ALL BLOG POSTS AND COMMENTS COPYRIGHT (C) 2003-2016 VOX DAY. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. REPRODUCTION WITHOUT WRITTEN PERMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED.

Friday, January 15, 2016

Trapping the wolves

The Anglican Community finally calls the false Christians of the Episcopal Church to account for their theological crimes:
For the first time, the global organizing body of Anglicans has punished the Episcopal Church, following years of heated debate with the American church over homosexuality, same-sex marriage and the role of women.

The Anglican Communion’s announcement Thursday that it would suspend its U.S. branch for three years from key voting positions was seen as a blow to the Episcopal Church, which allows its clergy to perform same-sex marriages and this summer voted to include the rite in its church laws.

It was also seen as a victory for conservative Anglicans, especially those in Africa, who for years have been pressing the Anglican Communion to discipline the U.S. body.

“The traditional doctrine of the church in view of the teaching of Scripture, upholds marriage as between a man and a woman in faithful, lifelong union,” the leaders of the Anglican Communion, which represents 44 national churches, said in a statement during a meeting in Canterbury. “The majority of those gathered reaffirm this teaching.”
The Episcopalians are not Christians. They follow the world, they do not follow Jesus Christ. It would be better if their evil "bishops" were all excommunicated, but we live in a softer, more secular world at the present. This suspension is a long overdue start.

Labels:

118 Comments:

Blogger CM January 15, 2016 8:08 AM  

Time to put our new presiding bishop's "more conservative" views to the test and see if he really does disagree with ssm.

Blogger Sean January 15, 2016 8:09 AM  

In Canada we have the United Church. It was once a highly respected and very important institution. But it drank the progressive Koolaid. It is bleeding members fast and is in very real danger of irrelevance.

And now we have the spectacle of a United Church having troubles removing a female minister who is an open athiest that refuses to use the lords prayer in her services. The once proud United Church, a union of presbyterian, methodist and evangelicals has trouble even enforcing its very watered down orthodoxy on its own ministers.

Blogger James Dixon January 15, 2016 8:12 AM  

Way past time...

Anonymous Credo in Unum Deum January 15, 2016 8:18 AM  

It would be better if their evil "bishops" were all excommunicated

Being excommunicated from the anglicans for gay marriage, is like being suspended from the special olympics for steroid use.

Blogger Mark Citadel January 15, 2016 8:25 AM  

I think they may want to target the Church of England. Female bishops? HERESY. Women are to remain SILENT in the church. They go against the will of God in promoting women for PC purposes.

Blogger White Knight Leo #0368 January 15, 2016 8:26 AM  

Forgive my atheistic ignorance, but is excommunication something the Anglican Church can actually do? I thought that was a Catholic thing.

Blogger Markku January 15, 2016 8:28 AM  

Forgive my atheistic ignorance, but is excommunication something the Anglican Church can actually do?

Wikipedia says yes. Conditions for excommunication are not clearly defined.

Anonymous That Would Be Telling January 15, 2016 8:29 AM  

@2 Beware entryists like "female ministers", her Wikipedia entry speaks for itself:

Rev. Gretta Vosper is a United Church of Canada minister who is an atheist. Her best selling books include With or Without God: Why The Way We Live is More Important Than What We Believe in 2008, and Amen: What Prayer Can Mean in a World Beyond Belief in 2012....

Vosper ... received her master of divinity from Queen's Theological College in 1990 with ordination in 1992. She currently serves as minister with West Hill United Church in Toronto....

Her work bridges Progressive Christianity and atheism exploring beyond the boundaries of Christian thought. Her website indicates "In 2001, I made it clear that I did not believe in a supernatural, interventionist, divine being. At first, I identified as a non-theist as I do in my first book published in 2008. Then, in my second book, I felt the need to further distinguish myself from those who used the term non-theist but retained a belief in the supernatural aspects of god; there, I identified as a theological non-realist. In 2013, I embraced the term atheist which means, literally, no belief in a theistic, supernatural being."


Well, I could add that she lost 2/3rds of her congregation.

Anonymous LLC January 15, 2016 8:30 AM  

I suspect this is far too little, far too late.

My very-small church has gone the other way. At our last business meeting (December), our pastor and the deacons proposed an addition to our statement of faith, affirming that marriage is between a man and a woman. The older members of our church were surprised on the grounds of "We thought it was already in there." The pastor, the deacons, and the secretary had gone back through thirty years of church records and couldn't find it anywhere...so the change was made.

I suspect we're in the minority of churches.

Anonymous Erik January 15, 2016 8:35 AM  

@6: Most denominations can do excommunication, it's just rare, and extra rare to hear about it from smaller denominations (i.e. anyone but Catholics). It's usually not that hard or complicated, though - the church leadership declares/recognizes that So-and-so is an unrepentant sinner and therefore not fit to hold office or receive Communion, et cetera.

Giordano Bruno possibly holds some kind of record for this. An inveterate church-shopper trying to see who would have him, he was excommunicated three times by different denominations: the Catholics, the Calvinists, and the Lutherans. Dear God, how much of an ass do you need to be to get excommunicated by the Lutherans?

Blogger Anchorman January 15, 2016 8:39 AM  

Well, I could add that she lost 2/3rds of her congregation.

The remaining 1/3rd...do they consider themselves atheist? I cannot comprehend the level of mental gymnastics needed to attend a "church" with an atheist minister who, bizarrely, refuses to drop the title or association with an overtly Christian organization.

