Sunday, June 21, 2009

"New U.S. Anglicans launch, to ban women, gays as bishops"


*Who Would Jesus Ban?
[As reported by Cathy Grossman in today's USA Today:]

Hundreds of formerly Episcopal parishes are meeting this week to unify as a new national church: the Anglican Church in North America.

Organizers, led by former Episcopal Bishop of Pittsburgh Robert Duncan, expect 300 delegates, including 50 bishops, in Bedford, Texas, for a three-day gathering that begins Monday.

The group is scheduled to adopt church laws that will exclude women and homosexuals as bishops. It also is expected to elect and install Duncan as archbishop.

The new group, which says it represents 100,000 believers, calls itself a province, echoing the language of the worldwide Anglican Communion, the third largest Christian denomination. The Anglican Communion is a loosely governed collection of 38 regional and national churches, including the 2.1-million-member U.S. branch, the Episcopal Church, and the Anglican Church of Canada. However, it may take years for the new group to be recognized as a member of the Communion.


Great launch -- doncha think? When the headline is about who's being banned from what?


uffda51 said...

Duncan: "If you see the love of Jesus in us, you will join."

I do not see the love of Jesus in these people.

Unknown said...

Why don't they just do what they really want to do and exclude everyone who isn't free, white, and Southern?

Neil Houghton said...

Sorry, John, but Louie Crew might take exception.... :-)

Silly, silly people. It's like a Monty Python sketch.

LGMarshall said...

Praise the Lord! It's been way too long in coming.... but now Anglican / Episcopal believers will have a church where they can remain in Obedience to the Lord. They will be able to worship the Lord in full communion with fellow believers and not have to look over their shoulders constantly in fear of ridicule and condemnation by non-beleivers.

Bishop KJS prayers have been answered...the pantheists, friends of abortion and same-genital couples can have TEC all to themselves.

Re 'excluding' women & homosexual bishops from serving in Anglican Church in N. America, isn't that a moot point? I don't see (any) clamoring for leadership roles in ACNA. (It is wrong though -- to hurt any ones feelings on this matter.)

uffda51 said...

What will be the difference between this new "Anglican Church in North America" and Rick Warren's church, other than vestments?

WilliamK said...

What will be the difference between this new "Anglican Church in North America" and Rick Warren's church, other than vestments?

An excellent question! I have read critics of the "inclusive"(*) direction of the Episcopal Church say that we are turning into "the United Church of Christ with bishops." I think that assertion is nonsense... but it does appear to me that much of the new ACNA is simply the Southern Baptist Convention with bishops.

(*) I must confess that I am coming to dislike this word because I don't think it accurately references TEC's commitment to the Gospel, as if we were practicing "inclusion" for the sake of "inclusion" rather than for the sake of the Gospel.

KJ said...

i should not take LG's bait, and I hope his/her comments are parody, but just in case they are not... To assume that TEC is devoid of "believers" is extreme arrogance. Howevever, as James points out, "even devils believe," so perhaps in your comment, you have inadvertently complemented those whom you wish to belittle while condemning yourself, and I don't think that I can do any better.

And, I trust that if your have a relationship with another, LG, that it is more than just "opposite-genital." If it is not, then I pity your "other." If your relationship is more than that, then I cannot understand your belittling the relationships of others. You might want to review for whom Jesus saved such snarkiness.


For the record -- and as the comment guidelines state -- there is no censorship on perspectives here in Comment Land ... just on personal attacks and those who are too lazy to set up their own blog and want to use the comment page as a place to post their favorite articles or sermons.

That said, LG's perspective is one that is -- in my mind -- sadly held by a significant percentage of our brothers and sisters in Christ. We owe it to ourselves -- and to the Gospel we proclaim -- to [1] recognize that and [2] equip ourselves to rebut it.

Jim said...

Of course Anglicans have such places and always have. Two are the Aglican Church of Canada and The Episcopal Church (USA.) Nothing has changed and nothing much will change.

ACNA can posture but it wont be a province in any real sense. ACC, Lambeth, Canterbury recognition and Primate Meeting membership will all be beyond its (every over reaching) grasp.

The former bishops of AC Canada and TEC who persist in the fantasy are going to be pretty irrelevant. They are now a lot more frogs than the pond needs.

I think AMiA really erred in tossing itself in with this lot. AMiA least were a growing going concern and Bp. Murphy had largely led them into their own space where hostility to TEC was not their raison d'être.

It is interesting to look at the Southern Baptist Convention's mulling over its (significant) losses. Doctrinal purity does not seem to pay off anywhere.


Pat Klemme said...

I know I'm blowing smoke here, but I can't help but congratulate ACNA for their new apparent inclusion of women and gays in Holy Orders except for bishops. What a progressive step forward! (The Fourth Estate's inability to grasp the finer points of Anglicanism never fails to amuse me.)