocking, and amazing how blind people have become!!

Wednesday, July 14, 2010

Women Bishops or biblical fidelity?

What's wrong with this picture??? Depends who you ask, if you are a liberal, culture driven, pro-feminist, pro-abortion, pro-gay, scripture trumping so called "christian", then the answer may be twofold: how come it took so long to reach this stage, and, there should be more women, if not the majority, sitting there as bishops and ordained ministers.

If you are a biblical based, scripture driven, pro-life, pro-family, pro-marriage, conservative christian, the answer would be another question, How could the church of God reject God so clearly in his face?

I don't deny that there are other, more pressing issues that we, as the church of the Lord Jesus Christ should be battling, the likes of poverty, justice and above all, the salvation of souls. Nevertheless, this issue is one of those that Salomon refererred to as:
Song of Songs 2:
5 Catch for us the foxes,
the little foxes
that ruin the vineyards,
our vineyards that are in bloom.

So, to say as some have suggested, that we shouldn't fight or confront this issue, don't see the greater issue, or don't comprehend it's repercussions. As Wayne Grudem has pointed out in his excellent book, Evangelical Feminism: A New Path to Liberalism?, all those churches that claimed that in order to survive they had to move in with the times, are rather dying, losing members. An example is that the Uniting Church in Australia sees its own demise by 2050, or the Episcopal Church USA, that despite ordaining women not only to the ministry, but also to the post of bishop, and as if that was not wrong enough, went ahead and ordained Gene Robinson, an open homosexual with a partner, as a bishop, the church is still losing members, while the dissenters are growing.

One of the women in the picture (notice all the women "bishops" except one have short hair, makes one wonder!!!), Barbara Darling, third from the left first role, once interviewed me as to gather if I was called to the ministry. Our interview was a mere formality, nevertheless, the interview turned to the topic as to how she had been passed over by men, who did not see God's calling in her life. She saw that as one of the greatest injustices of our time. At the end, I went away thinking if I really wanted to be ordained an Anglican (I was walking strayed from my Baptist roots!!), there were many Anglicans that I admired, N. T. Wright for example, but he has also endorsed women to be bishops. I have written to the good bishop that this approach contradicts his other approaches to be faithful to the biblical sources. However, he said something very encouraging during the debate that the Church of England is going through this last couple of days.
Answering to Cannon Robert Cotto, who suggested that " he was worried that the Church could turn into a sect, refusing to listen to the wisdom that was available in the outside world." Wright came responding to Cotto and others like him in the following statement: "that when the Church started to follow the dictates of contemporary society, it "would cease to be the Church" "

Wright's answer is the correct one, and he shouldn't be answering an ordained minister in that manner, since you would expect him that he had read James 4:4You adulterous people, don't you know that friendship with the world is hatred toward God? Anyone who chooses to be a friend of the world becomes an enemy of God. And also I Corinthians 1:21For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. It seems that some have never cared about what the bible says, unless it's their pet subject, and even then, they twist the Bible to say what they want it to say.

Now, the Anglican Church, as many other denominations in the past, are trying to keep their denominations together, even when they take decisions that are totally against Scripture. I still remember when the Evangelical Church of America, ELCA, took the decision to accept practicing homosexuals to the ministry, and the conservatives walked out of the convention, and the presiding bishop, Mark Hanson, called out to them to "stay in the conversation" What conversation I ask?? The decision was taken, there's no going back.

And why I am talking about homosexuality and the ordination of women? Because they are issues that go hand in hand. As Grudem points this out in his book above mentioned, we can see how women are the ones that make the ordination of homosexuals an issue of justice, the same argument they took when dealing with their recognition to be ordained. One is just a stepping stone to the next.

I haven't touched on the biblical verses that clearly teach that women cannot be ordained, or that practicing, unrepentant homosexuals can be christians, let alone ordained. If people are so blind and don't take the bible seriously, well, that's their choice, but please, don't call yourself a christian, since that title applies to those who are willing to follow not just his teachings, but those of his followers as well. It is very difficult to argue against those who don't see the Bible as authoritative, but rather see the culture as their norm to follow.