Women be trippin

Anonymous Goodnight January 15, 2016 8:48 AM  

I read an interview with that United Church "minister" Vosper. She sounded almost exactly like a modern cosmopolitan version of the main character from Flannery O'Connor's "Wise Blood" - she's trying to create a Church of Christ without Christ.

Blogger FALPhil January 15, 2016 8:48 AM  

@6 Forgive my atheistic ignorance, but is excommunication something the Anglican Church can actually do? I thought that was a Catholic thing.

All orthodox Christian churches are supposed to exercise church discipline per Matthew 18. One of the measures of the faithfulness of a congregation is its willingness to practice that discipline. Excommunication is typically reserved for unrepentant sin.

I am still waiting for the Roman Church to excommunicate the RC politicians who espouse abortion. I ain't holding my breath.

Blogger dc.sunsets January 15, 2016 8:52 AM  

I was raised in an Episcopalian family. What made "my" church different was that it was considered "High Church," i.e., very old school. Heck one of the local Roman Catholic churches was more New Age at the time.

Then the old priest retired and the Progressives subverted the whole shebang. Today that same church has a black female "pastor." She's a lovely lady, which is irrelevant. The old-school church is but a memory and today's "church" is just another head of the Left-collectivist Hydra.

Saddest to me is that Episcopalians used to be the Ultimate WASPs. They were in some ways the natural rulers of the USA (high average IQ, high-trust Northern-European-style civilization.) The civilization we (in the US) take for granted requires a certain concentration of these characteristics above a certain threshold.

Now they are just out-crossed mongrels, all largely falling below that threshold. Yet another source of selective breeding has been destroyed.

Blogger Doseux January 15, 2016 8:53 AM  

This is a promising development. However, I don't think there is anything they could do to prevent me from swimming the Tiber. Anglicanism has its orthodox branches, just look up the Anglican Church in North America, but they are small and unimportant compared to the Catholic Church. It is sad, too. Anglicanism has one of the greatest traditions of prayer in English, if not the greatest.

Blogger tz January 15, 2016 8:57 AM  

@5 I wish more male Bishops would remain silent in church.
The problem with pulling the tent is it leaves others uncovered who will find a home
http://anglicanmainstream.org/category/anglican-ordinariates/
If the Anglicans didn't take any action, they would have lost more entire flocks.

Blogger tz January 15, 2016 9:00 AM  

@15, see @16. I don't know where in the US they might be, but I'm sure they will start popping up (as another serious liturgy with the Extraordinary form and eastern rites to compete with the novus ordo partys).

Blogger James Dixon January 15, 2016 9:04 AM  

> Anglicanism has one of the greatest traditions of prayer in English, if not the greatest.

Agreed. The Anglican Prayer Book, along with the King James Bible, is one of the treasures of the English language.

Anonymous DNW January 15, 2016 9:15 AM  

"I am still waiting for the Roman Church to excommunicate the RC politicians who espouse abortion. I ain't holding my breath."

Along with some Catholics.

Note: The linked-to site might gratify some, but will possibly enrage others. While admitting the shattering abuses in the institutional Catholic church, they are almost - with qualifications - as harsh on the Protestant faith. Criticism is sprayed in every direction; and some bizarre theoretical political stances taken. Sincere Protestants who cannot emotionally distance themselves from the polemics to some degree, in order to sift the site for current events information, should probably spare themselves the annoyance and blood pressure spike likely to ensue.


http://www.churchmilitant.com/video/episode/cardinal-dolan-has-to-go

http://www.churchmilitant.com/news/article/head-of-popes-gang-of-eight-admits-existence-of-gay-lobby-in-vatican

Blogger Dexter January 15, 2016 9:17 AM  

The Anglican Communion’s announcement Thursday that it would suspend its U.S. branch for three years from key voting positions

If you determine Church doctrine by voting, then you're doing it wrong.

Blogger Mr.MantraMan January 15, 2016 9:22 AM  

You forgot to mention "Victoria" now they will know what to do to the destructive type

Anonymous NateM January 15, 2016 9:28 AM  

Wow, that's a major move by the Anglican Church. I'm actually very surprised they let them walk THAT far out before reigning them back in. I would have figured if they had an issue with what they were doing they'd have made of an issue of it before the female priests and bishops, and especially before the gay marriage apologist move. Maybe they are just counting on a Schism at this point and figure this'll trigger them to separate themselves so they don't have to do it themselves. Or maybe the main body just majorly underestimated how angry the rest of the church was about it.

Blogger Elocutioner January 15, 2016 9:39 AM  

Entryism everywhere. Is there any explicit, tested and proven to work 'code of Christ' to prevent churchian entryism? Or perhaps one that can be applied to remove the churchian influences after the fact?

There have to be some good examples for at least a starting point.

Blogger CM January 15, 2016 9:44 AM  

If you determine Church doctrine by voting, then you're doing it wrong.

Nicene/Apostle's Creeds, canonical scripture, saints...

All major accepted theological doctrine is voted on to make it "official".

No need to worry about emergent, blue like elvis, The Shack theology becoming doctrine in churches that hold to the Anglican or Catholic communion unless the whole thing is corrupted and rotten.

Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 9:46 AM  

Honest question -

Wouldn't/couldn't the acceptance of gays be seen simply as further changes that Christianity has been experiencing since its birth?

Blogger CM January 15, 2016 9:48 AM  

Is there any explicit, tested and proven to work 'code of Christ' to prevent churchian entryism?

If it offends, cut it off.

Better to throw a hand in the fire than for the whole body to be consumed.

Sound scriptural method for dealing with entryists.

