Exclusives : GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings
GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings
By David W. Virtue and Michael Heidt
www.virtueonline.org
7/14/2009
In another potentially communion breaking legislative session, the House of Bishop's met this morning to discuss resolution C056, which endorses same sex unions and rituals to bless them. The resolution goes on to invite the wider Anglican Communion into this process.
C056 resolves that the "Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishop's Theology Committee, collect and develop theological resources and liturgies of blessing for same gender holy unions" for presentation at the 77th General Convention. It also states that "all bishops... may provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this Church."
The final resolve invites the Anglican Consultative Council, and other desirous bodies of the Anglican Communion, to engage in the development of these rites. An amendment to the resolution by Bishop Don E. Johnston of West Tennessee states:
"that the 76th General Convention invites the Anglican Consultative Council into conversation regarding this resolution and the work that proceeds from it" and, "notes that similar work is presently being carried out in other Provinces, dioceses and churches of the Anglican Communion and invites these bodies to engage and share in the work of The Episcopal Church." The invitation extends to, "all provinces, dioceses, and churches of the Anglican... to engage and contribute to this work, as they may be moved and desire so to do."
This "work" is not prescriptive, with the fourth resolve stating that "no bishop or other member of the clergy shall be compelled to authorize or officiate at such liturgies..." After Alabama Bishop Henry Parsley's minority report was defeated because of its limiting effect on the blessings in question, the third resolve was amended to include "clergy" who will "provide generous pastoral response" as authorized by their bishops.
A further amendment, limiting the scope of developing new same sex rituals was defeated. Bishop Bill Love (Albany) sought clarification as to whether clergy were under the direction of their bishop and would they need the bishop's approval and what would happen if the bishop chose not to give that permission. Jefferts Schori said, "the bishop is the ordinary."
Another bishop observed that this looked more and more like the tyranny of the majority.
Bishop Peter Beckwith of Springfield rose in opposition to the whole matter. "Why waste my time and your time...is it casting a pearl before swine thing. This is another clear instance that we are allowing our church to be shaped by the secular culture rather than pursuing our God given mission in pursing the secular culture."
Bishop Stacy Sauls of Lexington said the church allowed divorced persons as a concession to human frailty. "It is time for the church be liberated from hypocrisy under which it has been operating about our gay brothers and sisters. Divorce contradicted sexual ethics. Our gay and lesbian members don't think much about what other Anglicans around the world think. The Nigerians are our most ardent critic. The Scribes and the Pharisees tied people up in burdens..."
Bishop Beckwith then requested the resolution be approved by a roll call vote, which would ensure voting on it is public and recorded. This was passed and the House went into recess. C056 is now scheduled for consideration tomorrow afternoon; if it passes through the House of Bishops it will move to the House of Deputies for adoption. Not all bishops were in favor of C056.
*****
The un-amended text of the resolution follows below: July 14, 2009 Resolved, the House of Deputies concurring, that the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops Theology Committee, collect and develop theological resources and liturgies of blessing for same-gender holy unions, to be presented to the 77th General Convention for formal consideration, and be it further Resolved, that the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music, in consultation with the House of Bishops Theology Committee, devise an open process for the conduct of its work in this matter, inviting participation from dioceses, congregations, and individuals who are or have already engaged in the study or design of such rites throughout the Anglican Communion, and be it further Resolved, that all bishops, noting particularly those in dioceses within civil jurisdictions where same-gender marriage, civil unions, or domestic partnerships are legal, may provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this Church; and be it further Resolved, that honoring the theological diversity of this Church, no bishop or other member of the clergy shall be compelled to authorize or officiate at such liturgies, and be it further Resolved, that the Anglican Consultative Council be invited to conversation regarding this resolution and the work that proceeds from it, together with other churches in the Anglican Communion engaged in similar processes.
Minority report from Bishop Henry N. Parsley: I offer the minority opinion that in the 3rd resolve the substitute should read, "Resolved, that in dioceses within civil jurisdictions where same gender marriage or civil unions are legal, the bishop may provide a generous pastoral response to meet the needs of the members of this church."
Explanation: This language focuses on the six states where same gender marriage or civil unions are legal which I believe to be our correct focus at this time.
+ Henry Parsley (Diocesan Bishop,Alabama)
END
The comments are owned by the poster. We aren't responsible for their content.
| Poster | Thread |
|---|---|
| daveball | Posted: 2009/7/15 1:21 Updated: 2009/7/15 1:21 |
Home away from home   Joined: 2004/12/18 From: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 2716 |
 Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex BlessingsLooks like Vickey Gene is well on the way to having his "Gay Church".
