Showing posts with label I'm an Anglican and I'm not okay.... Show all posts
Showing posts with label I'm an Anglican and I'm not okay.... Show all posts

Friday, 27 November 2009

Anglicans Must Change or Die

Sobering words by Steve Weatherbe of canadianchristianity.com. His article focuses on the Diocese of British Columbia's development director, the Rev. Dr. Gary Nicolosi, who calls for the Vancouver Island Anglican diocese to encourage growth by requiring
50 percent of rental incomes be spent on evangelization; by rewarding clergy with higher salaries and more holidays; by training those that don’t grow their parishes – and, if necessary, move them to non-leadership positions, or out of the ministry entirely.
It's not just a BC problem. It's an Anglican Church of Canada, Diocese of Calgary, StB and my problem, too. Lord, have mercy.

All here.

Saturday, 30 May 2009

Shame! The Diocese of Niagara Sues Individual Laypeople

See here.

See how these Christians love one another.

Yet another thing that makes it more difficult for people in parish ministry to promote the Anglican Church of Canada as being a good place to put down roots and learn to follow Jesus. Why would anyone, especially anyone starting out, want to do so in an organization that does this, or allows it to be done, to people who disagree with it?

Monday, 30 March 2009

Melanie Phillips on the Resignation of Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali, the Church, Multiculturalism and Secularism

Melanie Phillips, columnist for The Daily Mail, calls the resignation of Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester, a "terrible blow." Here's why:
Dr Nazir-Ali is one of the very few inside the church to make explicit the link between Christian and British values, and to warn publicly that they are being destroyed through the prevailing doctrine of multiculturalism.

That strong voice of protest has never been needed more than it is now. For Christianity in Britain is under attack from all sides.
And I wonder about the lack of episcopal voices making explicit the link there ought to be between Christian and Canadian values and the influence of our own increasingly doctrinaire brand of multiculturalism.

Although the anti-Christian onslaught is more advanced in Britain than in Canada, we are well on our way. She goes on:
Take for example the proposal by a regular churchgoer that the churches should ring their bells on St George’s Day, to proclaim that the Christian element of English identity is in robust health.

Only five out of the church’s 44 bishops back the plan while the rest have scuttled for cover. The Bishop of Chester frets about the danger of such ‘public displays’ of confidence, while the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds murmurs faintly: ‘I am not sure assertiveness is a Christian value.’

Such cultural cringe would be comical were it not so tragic. For this is precisely how the church has all but destroyed itself. Instead of asserting its core beliefs against aggressive secularism, it has tried to accommodate its own destroyer.

As a result, it stopped doing God and spirituality and holding the line for Biblical values and mutated instead into a branch of nonjudgmental social work — a kind of Guardian newspaper at prayer. The resulting moral vacuum now threatens not just the church but the nation itself.

Although most people may no longer be churchgoers, Christianity infuses all this country’s institutions, traditions and values.

These have been systematically attacked by a secular culture of unlimited self-indulgence and self-destructive behaviour, resulting in the collapse of the married family, rising crime, drug and alcohol abuse and a grievous erosion of the sanctity of human life.
Canadian Anglican bishops seem to be no different and the Anglican Church of Canada continues its inexorable slide to accommodate the spirit of our age.

The only episcopal voice I hear making any reasonably assertive effort to hold the line for Biblical values in the public arena is Fred Henry, Roman Catholic Bishop of Calgary. God bless him.

Thursday, 19 March 2009

On "Here I Stand, I Can Do No Other"

I follow Mark Driscoll's blog over at The Resurgence. He's been doing a series on various theological topics…short pieces from a reformed Calvinist perspective. Martin Luther is the subject of today's post. Driscoll quotes Luther's response when he was called upon to recant his reformed views:
Unless I can be instructed and convinced with evidence from the Holy Scriptures or with open, clear, and distinct grounds of reasoning . . . then I cannot and will not recant, because it is neither safe nor wise to act against conscience. Here I stand. I can do no other. God help me! Amen.
That would be my challenge to Anglican leaders who are advocating doctrinal revision around the authority of Scripture and sexuality: instruct and convince me with evidence from the Holy Scriptures or with open, clear and distinct grounds of reasoning.


Instead, the tools of Anglican instruction and convincing I read about are changed locks, lifted licences, punitive litigation,  and name-calling.

God help us, indeed.