The bible outlines very clear guidance for dealing with unrepentant sinners and bad theology. Issue isn't a method. Its the lack of conviction to follow through with it.

Blogger Cataline Sergius January 15, 2016 9:52 AM  

I used to be an Episcopalian. Don't blame me, it was my parents fault.

I saw this issue coming years ago. The Episcopal church had several inherent problems. First and foremost over reliance on Roman Catholic ritual and regalia without the corresponding discipline and catechism. It makes it easy to fall away from the spirit of the Word and rely only on the letters. Enunciate the right words properly and the Trinity is required to listen.


Second was that membership was a class indicator. Oh sure you could be as poor as a church mouse and attend services if you liked but if you were somebody or planning to be somebody, membership wasn't optional. That wasn't always a bad thing. In times past influential men of probity would meet after the service discuss charitable things that needed doing in the community. Which unfortunately turned into a downhill slope when the charitable thing that needed discussing was raising LBGTASDFQWERY awareness in the community.

The Episcopal Churches that didn't peel themselves off, are temples of Tartuffe, ou l'Imposteur. A church of hypocritical false piety.

A perfect reflection however of our new would be Aristocrats.

The Communion didn't go far enough in my opinion. By its words and actions in adopting an expressly prohibited mortal sin as sanctified. The Episcopal Church is cut off from the body and blood of Christ. They are excommunicate and anathema.

Blogger Unknown January 15, 2016 9:54 AM  

@25 Yost: Chuchianity may have changed. Christ and his followers have not changed. So, no.

Blogger CM January 15, 2016 9:55 AM  

Wouldn't/couldn't the acceptance of gays be seen simply as further changes that Christianity has been experiencing since its birth?

What change? Sound doctrine doesn't conflict with scripture.

There has been some unbiblical stuff that's been present in church doctrine before as well as the easy temptation of playing to power...

But the positions always come back to scripture. The Bible is not what says its ok for men to have affairs with mistresses, the Bible doesn't outline indulgences, scripture doesn't say "go ye forth and make slaves of black nations."

BUT scripture does say homosexualitu is a sin. And God doesn't bless sin. He asks us to repent and come to him. Marriage is the "God Approved" rubber stamp... and SSM makes us liars since God does NOT approve.

Scripture.

Blogger Titus Quinctius Cincinnatus January 15, 2016 9:57 AM  

Well, it's not burning the Bishop of Maine on the courthouse lawn, but it'll have to do for now.

Blogger Markku January 15, 2016 9:58 AM  

What change?

Exactly. Anybody who believes that Christianity has changed: Go read Ante-Nicene Fathers and try to see a difference between them, and any vanilla ultraconservative Christian congregation. I dare you. I double-dare you.

Blogger Student in Blue January 15, 2016 10:00 AM  

Dear God, how much of an ass do you need to be to get excommunicated by the Lutherans?

It's easy, you just have to publically and unrepentantly hold a position that's un-Biblical.

If it was just being an ass, Luther himself probably would've been ex-communicated.

Blogger Markku January 15, 2016 10:03 AM  

It's easy, you just have to publically and unrepentantly hold a position that's un-Biblical.

Antti Kylliäinen, a famous Lutheran priest here, has gone around for decades preaching that everybody goes to heaven. He explicitly mentions Adolf Hitler being in heaven.

Not only has he not been excommunicated, but even his priesthood has not been in danger.

Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 10:13 AM  

Aren't there entire sections of the bible that aren't followed anymore?

Was Christianity founded by ignoring the old testament or did that happen after?

Blogger Aeoli Pera January 15, 2016 10:15 AM  

I'm curious to see whether SJWs double down in response to a perceived authority.

Blogger endwatcher January 15, 2016 10:17 AM  

That it takes Africans to hold
the denomination to task is sad. The Church of England was leading from behind instead of leading.

While this is a positive step the backlash is coming. Until you can enforce discipline over doctrine with authority you are at the whim of the world.

Anonymous Altar Boy January 15, 2016 10:17 AM  

American leftists chastised by African traditionalists.

I hear the sound of cognitive dissonance implosions all across this fallen land.

It is music to my battered ears.

Anonymous Desiderius January 15, 2016 10:18 AM  

>Aren't there entire sections of the bible that aren't followed anymore?

No.

>Was Christianity founded by ignoring the old testament or did that happen after?

No.

Next question?

Anonymous Desiderius January 15, 2016 10:22 AM  

Aeoli Pera,

"I'm curious to see whether SJWs double down in response to a perceived authority."

It's taqiyya time for the SJWs. Then again, when isn't?

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 15, 2016 10:22 AM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 15, 2016 10:23 AM  

Excommunication is a New Testament Biblical concept.

The difficulty in enforcement comes with unaffiliated and independent congregations without a Earthly central hierarchical authority.

It is not just a Catholic thing.

https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+18

Mathew 18

15 “If your brother or sister[b] sins,[c] go and point out their fault, just between the two of you. If they listen to you, you have won them over. 16 But if they will not listen, take one or two others along, so that ‘every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.’[d] 17 If they still refuse to listen, tell it to the church; and if they refuse to listen even to the church, treat them as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

18 “Truly I tell you, whatever you bind on earth will be[e] bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth will be[f] loosed in heaven.

19 “Again, truly I tell you that if two of you on earth agree about anything they ask for, it will be done for them by my Father in heaven. 20 For where two or three gather in my name, there am I with them.”

Blogger Joe Keenan January 15, 2016 10:24 AM  

Good for the Anglican Communion, maybe the African bishops will be the ones to bring them all Home.

