Bishop Ingham is not happy, according to the Anglican Journal. There are so many things that could be said on that article, but the best bit surely was here:
“This is a full-blown schism now within the Canadian church and it is a direct attack upon the catholicity of the church and the gospel of Jesus Christ,” said Bishop Ingham.
I wonder how it is possible for him to say that with a straight face!?
You just have to shake your head in disbelief.
From the article:
…ordinations, if they proceeded, would not be recognized within the Anglican Church of Canada or within the Anglican Communion.”
Way to speak for the Communion there, Bp Mike. And all along that’s what I thought we were doing!
It’s hard to know what to say. He’s coming across as very juvenile. A child throwing a tantrum after being caught with their hands in the cookie jar. Did he really think no one who disagrees with him would try to fight him? How long did he think his antics would last before something blew, considering what’s already been happening in TEC?
I’m fully applauding Bishop Donald Harvey for what he’s trying to do for the faithful followers of Christ. God didn’t state anywhere in Scripture that there were “geographical” boundaries dividing his children. He said the opposite. He opened his arms to all the world. He initially divided them and confused their languages due to the blatant self-righteousness of the Jews in trying to “make a name for themselves” and not wanting to be scattered after God just gave the command “Fill the earth and be fruitful”.
Bishop Harvey is doing what he was ordained to do; protecting his sheep. Bishop Ingham is the who started the whole mess in Canada and started the “schism” he now so much rants about.
Well, guess what Bishop Ingham!!!! What goes around comes around!!!! The truth does always come back to haunt you. Now you’re experiencing that first hand. God is the one who’ll discipline you and deliver your consequences. You need to think really hard about that now and consider what your punishment might be if you continue to attempt to lead his children into the hands of Satan.
You are absolutely right Marg…Bishop Don Harvey is the Shepherd caring for a Flock that has been victimized by a pack of wolves in sheeps clothing, ie: Ingham and followers, (Moxley, Spence, Ottawa, Montreal, Primate??.
I reiterate my thoughts from another blog….I look forward to the time in the near future when we will start seeing other Bishops both active and retired speaking out on behalf of the Orthodox Church. (and Priests and Laity).
This, from the author of the schismatic activity in New Westminster?!?!
Equating “the gospel of Jesus Christ” with man-made ecclesiastical rules is quite breath-taking, even for Michael Ingham.
Oh ease up Marg. If anyone is going to need to need discipline before God its going to be Don Harvey and his band of merry men. Good luck with your new church. As for him being the sheppard, well I guess time will tell that story..
Marg, “into the hands of Satan”, are you for real? I fail to understand, I really do, how accepting those who are ‘different’ is such an affront to the gospel? Was it an affront when slaves were emancipated (churches broke away)? When women were ordained (churches broke away)? I love Bishop Tutu’s recent comment: “If God as they say is homophobic, I wouldn’t worship that God.” This coming from a man who has seen personally the destructiveness of xenophobic theology.
I just long to be in a Church that is not heterophobic and that will offer hope to those with unwanted sexual desires. Men and women have many sexual preferences, but sexual preferences can change. As Mario Bergner says, the TEC and ACC have bought into the political gay rights movement and have ignored the transformation of people’s sexual changes. There is hope for all of us and I am tired of fighting those who do not want to come to the foot of the Cross with the rest us, offering those behaviours which are not pleasing to God for transformation, whatever those behaviours maybe.
Steve, Why would God discipline Don Harvey for violating ecclesiastical rules in order to follow Christ? I seem to recall that Jesus had some harsh words for those who placed man-made laws on a par with the Word of God.
David K, “Accepting” sinful behaviour and celebrating unrepentant sinners is indeed an affront to the gospel. Your reference to schisms over other issues is a red herring, unless your point is that schism is always and everywhere contrary to God’s will, a rather odd view for an Anglican to take.
Leading children of God into the hands of Satan is a real possibility and a danger that Christian leaders should always be aware of. Imagine how shocked Peter must have been to hear Jesus’ rebuke (St Matthew 16:23). Peter, after all, thought he was merely offering our Lord sound advice.
Pauline, Thanks for your comment. That is spot on!
I have my moments!
Since when did +Ingham gain the right to kick Southern Cone out of the communion? See some of you at the conference!