Wednesday, 24 December 2008

Pope's Remarks on Sexuality will widen Anglican rift: a No-Bull Christmas Message

I found a thought provoking comparison of the clarity of Catholic and Anglican expression in a piece by Andrew Pierce in The Telegraph entitled, "Pope's remarks on sexuality 'will widen Anglican rift.'"…
Rev Geoffrey Kirk, a vicar in south London who is general secretary of the traditionalist Forward in Faith organisation, said: "It should not be a surprise that the Pope is a catholic and makes clear statements supporting catholic teaching.

"If there is confusion about what he said it is not because he is not clear - it will be because people chose not to listen to what he said. If there is confusion about what Rowan Williams says it is because he is not clear. We are in such a mess in the Anglican church, clarity on sexual morality is now impossible."

Rev Kirk said that even though the remarks of the Pope would increase pressure on the Archbishop to clear up the confusion he expected no movement. "Rowan will not be any clearer on the issue," he said. "He is an Anglican."
One of the things I admire about Pope Benedict is that he is a "no-bull" Pope—he says what he believes and what he means clearly. While I appreciate Anglicanism's breadth, many of our North American leaders go too far in compromising Biblical clarity with Anglican smoke and mirrors.

Read the whole article here. H/T Anglican Mainstream.

Thursday, 6 November 2008

On Smells and Bells

On the one hand, something that makes my heart sing from Matt Kennedy over at Stand Firm (in a post on the use of incense in worship):
we embrace the essential biblical truths recovered during the Reformation...

1. Sola Scriptura--the bible is the sole infallible source of revelation, the primary authority in the church by which all doctrine and discipline must be tested and measured.

2. Sola Fide--sinners are justified through the instrument of faith alone

3. Sola Christi--Christ's righteousness, sacrifice, and mediation is the sole basis or grounding for the justification that is communicated to sinner by faith alone.

4. Sola Gratia--the whole arch of salvation, from beginning to end, is due to and grounded in the free gracious gift of God and for no merit or deserving on our part.

5. Soli Deo Gloria--God's purpose in Creation, Judgment and Redemption is ultimately his own glory.
Therein lies our hope, our future and our salvation.

A pleasing Aroma

And speaking of "smells," I've always enjoyed it although I've discovered you need a high ceiling in your sanctuary. We tried it one Christmas Eve in the low-ceilinged St Francis in Airdrie, Alberta. One of the acolytes fainted dead away in the blue, sweet smelling haze. Flat on her face. Talk about being slain in the Spirit.

More from Matt on the sweet "smells" issue here.

A Less Pleasant Odour and Yet Another Warning Bell

(H/T The Essentials Blog)

The Globe and Mail is reporting that the Bishop of Montreal intends to proceed with same sex blessing despite the recent House of Bishops decision.

Why is it that we only seem to hear from the liberal revisionist bishops in the media? I wonder why our conservative bishops are so quiet? Faithful Anglicans who are trying to stand for Biblical orthodoxy within the ACoC need to hear some encouragement from their episcopal leaders. We need to hear something Biblical and clear and firm to counter the bland, nuanced, official Anglicanese which always tries to say yes and no at the same time and which, therefore, ends up saying nothing definite at all. And we need to hear it from the bishops within the institution otherwise it seems as if it's only the Southern Cone or the Global South bishops who are concerned about what is happening to our church.

When those who are silent seem to consent, it's hard for us in the trenches not to be discouraged as the mud gets deeper and the stench increases.

Monday, 22 September 2008

Of Schism, Heresy, Duncan, Spong and Thoroughly Modern Bishops

Joe Walker…

asks an interesting question over at his excellent felix hominem:
If I wake up in the morning to discover that, say, bishop Robert Duncan has been deposed for veering toward ecclesiastical realignment, but that bishop John Spong remains in good standing despite veering toward theological realignment, what should I think?  To put it bluntly, let us say, just pretend now, that the former is veering toward schism, while the latter is veering toward heresy.  I am sure the Episcopal Church has its excellent reasons for proceeding as it does, but to simple folk like myself it looks like a rather selective double standard.  
It does to me, too. Read it all, illuminated by the ancient and wise writings of St Cyprian, here.

The reason for this double standard and this fine mess?

Harald Haugan, in "Rebellion and the House of Bishops," an As Eye See It piece over at VirtueOnline, reckons this is the problem:
There are two kinds of bishops in the Episcopal Church, biblical bishops and secularly modernized bishops. The first have a personal relationship with Jesus and believe in the authority of Scripture. The second compromise with secularized thinking and standards reinterpreting Scripture to accommodate contemporary culture. The first are in the minority.