Anonymous Desiderius January 15, 2016 10:25 AM  

"A church of hypocritical false piety."

They're truly pious, just no longer to Christ or scriptural teaching.

Anonymous Broken Arrow January 15, 2016 10:33 AM  

This is why formal church membership is a necessity, if you refuse to become a recognized member in any Christian church you make a mockery of church discipline.

Anonymous Dan January 15, 2016 10:37 AM  

One nice side effect of their total commitment to democracy and multiculturalism is that they have to respect the voices of these actual Christians.

Now if US Episcopalians can just have ten kids per woman for a couple generations, they will totally get their voice back. Of course they won't do that. If they understood what sex is for, they wouldn't have stumbled into this situation in the first place.

Anonymous Bz January 15, 2016 10:39 AM  

Rev. Gretta Vosper is a United Church of Canada minister who is an atheist.

While it may to some seem she is unsuitable for her position, Vosper emphasizes that she still enjoys hectoring, shaming and moral preening for a secure salary. The United Church of Canada declined to comment.

Blogger Markku January 15, 2016 10:41 AM  

Was Christianity founded by ignoring the old testament

If you read Ante-Nicene Fathers you would see that even the very first ever recorded Fathers (Justin Martyr, and someone whose name escapes me) thought that the Old Testament does not apply to gentile Christians. Some of them actually thought that following it is essentially blasphemy, and you will go to Hell if you do.

Blogger Cataline Sergius January 15, 2016 10:42 AM  

That it takes Africans to hold the denomination to task is sad.

Dude, Africa is the frontline in Christendom's fight against Islam. It is literally life and death to them.

Anonymous 636 January 15, 2016 10:42 AM  

@34.

In orthodox Christianity, the New Testament interprets the Old. It is not ignored, but laws given to an earthly theocracy do not apply outside that context. Christendom is not that context.

Blogger Student in Blue January 15, 2016 10:42 AM  

@Markku
Antti Kylliäinen, a famous Lutheran priest here, has gone around for decades preaching that everybody goes to heaven. He explicitly mentions Adolf Hitler being in heaven.

I keep forgetting to mention "actual, liturgical, non-Churchian Lutherans" whenever I bring it up.

@Christopher Yost
Aren't there entire sections of the bible that aren't followed anymore?

Was Christianity founded by ignoring the old testament or did that happen after?


The Old Testament is not ignored, but it was completed in Jesus Christ. It served as a prophecy and the groundwork for why the Messiah was needed and why He was so significant.

So as it is, we're not under the Old Covenant any longer, but under a New Covenant. Nothing about the Old Testament is wrong or incorrect, but it's like having a curfew when you're young and not having it when you're older. You're not bound by said curfew (Law), but the underlying logic and truth is still real and relevant (it's good to have a set time to sleep and wake).

Blogger VD January 15, 2016 10:48 AM  

Wouldn't/couldn't the acceptance of gays be seen simply as further changes that Christianity has been experiencing since its birth?

No.

Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 10:48 AM  

Desiderious-

How many children have you stoned to death?

Anyone else actually able to converse-

What about the book of Judges? Deborah is/was supposed to be a prophet for god? That doesn't conflict with women not allowed to preach?

Are prophets and preachers different?

Blogger bob k. mando January 15, 2016 10:49 AM  

23. Elocutioner January 15, 2016 9:39 AM
Is there any explicit, tested and proven to work 'code of Christ' to prevent churchian entryism?



entryists couldn't be stopped when the Apostles were still here. that's why most of the Epistles were written.

we even had an entryist when Jesus was still here ( Judas ).

how you think you're supposed to keep them out when Jesus and the Apostles couldn't manage it, i have no idea.



24. CM January 15, 2016 9:44 AM
No need to worry about emergent, blue like elvis, The Shack theology becoming doctrine in churches that hold to the Anglican or Catholic communion unless the whole thing is corrupted and rotten.



*facepalm*

the Anglican Church schismed from the Catholic Church over the pressing theological issue of ... a king getting a divorce from a childless wife.

the Anglican church always was corrupt. to the extent that they are not, it's to the lengths that they have adopted Protestant doctrine.

but they aren't Protestant at all, just apostate Catholics.



34. Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 10:13 AM
Was Christianity founded by ignoring the old testament or did that happen after?



https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Matthew+5%3A17-20&version=KJV


Blogger Markku January 15, 2016 10:56 AM  

Here's Ignatius (ad c. 35 or 50 – 98 to c.110) on Old Testament

Be not deceived with strange doctrines, "nor give heed to fables and endless genealogies," and things in which the Jews make their boast. "Old things are passed away: behold, all things have become new." For if we still live according to the Jewish law, and the circumcision of the flesh, we deny that we have received grace.

Blogger Markku January 15, 2016 10:59 AM  

The development in Christendom has been the exact opposite of what Yost imagines. In the beginning it was: Absolutely do not follow the Mosaic Law and if you do, you are a heretic and must be excommunicated.

Only afterwards did it develop into "I guess it's kinda, sorta, ok, if you want to".

Blogger Joe Keenan January 15, 2016 11:06 AM  

"Everything in the Old is fulfilled in the New, everything in the New, is foreshadowed in the Old."

Christianity is all about putting History right. The Fall of Humanity requires the Salvation of Humanity. The History of that Fall, and the laying of the ground work of salvation, is recorded in the OT. Putting History right, saving humanity, is told in the NT. However, as anyone can claim to be God, the characteristics of the Messiah were outlined throughout the OT. His life was told before he was born. Only one man meets those criteria, Christ.