This is about as disgusting as it gets - a queer feeding frenzy. What's next? Blessings for pedophiles? Blessings for polygomy? The one true statement in this whole mess is that allowing divorce and re-marriage is equally indefensible. No chance ACNA will tackle that one, however, when they won't talk about eliminating WO. |
| Causidicus | Posted: 2009/7/15 3:41 Updated: 2009/7/15 3:43 |
Home away from home  Joined: 2005/7/3 From: Posts: 1187 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings Barbara Harris puts forth the revisionist position (and gay position) directly: Marriage should no longer be a sacrament. As that is their position it is logical that all they need are liturgies - liturgical rituals of blessing for gay marriage, liturgical rituals for abortions for the straights, etc, etc, but all of their activity proceeding from one thing: Baptism. Baptism becomes the catch all be all justification for everything from membership to leadership to overlordship of anyone they choose. Note the argument now being pandered at the convention by the sodomite crowd: "Why did you baptize me if I was unworthy?" - (a pretty good question actually) and new refrain "I have been baptized" used as a rhetorical weapon.
Since they have succeeded in deconstructing marriage they no longer need it, signifying, by the way, that they never actually did - it was just a merit badge they picked up along the way in places like Massachusettes. Blessings will do just fine, thank you very much - at least according to Harris. Poor liberalepiscobishops - nothing but pawns in a larger game. |
| ACLins | Posted: 2009/7/15 10:42 Updated: 2009/7/15 10:42 |
Home away from home Joined: 2005/3/31 From: Kentucky Posts: 284 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings Bishop Sauls stated, "The Nigerians are our most ardent critic." Perhaps we should ask why that is? The Nigerians know the Bible and Holy Tradition because they live in the crucible where Abraham's faith was formed. Kain and Seth married daughters of the chief of Nok (Nok is in the Jos Plateau of Nigeria.) The Jebu (Jebusites) intermarried with the descendents of Kain. Noah's homeland is Bor'nu near Lake Chad in northern Nigeria. The priestly lines from which Joseph and Mary come originated among the ancestors of the Yoruba. All of this has been well documented and verified.
|
| cmsigler | Posted: 2009/7/15 11:39 Updated: 2009/7/15 11:39 |
Not too shy to talk   Joined: 2006/6/27 From: Southwestern Va. Posts: 31 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings It's very interesting to me how this all is working together to proclaim the need for biblical orthodoxy.... I wrote elsewhere recently that Bp. Sauls had ignorantly, it would seem, given total support to the conservative position, and one would reflect that such statement must've been totally unintentional.
How many times have I seen it written that it was not the ordination and consecration of sexually active homosexuals, it was not the ordination and consecration of women as ministers of the Sacraments, it was not the liturgy crafted in the '79 BCP... it was the relaxation of the standards on marriage and divorce that definitively pointed TEC (and the mainline church) down its current path, from which it seemingly won't turn back, and which is an unholy dead-end? As to marriage in the church, the historic CoE practice and liturgy was that of solemnization of matrimony, not establishment. It seems to me that from the time of the reformation (and wasn't this one of the burrs under Luther's saddle?) civil marriage was recognized. But in church it is solemnized, that is, made complete in the eyes of God and the Church. Up until then it's just a frivolous non-institution recognized in the civil sphere alone. Back then, could two men, for example, have been married? Knowing their cultural norms (to which much appeal is made these days), it seems unlikely. But one thing is for sure -- the Church would never have solemnized such a union because God didn't join together in a (pro)creative union Adam and Steve  Considering baptism, until everyone understands the whys and wherefores of this sacrament, some will be tragically mislead by their misunderstanding. My understanding is that baptism grafts a new member into the Body of Christ. But look at St. John 15:5-6. When a new branch is grafted into the vine, it is expected to take on the life, health, character and vitality of the vine (the True Vine) into which it has been grafted. If it doesn't (abiding not in Christ), the branch is cut off and cast forth. It withers and is cast into the (eternal (my addition)) fire. It seems clear to me that this teaches that baptism is not expected to "take" in every case (be perfectly effectual), thought I'm sure there will be strong disagreement with me on this. So what's so gosh-darned central about baptism that it's become the focus of so much new "teaching" and "theology" in TEC? I believe it's not just because it's the sacrament of entry into the church, and it's not just because "everybody" (including the LGBTQIA) is baptized, it's because baptism is the one sacrament that is universally accepted (as long as it's done in the Trinitarian formulation given in the Great Commission). Anglicans will accept any properly/regularly baptized person as a member. There is no "rebaptism." (Isn't this even true of the Roman and Eastern Orthodox churches?) Indeed, the question of "why did you baptize me in the first place" is a very good, a very deep, a very important one. I would recommend a study of the historic baptismal liturgy as an introductory guide to an answer. |
| SixDays | Posted: 2009/7/15 11:53 Updated: 2009/7/15 11:55 |
Home away from home Joined: 2006/2/23 From: Posts: 334 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings "Why did you baptize me if I was unworthy?"