Modernized bishops have arrived through the present world's methodology of corporate career advancement. They would bristle at being accused in such a way but Scripture is clear when Jesus says you are either for Him or against Him. Biblical bishops do not question the authority of Scripture or attempt to reinterpret it. They know the injunction not to add or subtract from it.

These two groups live in two entirely different worlds, two different mindsets, with two totally conflicting beliefs and missions.  
We have the same kinds of bishops and the same mess in Canada although, I am happy to say, my bishop is one of the first kind. Read the rest of Haugan's piece here.

Is it just me? Or…

was St Paul addressing something very similar when he wrote:
For if someone comes and proclaims another Jesus than the one we proclaimed, or if you receive a different spirit from the one you received, or if you accept a different gospel from the one you accepted, you put up with it readily enough. (2 Cor 11.4, ESV)
Is that what we're doing by accepting and not challenging the leading of thoroughly modern bishops…too readily putting up with another Jesus, a different spirit, a different gospel?

And could these thoroughly modern bishops really be…

false apostles, deceitful workmen, disguising themselves as apostles of Christ. And no wonder, for even Satan disguises himself as an angel of light. So it is no surprise if his servants, also, disguise themselves as servants of righteousness. (2 Cor 11.13-15, ESV)
Servants of Satan? Strong words. I think not, at least not intentionally. And yet the enemy so often tempts us with, "Did God really mean that? Come, be reasonable. Be tolerant. Do the 'loving' thing."

Wednesday, 3 September 2008

Canadian Primate and Bishops Respond to Lambeth Moratorium Call

Our Primate and some Bishops have responded to the Lambeth moratorium call (no more same-sex blessings, no more actively homosexual bishops, no more cross-border interventions) in a piece from The Journal. Not surprisingly, Bishop Michael Ingham, is among them.
Bishop Michael Ingham, whose diocese – New Westminster – voted to allow same-sex blessings in 2002, reacted strongly to the WCG’s proposals, describing it as “an old-world institutional response to a new-world reality in which people are being set free from hatred and violence.”

Bishop Ingham said that if the proposal for a moratorium on same-sex blessings is adopted, “it will put the Anglican Church of Canada in the position of having to support and defend irrational prejudice and bigotry in the eyes of our nation.”
Notice how Ingham insinuates that we who do not believe that the Holy Spirit is leading the church in this direction are not only keeping homosexual people mired in hatred and violence but are irrationaly prejudiced bigots. I find that offensive.

George Elliott, suffragan bishop of Toronto (York-Simcoe), had this to say,
“I don’t think there’s a going back. I think there are ways in which we can perhaps slow down or continue to consider what a moratorium might be. But I don’t think it’s possible to go back. I don’t think it’s fair to go back.” He said that dioceses that have moved ahead “and done it faithfully,” have done it in the context of Canadian church polity. “It would be absolutely devastating to even think about moving back to where we were before.”
In other words, the context of Canadian church polity trumps Scriptural, traditional and reasonable theological contexts.

Bishop Victoria Matthews of the Windsor Continuation Group and the new Bishop of Christchurch, New Zelaand, sums it up well,
“I don’t think they actually mean ‘can’t,’ I think they actually mean ‘won’t,” she said. “It’s not physically impossible to change that. I can understand if they say they don’t want to.”
It's all here.

Saturday, 9 August 2008

Lambeth Aftermath, Purple-shirted, Flatulence, Schism is Better than Heresy and the Future

"Purple-shirted Flatulence: Schism is Better than Heresy" is the arresting title of an article which is an excellent summary of where we find ourselves after Lambeth 2008 and how we got here. Mark Dawes, The Jamaica Gleaner News religion editor, gets The Windsor Report and how it plays in Anglicanism right:
The Windsor Report served to invoke a charge not uncommonly laid against Anglican ethos. The charge was that the report did not go far enough and that the Anglican communion was sacrificing biblical truth to preserve unity. Indeed, there is a saying that Anglicans prefer to accommodate heresy within their ranks rather than have a schism.
He also gets it right on the opposing views of biblical authority:
The problem posed by homosexuality to the Anglican church was theological long before it became organisational. For the conservative Anglican, the Bible is inspired and, therefore, authoritative for faith and practice. For liberals, the Bible is inspiring, like good Shakespearean writings, and listening to Mozart or Marley.
Finally, 
The Anglican church has had five years to deal with homosexuality among clergy and the blessing of same-sex unions. Collectively, the church has lacked courage to take the hard decision that beckons. There have been enough conferences, councils and purple-shirted flatulence on the issue of homosexuality. If a person can find where the Bible sanctions homosexuality he/she should be recruited by George W. Bush to find bin Laden. Anglicans have lost enough time on the issue of homosexuality. The two opposing views on homosexuality are incompatible. There is no middle ground. There has been enough talk. There comes a time when schism is far better than heresy.
Read it all here: Jamaica Gleaner News - Purple-shirted flatulence: Schism is better than heresy - Saturday | August 9, 2008. H/T Stand Firm.