Blogger Thomas Davidsmeier January 15, 2016 11:18 AM  

@25

The Bible was voted on as canon specifically to define the faith and to prevent drifting from the original teachings of Jesus Christ and His chosen Apostles. The Bible says homosexuality is an abomination. Not just once in one place. Not just in the Old Testament. But, multiple times in both the Old and New Testaments. God is unchanging. His moral* laws are unchanging.

*- Ceremonial laws that were part of the specific covenant God made with the nation of Israel changed, but moral laws do not. Hence the specific inclusion in the Bible of the story where God explained to Peter in a vision that God had made all animals 'clean' to eat. Jesus fulfilled the old covenant and made a new one in His Blood through His death and resurrection. That's why Christians don't worry about following the Hebraic dress code or dietary laws.

Blogger S1AL January 15, 2016 11:38 AM  

Christopher Yost - You're confused (or dissembling) with regards to basic Christian doctrine and sensibilities. The moral laws of the OT still hold force, but the legal punishments do not. We are not Israel.

As for Deborah, yes prophets and teachers are different. Additionally, see Acts 2:17. Next, the judge of Israel was a governmental position, not a doctrinal one. Finally, it was to the shame of Israel (as outlined in multiple places in the OT) that God realized up a woman to lead the nation. You clearly did not read the story of Deborah.

Anonymous 636 January 15, 2016 11:39 AM  

What about the book of Judges? Deborah is/was supposed to be a prophet for god? That doesn't conflict with women not allowed to preach?

Totally different situations.

May I suggest you actually read it a few times if you're genuinely interested?

Anonymous Kansas Wing Man January 15, 2016 11:46 AM  

To me, the high point is admission by the American multi-cult, progressive, inclusive and open-minded EC they are at odds with the African (and other third world) faithful.

So much for their embracing diversity.

Anonymous Big Bill January 15, 2016 12:03 PM  

@52: "Are prophets and preachers different?"

Yes. Do you have access to a dictionary?

Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 12:07 PM  

Student In Blue -

That was an AWESOME explanation, thank ya!

Bob k. Mandi -

Matthew 5:18, I'm assuming that's what you're pointing towards. What is "till all are fulfilled" referring to?

Without context the link reads like it's in conflict with what I'm being told regarding the changes to the old testament.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 15, 2016 12:21 PM  

Matthew 5:17-20 is addressing Jews.

Galatians 3
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Galatians+3

Anonymous RC January 15, 2016 12:29 PM  

@41 "The difficulty in enforcement comes with unaffiliated and independent congregations without a Earthly central hierarchical authority."

While accountability is important, in today's church the central authorities have been corrupted: allowing for homosexual relationships, female pastorship, cooperation and even sponsorship of the destruction of civilization, and numerous other compromises with sin.

The central authorities often hold the title to the local church property which gives them immense power to exert leverage against a local congregation resists these compromises. I am immersed in this precise circumstance as I write and it's ugly. It's the reason the entryists target congregational and educational leadership positions. If you own the property, the local congregation either gets in line or you blow it up and start afresh.

There are certainly problems with runaway local congregations, but their impact on the culture and Christendom is limited.

Blogger Nemo Maximus January 15, 2016 12:32 PM  

The council of Jerusalem is also instructive.

From Acts 15

5 Then some of the believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees stood up and said, “The Gentiles must be circumcised and required to keep the law of Moses.”

6 The apostles and elders met to consider this question. 7 After much discussion, Peter got up and addressed them: “Brothers, you know that some time ago God made a choice among you that the Gentiles might hear from my lips the message of the gospel and believe. 8 God, who knows the heart, showed that he accepted them by giving the Holy Spirit to them, just as he did to us. 9 He did not discriminate between us and them, for he purified their hearts by faith. 10 Now then, why do you try to test God by putting on the necks of Gentiles a yoke that neither we nor our ancestors have been able to bear? 11 No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”
...
19 “It is my judgment, therefore, that we should not make it difficult for the Gentiles who are turning to God. 20 Instead we should write to them, telling them to abstain from food polluted by idols, from sexual immorality, from the meat of strangled animals and from blood."

1) The Old Testament ceremonial law (circumcision, law of Moses) is not applicable to Gentiles
2) Sexual rules from the OT are applicable. So no homo, no adultery, no hookers, no premarital sex, etc.
3) Stay away from the blood pudding and blutwurst.


Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 12:36 PM  

636 -

A prophet is beneath a preacher?

Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 12:39 PM  

Big Bill -

If you're going to enforce the dictionary upon the bible you're going to lose. Dictionaries are literal, the bible...not always so.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 15, 2016 12:50 PM  

There are no Old Testament type prophets today. There is a test and failure means stoning. Paul might be considered the last, else John the Baptizer. Anyway, the topic of modern day prophets is not clear. My opinion is that there no prophets like, for example, Elijah.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 15, 2016 12:53 PM  

@66
"A prophet is beneath a preacher?"

Beneath? If there were such thing as Old Testament type prophets today, no. Different offices and function.

Blogger lorenzstransky January 15, 2016 12:57 PM  

Catholics need to do the same to the US Church and others. Vatican II opened a whole Pandora's Box of evil onto the Church which may be difficult, if not impossible, to eradicate. Benedict XVI apparently said to a visiting prelate that the US Church is in total apostasy. Unfortunately, the Vatican curia also seems to be infested with heretics and the present Pope, if not complicit, may be powerless to stop it. As Pope Paul VI has noted, "the smoke of Satan has entered the temple of God."