Actually, when you think about it, what an ingenious way to distract our attention away from generations of copious inept mismanagement within the ACC… Such things as our rapidly dwindling resources, whether its our previously sound theological heritage, money, property, missions or people (active parishioners) themselves… Why not hail the arrival of Donald Harvey as a Godzilla ready to wreck havoc on the once might & lofty spires of the ACC. Brilliant ++Michael, brilliant!!! The so-called progressive hidden agenda opps, mindset is now in full monty opps, view!
David K, yes I am indeed for real. You state you fail to understand how accepting those who are “different” is such an affront to gospel. “Different” is what YOU are seeing when you look as something that is contrary to the gospel Jesus taught. However, to me, “different” might be a person being of a “different” race, or a “different” gender, or a “different” language or culture, etc. Those people would definitely be “different” than me in those aspects, however, still true to the gospel. I would never rebuke them for being “different” in those aspects. God did create all of us equal and loves us all. I would rebuke those people for promoting teachings contrary to scripture. God made it very clear that we need to be obedient to Him if we want salvation. It’s very clear in the scriptures how He plans for our salvation. Jesus states “I am the way, and the truth, and the life; no one comes to the Father, but through Me,” he said in John 14:6.
God makes it clear he won’t tolerate sinners leading his children astray.
Is 3:10-12 (NKJV) 10 “Say to the righteous ??that it shall be well with them,
??For they shall eat the fruit of their doings.
11 Woe to the wicked! ?It shall be ill with him,
For the reward of his hands shall be ??given him.
12 As for My people, children are their oppressors,
And women rule over them.
O My people! ?Those who lead you ??cause you to err,
And destroy the way of your paths.”
Here he tells us not to be “deceived” by false teachers. ?
1 Jn 2:24-27 (NKJV) 24? Therefore let that abide in you ??which you heard from the beginning. If what you heard from the beginning abides in you, ??you also will abide in the Son and in the Father. ?25? ??And this is the promise that He has promised us—eternal life.
?26? These things I have written to you concerning those who try to ??deceive you. ?27? But the ?anointing which you have received from Him abides in you, and ?you do not need that anyone teach you; but as the same anointing ?teaches you concerning all things, and is true, and is not a lie, and just as it has taught you, you ?will abide in Him.
Bishop Ingham and others like him are false teachers. What they preach is not the true gospel. It’s all lies. God will punish them according to their deeds. Don’t ever doubt that. Don’t be deceived by them. Satan’s biggest weapon is deceit. We are to be alert for that and guard against it.
I think Jude explains it very well here: (New Living Translation)
1:8 – Yet these false teachers, who claim authority from their dreams, live immoral lives, defy authority, and scoff at the power of the glorious ones.
1:9 – But even Michael, one of the mightiest of the angels, did not dare accuse Satan of blasphemy, but simply said, “The Lord rebuke you.” (This took place when Michael was arguing with Satan about Moses’ body.)
1:10 – But these people mock and curse the things they do not understand. Like animals, they do whatever their instincts tell them, and they bring about their own destruction.
1:11 – How terrible it will be for them! For they follow the evil example of Cain, who killed his brother. Like Balaam, they will do anything for money. And like Korah, they will perish because of their rebellion.
1:12 – When these people join you in fellowship meals celebrating the love of the Lord, they are like dangerous reefs that can shipwreck you. They are shameless in the way they care only about themselves. They are like clouds blowing over dry land without giving rain, promising much but producing nothing. They are like trees without fruit at harvesttime. They are not only dead but doubly dead, for they have been pulled out by the roots.
1:13 – They are like wild waves of the sea, churning up the dirty foam of their shameful deeds. They are wandering stars, heading for everlasting gloom and darkness.
1:14 – Now Enoch, who lived seven generations after Adam, prophesied about these people. He said, “Look, the Lord is coming with thousands of his holy ones.
1:15 – He will bring the people of the world to judgment. He will convict the ungodly of all the evil things they have done in rebellion and of all the insults that godless sinners have spoken against him.”
1:16 – These people are grumblers and complainers, doing whatever evil they feel like. They are loudmouthed braggarts, and they flatter others to get favors in return.
Like Jude explains, when satan gets angry, he gets ugly. Right now he’s getting really angry. The TRUE followers of Jesus are fighting back with the full armour of God on them. They are exposing the lies being taught. Satan has become desperate, so he’s showing his true colours. He’s getting really ugly.
DavidK do you want to join satan in his ugliness, or do you want to be in the loving arms of Jesus? You need to ask yourself that. I know where I want to be, and it’s definitely not with satan.