Dawes is right. Anglican leaders, whether for the sake of not excluding anyone, or because they were ignorant or in denial of the depth of the divide that has formed, have avoided coming to a resolution on the issue that faces us. Instead, for fear of offending anyone, they have remained silent, or opted for endless "dialogue," while all the while, in the case of the Anglican Church of Canada, simply declaring that this is not a communion-breaking issue which they must think will just make it all go away.

What that and Lambeth 2008 have brought us to is summed up by Stand Firm's, Sarah Hey:
The end result of the Lambeth Conference is that it leaves the revisionists with zero consequences as of yet from the international communion. And with ten years before another Lambeth Conference.
...from her excellent no-tell-us-what-you-really-think summation of it all here.

And so the US Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada will continue on their present course. Victoria Matthews, former Bishop of Edmonton, now Bishop of Christchurch in God'sOwnCountry (New Zealand), is a member of the Windsor Continuation Group comments:
Regarding the difficulty of the Canadian and US churches in stepping back from their approval of same-sex unions, she told the Anglican Journal, "I don't think they actually mean 'can't', I think they actually mean 'won't'."
...from Jim Coggins at canadianchristianity.com here

Saturday, 12 July 2008

O for a Canadian Conservative Episcopal Voice

Yesterday I read a letter Roman Catholic Bishop of Calgary, Fred Henry, wrote to Alberta's Premier, Ed Stelmach, on abuses being perpetrated by the Alberta and other Human Rights Commissions across the country. It is a good, clear, courteous, but firm, letter. You can read it here.

O, how I wish there was such a conservative Anglican Church of Canada bishop who would speak out as clearly on such matters and who would counterbalance and challenge the influence and effect of the writings, statements and actions of the bishops, dioceses and provinces who are promoting theological liberalism.

Tuesday, 27 May 2008

Another Bulkhead Gives Way: The Diocese of Huron and Wisdom from JI Packer

Another bulkhead has just given way in His Majesty's Ship, The Anglican Church of Canada, namely the Diocese of Huron (see here). We settle even lower in the water. I expect to hear the band playing "Abide With Me" at any moment. More lifeboats are being swung out. Some have already left.

A lucid and timely reminder of what we need to keep us faithfully afloat from JI Packer:
CHRISTIANITY, the faith of the patristic creeds and Reformation confessions (of which the 39 Articles, historically and theologically, form one), rests on the authoritative truth of biblical teaching. Nothing un- or anti-biblical may be received as a standard of faith and practice.

ANGLICANISM, the English version of reformed Christianity, now internationalized in the worldwide Anglican Communion, is Trinitarian, incarnational and Christocentric; liturgical, pastoral and educational; gospel-focused, holiness-oriented and continuity-conscious. It rests on an explicit estimate of the canonical Scriptures as "God's Word written," which as such is sufficient for salvation (Article 6), a unity of gospel instruction (Article 7), the final authority for belief within the Christian fellowship (Articles 8, 20-22, etc.), and coherent throughout, so that as "it is not lawful for the church to ordain anything that is contrary to God's Word written," as "neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another" (Article 20).

THE ANGLICAN CHURCH OF CANADA (ACC) is constitutionally based on the Solemn Declaration of 1893, which expresses the intention that "this church...shall continue in full communion with the Church of England throughout the world," maintaining the "Doctrine, Sacraments and Discipline of Christ as the Lord hath commanded in his holy Word, and as the Church of England has received and set forth the same" in the Book of Common Prayer, including the Ordinal and the 39 Articles; and the determination to "transmit the same unimpaired to our posterity."
…over at VirtueOnline here.