Blogger Torial January 15, 2016 12:57 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Anonymous Newjerseythomas January 15, 2016 1:01 PM  

"If it was just being an ass, Luther himself probably would've been ex-communicated."

Luther was ex-communicated. That's why he had to found his own church.

Student in Blue-
I like your curfew analogy. I havn't seen that before.

Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 1:04 PM  

JaimeinTexas -

That link was interesting. It describes how the laws are not sacrosanct and I'm able to grasp the how of it but not getting the "why".

As in "why" would the laws be different. I'm not able to separate that from the ol' "Christians just pick 'n choose what to follow".

Blogger Nate January 15, 2016 1:11 PM  

note the majority of the pressure to punish the americans came from african anglicans. The fact is the african christians are hardcore gospel conservatives. This is the same thing we see in the United Methodist Church. As the american UMC is fighting with entryists... due to the global nature of the church... the heavy influence of conservative asian and african churches dominates and prevents the idiot entryist americans from moving the church left. For the last 3 conferences the church has moved further right.. and it will continue to do so. We've moved from a battle over same-sex marriage... to a battle of how those who break our laws against it will be punished.

Blogger James Dixon January 15, 2016 1:13 PM  

Yost, the day you're competent to lecture anyone here on the tenants and nature of Christianity will be a cold day in hell.

SiB made it simple for you. What part of "we're not under the Old Covenant any longer, but under a New Covenant." is hard for you to understand?

> ...but they aren't Protestant at all, just apostate Catholics.

If you make that Roman Catholics, you might have a point. As is, no. They are no more apostate Catholics than the Orthodox churches are.

Blogger James Dixon January 15, 2016 1:39 PM  

> As in "why" would the laws be different.

Mosaic law was fulfilled by Christ's life, death, and resurrection.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 15, 2016 1:40 PM  

@73
Things like food restrictions do not apply to Christians, except as a matter of conscience and as a self-imposed method not to be a stumbling block when trying to reach others with the Gospel.

Anything to do with the Temple and sacrifices simply do not apply. If for nothing else because there isn't one.

The principles taught in the Old Testament, through the Law (Adamic, Nohadic, Mosaic), still apply. How they are implemented varies. Marriage between male and female, there is just one way to implement (leaving aside polygamy) -- males pair up with female. There is only one God (yes, a triune God, outside our ability to totally comprehend, only apprehend) so no wiggle room as to worship.

"Sabbath" has different meanings in the Old Testament. In the New Testament, it does not have to be Saturday. It can be Sunday, Wednesday. All days belong to God but the principle is the dedication of a day, or substantially, to God.

The above are just a small sample.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 15, 2016 1:42 PM  

@74

"This is the same thing we see in the United Methodist Church. As the american UMC is fighting with entryists.."

My experience with the UMC, 20 yrs ago, is that the entryists have taken over. Individual churches may be exceptions but the UMC owns all property. There is no such thinbg independent UMC churches.

Have things changed?

Blogger Aeoli Pera January 15, 2016 1:54 PM  

@39 Desiderius,

It's taqiyya time for the SJWs. Then again, when isn't?

I figure you're right. SJWs seem to lack the hardware for opposing official narratives directly. They're born ladder climbers.

Blogger Aeoli Pera January 15, 2016 1:56 PM  

@74 Nate,

The fact is the african christians are hardcore gospel conservatives.

God bless 'em.

Blogger Aeoli Pera January 15, 2016 1:59 PM  

Slightly OT:

http://smbc-comics.com/index.php?id=3985

Anonymous johnc January 15, 2016 2:01 PM  

The NT is very plain about the immorality of homosexual relations. Of course Our Lord was also clear about divorce. So it's quite an irony that the entire "Church of England" was created simply because of the king wanting a divorce. It's a church built on sin, not on Our Lord.

Blogger endwatcher January 15, 2016 2:06 PM  

I agree. My statement was a knock against the actual CoE and its nearly useless archbishop

Blogger Student in Blue January 15, 2016 2:09 PM  

@78 JaimeInTexas
Have things changed?

Nope.

Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 2:20 PM  

James Dixon -

You smell of CHORFie.

"Because we said so, gosh!"

Also, if you're a follower you're doing a crap job of it.

Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 2:22 PM  

James Dixon -

Okay, that's a real answer. I'll go look up mosaic law.

Blogger Christopher Yost January 15, 2016 2:39 PM  

This link discusses how women can preach through a "coverings" argument. Found it from the Deborah stuff.

http://bibleresources.org/head-coverings/

Blogger Nate January 15, 2016 2:41 PM  

"My experience with the UMC, 20 yrs ago, is that the entryists have taken over."

No. Its the opposite. There are individual UMCs that have been lost. in fact there are two conferences (texas and california) that have been lost. The rest of the US church though is still held by Christians. And because the governing body of the church is international... and the new growth in the church is happening in asia and africa where they are hard core right bible conservatives the lefties in america simply can't go any further. The tide turned about 10 years ago... when they stopped gaining ground and now are actually losing ground.

it will take a long... long time to root out the entryists... the fight is by no means over. I'm just saying that its now an offensive struggle. Its no longer a fight to slow down the losses. Its a fight to take more ground.

Blogger darrenl January 15, 2016 2:44 PM  

Hmmmm....anyone else find it ironic that the Anglicans are disciplining the Episcopalians for marriage issues? Just me then?

Anonymous Discard January 15, 2016 2:47 PM  

Some years ago, progressive Bishop John Shelby Spong was retired after making un-Episcopalian remarks about African Christians who failed to keep up with the times. The remarks were not published, but he did apologize for them.