With this entry, I just hope to point out some points that are not touched as often in conservative circles, and to show that in this debate, we can go beyond those passages usually cited, to give a stronger and more complete response to those who have rejected Scripture in all of its forms.

Luis A. Jovel

Tuesday, May 8, 2007

Schism in the Episcopal Church of the USA

I have always enjoyed reading and hearing to Albert Mohler, president of the Southern Baptist Seminary, who usually posts very interesting articles in his blog, as well interesting podcasts from the same blog.

Since the next couple of weeks I will be very busy doing my essays for the end of the semester, I may not write a lot, but I will keep you informed of those news and issues that are of a Christian interest.

I thereby offer you an interesting blog entry by Dr. Mohler.


William Bennett once observed that America was fast becoming "the kind of nation civilized nations sent missionaries to." In truth, that is what America has now become, with the installation of Martyn Minns as "missionary bishop" for the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA).



The schism in the Anglican communion was visible for all to see when the Nigerian primate, Archbishop Peter Akinola, installed Bishop Minns in a ceremony held in northern Virginia. According to press reports, the event was held in a 3,500 seat facility next to Potomac Mills. Bishop Minns will exercise episcopal oversight over 34 congregations in the U.S. -- with about one third identified as ethnically Nigerian.

As Michelle Boorstein of The Washington Post reported:
A powerful Nigerian Anglican archbishop defied top church leaders yesterday by coming to Northern Virginia and installing as one of his bishops a local minister who recently broke with the U.S. church after accusing it of being too liberal.

The festive ceremony thrilled those who believe the U.S. church has become too permissive but highlighted divisions that threaten to crack the Anglican Communion.

Church leaders in the United States and Great Britain had asked Archbishop Akinola not to come to America at this time and not to install Martyn Minns as bishop of his new group. Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church USA, even released a letter asking Akinola to stay away. The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, did the same [see here].

Nevertheless, he came. And his coming indicates one blunt truth that cannot now be denied: Archbishop Akinola no longer considers his church in communion with the Episcopal Church USA, at least as the American church is represented by its elected leadership.

This was made clear in a letter from Akinola to Jefferts Schori released May 2, 2007. Note this excerpt:
At the emergency meeting of the Primates in October 2003 it was made clear that the proposed actions of the Episcopal Church would "tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level, and may lead to further division on this and further issues ..." Sadly, this proved to be true as many provinces did proceed to declare broken or impaired communion with the Episcopal Church. Since that time the Primates have established task forces, held numerous meetings and issued a variety of statements and communiques, but the brokenness remains, our Provinces are divided, and so the usual protocol and permissions are no longer applicable.
And:
It is my heartfelt desire - and indeed the expressed hope of all the Primates of the Communion - that The Episcopal Church will reconsider its actions - and make such special measures no longer necessary. This is the only way forward for full restoration into fellowship with the rest of the Communion. Further, I renew the pledge that I made to your predecessor, Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold, that the Church of Nigeria will be the first to restore communion on the day that your Province abandons its current unbiblical agenda. Until then we have no other choice than to offer our assistance and oversight to our people and all those who will not compromise the "faith once for all delivered to the saints." (Jude 1:3)

The Washington Post observed that Archbishop Akinola now presides over the largest province of the Anglican Communion -- and a province experiencing rapid and continuing growth. Meanwhile, the Episcopal Church USA continues to lose members.

An interesting comment came from one of those who observed the new bishop's installation. Marie Penney, described as bouncing her baby happily in the foyer, said this:
"To me, this movement combines the best of all worlds -- to be banded with all these brothers and sisters from Nigeria. I can't imagine another group of Christians I'd rather be with," said Pinney, who grew up Baptist and worships at Truro. "I feel so much more in line with Archbishop Akinola. There are hardly any bishops in the Episcopal Church that I'd even want my children in Sunday school with."

That last sentence is stunning in its force and clarity. "There are hardly any bishops in the Episcopal Church that I'd even want my children in Sunday school with."

That kind of frustration with liberal theology and liberal church teachings is what produced the installation of Bishop Minns. Archbishop Akinola came to the United States as, among other things, a missionary to a land that desperately needs the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

Tragically enough, his visit was necessary because far too many of our churches and denominations need to be evangelized as well.