Steve #7, no, I have no intention of “easing up”. I’ve been commanded by God all through the scriptures that if I want salvation I need to be obedient and follow him with his armor on. I’m doing my best to do that. I support Don Harvey 100%. He’s got on the armour of God too, and he’s fighting at the head of the battle for US. I can only love him for that. May God bless his soul.
10 Scott: No, I am not suggesting that schism should be avoided at all costs but I do wonder what name the schismatics will adopt. ‘Orthodox Anglican Church’ is taken. They are the ones who won’t ordain women, as a superficial reading of scripture demands (nor the abolition of slaves). As you well know, a more intelligent exegesis supports women in ministerial roles. There is a trajectory towards that in the new testament, though it does not arrive. What frustrates me is that the traditionalists refuse to apply scholarship to the homosexual issue, as Marg (14) so clearly demonstrates. But I know this is a useless debate…
David K (#15): As I’m sure you realise, there is scholarship on both sides of the homosexual behaviour issue. The most thorough and exhaustive investigation of biblical teaching decisively supports the orthodox view. The Bible and Homosexual Practice: Texts and Hermeneutics (2001), by Robert Gagnon, is, in the opinion of many theologians and biblical scholars, irrefutable. (FWIW, I agree with that assessment.)
So much for your condescending claim that “traditionalists refuse to apply scholarship to the homosexual issue”.
“In a church that accepts the legitimacy of contraception, the absolute condemnation of same-sex relations of intimacy must rely either on an abstract fundamentalist deployment of a number of very ambiguous biblical texts, or on a problematic and nonscriptural theory about natural complementarity, applied narrowly and crudely to physical differentiation without regard to psychological structures.” (Rowan Williams, what he actually believes)
Then Rowan Williams apparently has fundamental disagreements on this issue with his friend and colleague N.T. Wright, Bishop of Durham.
Do you have a source for that quote, by the way?
“Theology and Sexuality” (ed. Eugene Rogers, Blackwells 2002) and reprinted here http://www.igreens.org.uk/bodys_grace.htm
Have you read Gagnon’s book as well? Why exactly do you think that Williams’s categorical statement in a lecture outweighs Gagnon’s over 500 pages of in-depth consideration of all the relevant biblical texts and background?
I must confess that I find the statement you quoted a non sequitur and by no means a substitute for exegesis of applicable Bible passages.
David K, you state “What frustrates me is that the traditionalists refuse to apply scholarship to the homosexual issue, as Marg (14) so clearly demonstrates. But I know this is a useless debate…”
What exactly do you mean by this statement? How do I clearly state that to you in my comments? Why should traditionalists (or any true Christian for that matter) apply scholarship to the homosexual issue? What does “scholarship” have to do with the “homosexual issue?” You can debate it until the cows come home, but the fact remains that homosexual activity is sinful. It’s very clearly stated in the scriptures. I know many fail to accept that and try to either twist the scriptures to mean something else, or say things like the OT is no longer in effect, etc. Some try to fabricate their own meanings for the scriptures that address the issue very clearly in their own attempts to deceive others into following their path to satan.
We are all very aware of these tactics and clearly see through them. For the fact remains, homosexual activity is not scriptural. To that some like to say the scriptures are not the authority. Another weak argument that can be easily blown out of the water. Jesus states here:
Mt 11:27 – “My Father has given me authority over everything. No one really knows the Son except the Father, and no one really knows the Father except the Son and those to whom the Son chooses to reveal him.”
The Pharisees tried to question the authority of Jesus here:
Matthew 21:23-27 (NLT) 23 When Jesus returned to the Temple and began teaching, the leading priests and other leaders came up to him. They demanded, “By whose authority did you drive out the merchants from the Temple? F116 Who gave you such authority?” 24 “I’ll tell you who gave me the authority to do these things if you answer one question,” Jesus replied. 25 “Did John’s baptism come from heaven or was it merely human?”They talked it over among themselves. “If we say it was from heaven, he will ask why we didn’t believe him. 26 But if we say it was merely human, we’ll be mobbed, because the people think he was a prophet.” 27 So they finally replied, “We don’t know.”And Jesus responded, “Then I won’t answer your question either.”
That didn’t work for them either.
Here Jesus tells his disciples of His authority in heaven and on earth:
Mat 28:18-20 (NLT)18Jesus came and told his disciples, “I have been given complete authority in heaven and on earth. 19Therefore, go and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit. 20Teach these new disciples to obey all the commands I have given you. And be sure of this: I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”
Jesus also gave us a promise in the above statement that He would be with us always. We all need to have faith in that statement of truth. The scriptures are, indeed, the authority and word of God. Jesus is God, the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit. His authority stands above all else.