Friday, 18 January 2008

The Painted Veil

A flick worth a look. From a Somerset Maugham novel. In which was this exchange:
MOTHER SUPERIOR: So tell me Mrs Fane, to which faith do you subscribe?

KITTY FANE: (Choke) Excuse me. We attend services...not religiously, ah, regularly. You could say I'm a member of the Church of England.

MOTHER SUPERIOR: Which is an inoffensive way of saying you don't quite believe in anything much.
...and as the "progressives" warm to their tasks, we seem to be not quite believing in less and less these days.
And even if our gospel is veiled...(2 Cor 4.3)

Monday, 9 July 2007

Thoughts on the Global South

I finally got around to reading a piece in my "Read & Review" file. It comes from something called the Pew Forum's biannual Faith Angle Conference on religion, politics and public life which took place in May. Some leading US journalists spoke to Philip Jenkins, Distinguished Professor of Religious Studies and History at Pennsylvania State University. As the event transcript states, he is
one of the first scholars to call attention to the rising demographic power of Christians in the southern hemisphere, analyzed the ongoing schism in the worldwide Anglican church. While the dispute concerns attitudes toward homosexuality, Jenkins argues the core of the conflict lies in how biblical authority is defined.
A couple of things Jenkins says caught my eye:
back in 1900, Africa had 10 million Christians representing 10 percent of the population; by 2000, that was up 360 million, to 46 percent of the population. That is the largest quantitative change that has ever occurred in the history of religion. A rising tide lifts all boats, and all denominations have been booming. The Anglicans have done very well, and the Anglican Church is going to be overwhelmingly an African body in the near future.
Everything I say here is going to happen in Canada before it happens in the U.S. If a church is going to be thrown out of the Anglican Communion, it'll be Canada on a Tuesday and the U.S. on a Wednesday. That's almost the stage Akinola's moved to. It's been surprising how many moderately conservative folks have gone along with that idea. There's a British bishop called Nazir-Ali, interesting story in his own right: the son of a Shiite family. Bishop Nazir-Ali has said, "Of course the Communion's going to split; if you have two different religions within the same church, the situation can't go on forever." Saying that ECUSA represents a different religion is pretty tough talk.

Thursday, 28 June 2007

It's quiet out there

Back home after General Synod 2007. Resting and wondering. Things have gone quiet in the Blogosphere as I write.

In the meantime, the latest Anglican Essentials Report has reponses from both the Federation and the Network:
A Message from the Anglican Essentials Federation…
Canadian Anglicans have been left trying to grasp all the implications of passing a motion declaring the blessing of same-sex relationships as “not in conflict” with Anglican doctrine – while, at the same time, rejecting the “local options” motion. Within that tension, we now await the response of the rest of our Communion and will be looking to the Communion for guidance in the work of answering the many questions this Synod has raised but not clearly answered.

The Federation gratefully acknowledges the bishops who gave leadership in these crucial debates – as well as the delegates who bravely championed orthodox views.

Please see our website for more information about Federation: www.anglicanfederation.ca

A Message from the Anglican Network in Canada…
Conflicting decisions of General Synod have once again caused confusion among Canadian Anglicans. By declaring that same sex blessings are not in conflict with Anglican core doctrine, while not proceeding with the explicit authorization of same sex blessings on a local option, many have been left wondering what it all means. Despite the news headlines, the Network believes the Anglican Church of Canada did NOT close the door on same sex blessings at General Synod but, in fact, opened the (doctrinal) side door for these blessings.

In addition to the above, by overwhelmingly refusing to take the steps specifically requested by the Primates, they have failed to repair the bonds of communion with the global church. In light of the Dromantine and Dar es Salaam Communiqués, we believe the Primates will see these actions as a clear indication that the Anglican Church of Canada has chosen to “walk apart”.

We are committed to remaining in full communion with the overwhelming majority of global Anglicans, who are, like us, committed to historic, biblically-faithful Anglicanism. We look forward to the response of the Primates to clarify what has happened and will be consulting with our membership regarding the best way forward in light of these decisions.

Please see our website for more information about Network: www.anglicannetwork.ca
It's quiet out there...too quiet?

Tuesday, 14 February 2006

Anglicans in The Da Vinci Code

I'm reading The Da Vinci Code (finally) and more on it later. In the meantime, a quote from one of Brown's characters, Leigh Teabing on Anglicans:
Anglicans drink their religion straight. Nothing to distract from their misery. 
Things that make me go, "Hmmm."