It's not often that I root for Africans, but this time I'm in their corner.

Blogger darrenl January 15, 2016 2:49 PM  

Hmmmm....anyone else find it ironic that the Anglicans are disciplining the Episcopalians for marriage issues? Just me then?

Anonymous VFMbot January 15, 2016 2:49 PM  

Yost, it would be beneficial to approach your topic methodically.

1. List Old Testament laws, commands, and precepts. Note whether said concepts are personal, familial, commercial, ecclesiastical, or governmental as you go.

2. Read the New Testament. Pay special attention to the many many times Jesus himself, or one of the other authors address the many times they are confronted by Jews about how they seem to be going against the OT.

3. Determine whether you buy it or not. Jews don't buy it. Christians buy it. Atheists don't get it.

Protip: Find a list of OT commands. There are more than 10 commandments. Here is a beginning point: Wikipedia 613 Commandments.

Parting advice: The big ones off the top of my head that are clearly dealt with in the NT are: dietary laws, circumcision, permitted Sabbath activities, means of proper worship, relating with you neighbors/government, means and ends of justice, division of church and state. Ones that still mystify me: clothing fibers.

Blogger RobertDWood January 15, 2016 2:51 PM  

Very helpful, I'm glad to see you hold out such high hopes for Yost's future level of Christian maturity

Blogger RobertDWood January 15, 2016 2:51 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger JaimeInTexas January 15, 2016 3:03 PM  

@88 Nate
That is good news to me. My wife grew up UMC.

Anonymous peppermint January 15, 2016 3:15 PM  

'Bishops'

What's your view on the sacramental theology of Holy Orders?

Blogger Snidely Whiplash January 15, 2016 3:22 PM  

The problem the Anglican Church has, has always had, is reconciling two very disparate impulses in it's membership. Because membership was NOT optional, it has always had a large number of people who had no particular interest in Christianity, but were there because it was the expected thing. Due to how primogeniture and inheritance worked, the Anglican priesthood became a secure living for second sons and men from respectable though impoverished families. All of which meant a very large number of semi-Christian or not-at-all Christian members and clergy.

All of which has been revolted against time and again, hence the Puritan, Quaker, Methodist, Presbyterian, and many others groups of actual Christians who left the Anglican Church.

Anonymous Noah Nehm January 15, 2016 4:09 PM  

Markku,

You might enjoy Rod Bennetts talk on the church fathers:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lsIoiWO96JI

Anonymous Desiderius January 15, 2016 4:45 PM  

CY,

"Anyone else actually able to converse-"

Able, just not particularly willing.

Sort of like your questions, and your evident faith, or lack thereof.

The Lord of Lies too can make any number of well-intentioned Christians dance around like puppets on a string, yet he is powerless to create anything new, as that is a gift of the Father to those is His image.

Do you seek to share in that impotent powerlessness?

Anonymous Desiderius January 15, 2016 4:49 PM  

"Due to how primogeniture and inheritance worked, the Anglican priesthood became a secure living for second sons and men from respectable though impoverished families."

And not just Anglicans. Thanks to Fred Jaffe and his fellow travelers, there are a lot less second sons running around. Many of the present discontents in the West flow from that fact.

Blogger SirHamster January 15, 2016 4:49 PM  

Also, if you're a follower you're doing a crap job of it.

Considering your lack of knowledge on the subject of what it means to follow Christ, what makes you think you're able to judge how well someone is following Christ?

Your stance is inconsistent with honest questioning, though I see many are willing to answer your questions regardless.

Anonymous Desiderius January 15, 2016 4:52 PM  

Nate,

"the new growth in the church is happening in asia and africa where they are hard core right bible conservatives"

Another reason to keep them there instead of importing them here, where there is greater danger of corruption.

Blogger SirHamster January 15, 2016 4:55 PM  

Another reason to keep them there instead of importing them here, where there is greater danger of corruption.

We should take their missionaries without giving them citizenship.

Anonymous Be Not Afraid January 15, 2016 5:18 PM  

On the UMC: Membership continues its decline, probably both from people not professing faith and people disgusted with the largely liberal leadership. I'm expecting real fireworks over SSM during the General Conference in the Peoples' Republic of Portland later this year. The SSM crowd will NEVER give up, and I suppose they'll win there or eventually, or the church will break apart. I am a Methodist and am thinking of leaving the church due to the lack of any obvious conservative congregations in my area; but what are the other choices for a Protestant these days?

Blogger weka January 15, 2016 6:21 PM  

@104.
Think Crunchy. I will argue by analogy.
The Crunchy Catholics attend Latin Mass and keep the ancient disciplines.
The Crunchy Orthodox keep the fasts and the disciplines and the holy days.
The crunchy Reformed are in the small congregations that refuse to amplify the music or have women elders.
The crunchy Arminists are tending towards the more established New churches (what a friend calls "pentecostalism with a seat belt") where the rules for governance are taken from scripture.
Leave the fashionable congregations, the ones praised by the elite, well alone.

Other tells.

-- how many babies and young people are there?
-- is it run by a bloke who believes?
-- is it growing or shrinking?

Denominations are no longer useful indicators of theological integrity, congregational discipline, or spiritual life. I'm expecting the NZ methodists to die fairly soon, for they have fallen to the campaigns of those who follow the agenda of this world. I have some hope for the Presbyterians, little for the local Anglicans, and I worry about by Catholic friends, for the local bishops and cardinal are, to a man, spineless.

