The ACoC is exporting its views on sex to Africa:
In a kind of high-level pen pal relationship, theologians from six African dioceses are now exchanging essays about sexuality with theologians from four Canadian dioceses. Dr. Kawuki (Isaac) Mukasa, General Synod’s coordinator for dialogue, paired up dioceses during two trips to Africa, including visits to South Africa, Tanzania, Kenya, and Uganda from July 31 to Aug. 21.
Mr. Mukasa, a native Ugandan, considers this work essential to improving communication within the Anglican Communion, which is divided over the place of gays and lesbians in the church.
In Canada, the dioceses of Niagara and New Westminster have agreed to bless same-sex unions, and several other Canadian dioceses are considering following suit. Most African Anglican churches are conservative on the issue.
[......]
The dioceses currently in conversation are:
-The dioceses of Central Tanganyika and Dar es Salaam (Tanzania) with the Diocese of Niagara
-The Diocese of Mombasa (Kenya) with the Diocese of Ottawa
-The dioceses of Cape Town (South Africa) and Tanga (Tanzania) with the Diocese of Toronto
-The Diocese of Botswana (Botswana) with the Diocese of Ontario
i wonder if the use of words such as “dialogue” and “conversation” will have the same connotation attached internationally in this particular communication as they have had in the Anglican Church of Canada in the past?
Hopefully, the African Dioceses that are communicating with the Canadians will send the right message and that the Canadian Churches (ACoC) will have the ‘eyes’ to read and the ‘ears’ to hear the Truth finally.
I’m with Gerry. I don’t think the Africans will have much interest in importing SSBs. They will probably try to counteract the errors here. I don’t see any long-term future for this, but it’ll be interesting to see who blinks first and withdraws from the dialogue.
Sin is very deceitful and pride of life (as is found in fancy revisionist theology, for example) could be a temptation for many. Our part is to pray for the spiritual protection of our African brethren and for repentance in those attempting to spread the Enemy’s deceit.
This will really help relations with their Muslim neighbours.
I’m sure they want to hear all about inclusiveness,lawsuits ,drawing circles and how to get a special hot line to God about “doing a new thing”
Irena #3; Excellent response, I particularly like your term “revisionist theology” It goes to the source of the changes we are forced to deal with over the past 60 odd years. Your instruction that follows is the best we can do. -”Pray without ceasing”
Thank you and God Bless
The Africans will listen because they are a polite people, but several of those Dioceses are still not in communion with the ACoC and NW, a fact that the Canadian Church continues to ignore. Yes, they do live side-by-side with Muslims. Will the West listen?
Who initiated this “dialogue”? ACoC or the African Dioceses?
If it was ACoC, than it is an attempt to spread their lies and poison. A form of attack against those who support ANiC. They may think that by destoying those who support ANiC, that ANiC in turn will be destroyed.
If it was the Africans, than they are attempting to save those who have been led astray.
Either way, we should pray for all involved.
“Mr. Mukasa, a native Ugandan, considers this work essential to improving communication within the Anglican Communion, which is divided over the place of gays and lesbians in the church.”
In light of this perhaps we should ask Dr. Mukasa if he would be interested in including us in his dialogue. Specificly the Essential leaders (who seem to be pretty quiet on this blog) might take the inititive. After all “Charity begins at home”. However considering the (HOB,ACoC lack of?) response to their last communique I would recomend prayerful patience.
The only reason for dialogue on an issue that the Bible unequivocably deems sin is to initiate change. Any other understanding of dialogue in the context of blessing homosexual activity is a smokescreen for a hidden (or not so hidden) agenda.
Either Dr. Mukasa is aware of the process in which dialogue is the tool of change and wishes to initiate change in Africa, or he is woefully uninformed and is unintentially aiding the revisionists. I do not think that anyone should continue to dialogue with revisionists because it simply furthers their agenda. As long as people are talking to them, they figure they are ok, and that their revisionist theology has a place at the Anglican table.
Sam if what you are saying is correct, than doesn’t that make Essentials and their work at best superfluous, and at worst, indicate that it is time to close the books, lock the doors and let the spiders (cobwebs) take over? What about this Blog? What about those whose understanding has been compromised, should they be abandoned?
Stuck (#11), go to the main Essentials website and read the vision and mission statements. Your comment makes no sense.
Jesus made very clear that the understanding of the scribes and pharisees had been “compromised” (an interesting choice of word – not biblical – but interesting). How did He respond to them?
Warren read my first sentence. Again. Than put the rest in context.
Stuck (#13), I did. Sam makes sense – you don’t.
Warren –
Sam’s statement “I do not think that anyone should continue to dialogue with revisionists because it simply furthers their agenda.”
Our Vision: To be the Theological and Spiritual Rallying Point for Historic, Christian Orthodoxy in the Anglican Church of Canada.
Our Mission: To call the Anglican Church of Canada to Embrace and Live by its Orthodox Christian Heritage under the Renewing Guidance of The Holy Spirit.
Could you please explain how Essentials can live the vision and mission WITHOUT DIALOGUE?
Stuck (#15), does your definition of “dialogue” include Jesus calling the Pharisees and Sadducees vipers? If so, you have a point. My hunch, however, is that your definition of dialogue includes compromise – compromise that is contrary to God’s Word.
Warren you did not answer the question!
dialogue
n. conversation, discussion, talk
Stuck (#17), if I don’t get off this merry-go-round I will have to change my name to Stuck. See yah.
When a young rich man asked Jesus what he had to do to become a Desciple Jesus told him to sell all his property and to give all his money to the poor. The young rich man walked away and Jesus did not chase after him, but let him go. Jesus then said that it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heavan.
Our Lord and Saviour has experienced a situation in which continued dialogue would not change someone. Not because Jesus lacked the power to do so, but because the man himself could/would not. The situation with Niagara is perhaps similar. The ACoC Bishop there is not able/willing to change. Instead he seems to want everyone else, including God, to change. What hope of dialogue is there with such a man, after so much effort has already been made? Would it not be better to reach out to those who are willing to receive the message?
Gentlemen Either I’m infected with Danny Crane’s “Mad Cow” or you two are on the same merry-go-round. This stream started with my response, #9 to this blog, suggesting Mukasa should allow us to enter this dialogue. #10 Sam disagreed suggesting we should not dialogue with revisinists. I countered in #11 suggesting that if this is the case were does that leave Essentials et al. What follows shows Warren going completely off the rails and finally getting off a “Merry-go-round that he initiated, Lastly Amp, this stream started with Dr. Mukasa not Niagara. The reason I joined Essentials, ANiC, ACNA, and FoCA, was the apparent openess and the lack of same in the ACoC. I am fully aware of our instruction to “Turn Away from such as these”. Our Lord Christ had an “inside track” on who to turn away from. We on the other hand must involve ourselves in serious study and prayer before making such a drastic move.
Stuck – doesn’t look like mad cow disease to me…..