So that argument holds no weight either. Some will say Jesus was not divine, not the son of a virgin. That there was never a resurrection. That he was only a prophet. Here’s where the scriptures clearly refute that argument again:
Luke 24: 18-35 (NLT)18 Then one of them, Cleopas, replied, “You must be the only person in Jerusalem who hasn’t heard about all the things that have happened there the last few days.” 19 “What things?” Jesus asked.”The things that happened to Jesus, the man from Nazareth,” they said. “He was a prophet who did wonderful miracles. He was a mighty teacher, highly regarded by both God and all the people. 20 But our leading priests and other religious leaders arrested him and handed him over to be condemned to death, and they crucified him. 21 We had thought he was the Messiah who had come to rescue Israel. That all happened three days ago. 22 Then some women from our group of his followers were at his tomb early this morning, and they came back with an amazing report. 23 They said his body was missing, and they had seen angels who told them Jesus is alive! 24 Some of our men ran out to see, and sure enough, Jesus’ body was gone, just as the women had said.” 25 Then Jesus said to them, “You are such foolish people! You find it so hard to believe all that the prophets wrote in the Scriptures. 26 Wasn’t it clearly predicted by the prophets that the Messiah would have to suffer all these things before entering his time of glory?” 27 Then Jesus quoted passages from the writings of Moses and all the prophets, explaining what all the Scriptures said about himself. 28 By this time they were nearing Emmaus and the end of their journey. Jesus would have gone on, 29 but they begged him to stay the night with them, since it was getting late. So he went home with them. 30 As they sat down to eat, he took a small loaf of bread, asked God’s blessing on it, broke it, then gave it to them. 31 Suddenly, their eyes were opened, and they recognized him. And at that moment he disappeared! 32 They said to each other, “Didn’t our hearts feel strangely warm as he talked with us on the road and explained the Scriptures to us?” 33 And within the hour they were on their way back to Jerusalem, where the eleven disciples and the other followers of Jesus were gathered. When they arrived, they were greeted with the report, 34 “The Lord has really risen! He appeared to Peter F118 !” 35 Then the two from Emmaus told their story of how Jesus had appeared to them as they were walking along the road and how they had recognized him as he was breaking the bread.
I could go on all day. The Bible is such a wonderful thing. God gave us His inspired word in the Bible so we could learn more about His love for us and how to live our lives the way He planned for us. He gave the laws to Moses in the OT so we would know what sin was. Then his sent his only Son our Lord to take the burden of that sin away from us. God knew we could never live to the full letter of the law. It was impossible since the original sin of Adam. No man can live without sin. So, God gave us His gift of salvation through His grace. He only has one condition; we have to repent and believe in Him. We have to trust in Him. Can you do that, David K? I know I can.
Homosexual activity has nothing to do with it specifically except that it’s one of the sinful behaviors that God told us about in his Word. Those who feel they are plagued by those sinful behaviours can be saved. They need only to repent and believe in God and let Him save them. Telling them that their behaviour is not sinful is lying to them and giving them false hope. In doing so, we would be driving them into the arms of satan. Would you want to push your brother or sister in front of a fast moving tractor trailer? This is an analogy, but it would essentially be the same fate. Sure death. I could never do that to you, David k. I don’t know you personally, but I know God created you and loves you and wants you to be saved. He wants all those who are struggling with homosexual activity to be saved too. We are His disciples and need to help them learn the truth of His word and the good news of salvation through his Son Jesus Christ.
20: Yes, but one quote. For detailed exegesis see: Dirt, Greed, and Sex by Countryman–probably the most influential of the lot I’ve read. But we are both probably too entrenched in our respective opinions for further conversation to be of much use. Agree to disagree?
21: Marg, um…
Well, Dave K, I gather you aren’t going to answer my question on what frustrates you. I gave enough to support my position. Your “um…” response doesn’t really say much now does it?
Best regards,
Marg
I’m always open to consider other opinions. I’ve read bits of Countryman’s book, but not the whole thing. The parts I read were not persuasive, else I might have read more.
At one time, I was uncertain about the ethics of homosexual behaviour. After doing some reading on both sides, it was Richard Hays’s The Moral Vision of the New Testament that provided a solid biblical basis for my moral conviction on the issue. Then Gagnon filled in all the blanks and answered every question.
Personally, I think “agree to disagree” on an issue that the Bible clearly addresses is a high-risk strategy. But maybe that’s just me.