But that which does not remain united with Christ will die. The Unitarians and shakers are but the most recent warning.

Anonymous MendoScot January 15, 2016 7:22 PM  

"Why do you send missionaries to us? We should be sending them to you.”
Malaysian Christian to me, 30 years ago.

Anonymous ALice De Goon January 15, 2016 8:19 PM  

@Christopher Yost

Honest question -

Wouldn't/couldn't the acceptance of gays be seen simply as further changes that Christianity has been experiencing since its birth?


Here's another honest question: If you remove "ability to naturally reproduce together" as a factor determining the validity of a marriage, then why should you care about any other factors? Why can't three or more people enter into a marriage? If 6 men wanted to enter into some kind of gay marriage gestalt and force the employer of the one who has the best insurance to cover every partner in the household, would you object to that?

(And don't tell me "B-b-b-b-ut infertile couple who can't have children get married all of the time!" Infertile couples still perform gender roles. There's still an exchange of the attributes innate of each gender going on between the couple - they are still completing each other spiritually, even if they can't have children.)

Blogger x January 15, 2016 8:23 PM  

This comment has been removed by the author.

Blogger Jeffrey Quick January 15, 2016 8:24 PM  

Reading the various responses from TEC. I was struck by their pride… not the “let’s have a parade!” kind but the “non serviam” kind. They really think that they are more capable of deciding good and evil than Scripture, Tradition, their own communion or even God Himself.

Blogger x January 15, 2016 8:30 PM  

Openly gay clergy, can it work? Is it a benefit to the religion? My first thought is this looks like the wholesale open swallowing of cultural Marxism. Of course there is a healthy dose of cultural Marxism in large successful mega churches but it is denied to exist. Hypocrisy is the life blood of religion, removing all hypocrisy will kill a religion deader than fried chicken. I can only see terminal decline for the Episcopal Church as they focus homosexuality, same-sex marriage and discourage fertility of their women.

The Holy Roman Catholic Church successfully used gay clergy, you know unmarried men only. From 400 to 1200 AD the Church reigned largely internally unchallenged. It repelled repeated Muslim invasions into Europe. It tamed the barbarian tribes of Europe, something the Roman Empire never could do. If you count the churches collusion with the Spanish and Portuguese Empires that would include Central America, South America, parts of Africa and the Philippines.

The fastest spreading religion in history now is Pentecostalism. You have to count the explosive growth in Africa, Asia and Latin America. Straight marriage and children are a focus.
Gay men’s brains are wired like women’s and have even more cross hemispherical connections, they are naturally adept at socially manipulation even more so than women. It is forbidden in the Bible, to be gay, no argument there.

All kinds of things are mentioned in the Bible but are not useful dogmas so not even considered. Biblical interpretations are always changing over time, that’s why Christianity has had such a long success, it’s very adaptable. With the chain reference bible study method, you can say virtually anything you want.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thompson_Chain-Reference_Bible

Anonymous AhVery January 15, 2016 9:01 PM  

Evil bishops? For allowing gay marriage within the Christian church? I had no idea it took so little to be considered a paragon of malice. Such a paltry complaint, you need focus.

Blogger The Hammer January 15, 2016 10:10 PM  

Nate,

That is encouraging to hear about the UMC.

On the OT laws, I would contend that the first Christians didn't see the Mosaic Covenant as ended. Jewish believers were still to keep it out of covenant obligation (see Acts 21 - which should be the controlling factor in how we read Paul).

Notice an implication too of the command against idols in the Apostolic decree for Gentiles in Acts 15. This would include abstaining from pagan holidays. The only calendar option available to the Gentile believers then would be the Jewish ones, though not out of covenant obligation like a Jew (many would've also have already been participating in the holidays anyway because many of the first Gentile converts in a city were "God-Fearers" already a part of the local synagogue community).

It's an unfortunate development of history that the church lost this voluntary and willing participation in the Jewish holidays (and the antagonistic re-dating of Easter out of sync with Jewish Passover most of all).

Blogger Snidely Whiplash January 16, 2016 12:56 AM  

@111 AhVery
Evil bishops? For allowing gay marriage within the Christian church?

1) No, for denying Christ

2) Shut up Tad.

Anonymous Discard January 16, 2016 2:36 AM  

104. BeNotAfraid: Try an Anglican Church. It might be a good fit for a Methodist. By "Anglican" I mean the former Episcopalians who refused to accept the sacrament of sodomy. The churches often have no property and rent space for their services, and the two priests I've met have day jobs.

Blogger James Dixon January 16, 2016 5:22 AM  

> : Try an Anglican Church. It might be a good fit for a Methodist. By "Anglican" I mean the former Episcopalians who refused to accept the sacrament of sodomy.

Preferably one that uses the 1928 or older Prayer Book.

Anonymous jdgalt January 16, 2016 3:58 PM  

I predict that the Episcopals immediately secede rather than put up with the punishment. This is probably the best solution for both sides, even though it is not the surrender the conservatives want.

I also predict that the conservative Anglicans will find plenty of local groups defecting back to them in places like Texas -- while plenty will do the opposite in other countries, especially the UK itself.

Blogger Halifax Donair January 16, 2016 11:43 PM  

@8 St. Thomas the Apostle Church, amirite?

Anonymous Alan J. Perrick January 21, 2016 2:53 AM  

1928 Book of Common Prayer is the one to go with.

A.J.P.

Post a Comment

Rules of the blog
Please do not comment as "Anonymous". Comments by "Anonymous" will be spammed.

<< Home

Newer Posts Older Posts