Well, you see its like this: We didn't know, when you were brought in for baptism, as an infant, that you were going to grow up to be a pervert. Had we known that at the time, we wouldn't have Baptized you. -SD |
| DJ1943 | Posted: 2009/7/15 13:05 Updated: 2009/7/15 13:05 |
Home away from home Joined: 2007/11/30 From: Ohio Posts: 240 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings You have to wonder what other fringe groups are waiting in the wings for TEC to champion.
|
| Causidicus | Posted: 2009/7/15 13:22 Updated: 2009/7/15 13:25 |
Home away from home Joined: 2005/7/3 From: Posts: 1187 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings Six days: You just made the classic Baptist argument against infant baptism.
 |
| cmsigler | Posted: 2009/7/15 13:35 Updated: 2009/7/15 13:35 |
Not too shy to talk Joined: 2006/6/27 From: Southwestern Va. Posts: 31 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings In beginning, I just want to say I'm prepared to be scathingly castigated by any Baptists. You may have at me, because I can and do err.
The problem is that the Baptist teaching is once baptized, always baptized -- with which Anglicans emphatically agree -- means once saved, always saved -- with which Anglicans emphatically disagree. This is why Baptists "backslide." They can backslide, but they can never lose their salvation. It's a weird reflection, but to the point, that the new emphasis on "I am baptized" demonstrates the new understanding to which TEC has led themselves. That understanding is: Once baptized, always baptized, therefore, always a part of the Body, therefore, always saved. So TEC is in the process of becoming pseudo-Baptists with attractive vestments and large, historic buildings and endowments! Clemmitt |
| mathman | Posted: 2009/7/15 13:36 Updated: 2009/7/15 13:41 |
Home away from home Joined: 2004/5/26 From: Rockville, MD Posts: 1135 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings See the 1979 Book of Common Prayer for details.
The 1979 Baptism claims that Baptism establishes a covenant, wherein God agrees to accept the Baptized person as a member of Christ's Church. This Baptism is irrevocable and binding on God. All else is predicated on this binding act. The content of the entire teaching of the New Testament is negated by this covenant notion. From the first Word: Repent to the last word: do not take away anything from the Word of this prophecy, Tec has banished the New Testament from its degraded and debased theory. Jesus taught that the New Covenant was expressed in His Blood, which He shed on the Cross. No other Covenant, express or implied, is found in the New Testament, the Early Fathers, or the Ecumenical Councils. The invention of a new covenant of Baptism, in which homosexual perverts are fully incorporated into the life of the Bride of Christ, without repentance, is the sort of corruption spoken of in James, Peter, and Jude. The truth is that, as Jesus taught in speaking himself as the Vine, that one must walk the path that is hard, seek the Gospel, walk in the Light, live in the Spirit and quench the desires of the flesh, and so on. There will be a Bema judgment, according to Matt 25, and some who thought themselves part of the elect will be sent away empty. It is difficult to put any other interpretation on Matt 25:46. As my rector recently said: "I'm sorry, I am not making this up." |
| SixDays | Posted: 2009/7/15 13:44 Updated: 2009/7/15 13:44 |
Home away from home Joined: 2006/2/23 From: Posts: 334 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings Causidicus;
Having been raised a Baptist, I know that you are right (BTW: I am not against infant Baptism). However, I think, more importantly, I made the argument against the "doctrine" of "Once saved, Always saved", which is what the perverted TEC members are trying to feed us. In other words, just because they were, at some point in their lives, Baptized, that in an of itself doesn't qualify them for everything within the church. St. Paul is quite clear, for example, of what it takes to be a Bishop in the Church. It is much more than simply being Baptized. -SD |
| cmsigler | Posted: 2009/7/15 14:16 Updated: 2009/7/15 14:16 |
Not too shy to talk Joined: 2006/6/27 From: Southwestern Va. Posts: 31 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings I'll repost here something I put up on the Anglican Curmudgeon's blog:
It seems to me that there's a confounding by some of covenant and sacrament going on. A covenant is, of necessity, a two-way instrument: I do, and (then) you do. But a sacrament is, of necessity, a one-way administration. (In the whole sense, we can offer nothing in return. We cannot administer grace as does God.) The liturgy of baptism questions and receives assurance of agreement to the covenant by or for the baptized. This is the first part. The second part is the administration of Holy Baptism in(to) the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. The covenant and the sacrament are not the same thing. Indeed, the sacrament is the second part of the covenant. The whole second part, I believe. In neither the covenant nor the sacrament are any rights or privileges granted to the baptized. Instead, grace is (norminatively) given. And grace is far, far, far better than any right or privilege that can be expressed by human tongue. Clemmitt |
| Isaac | Posted: 2009/7/15 14:32 Updated: 2009/7/15 14:33 |
Home away from home  Joined: 2004/3/1 From: Texas Posts: 672 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings The Bible is clear that sexual relations are to be between a husband and wife. Now that TEC has rewritten the Bible to allow for same sex sex, they still have the problem that such sex is still outside of marriage. Therefore, they MUST now allow for same sex marriage.
"Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for images made to look like mortal man...Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and worshipped and served the creation rather than the Creator- who is forever praised. " Romans 1:22-25. Isaac |
| cmsigler | Posted: 2009/7/15 14:46 Updated: 2009/7/15 14:46 |
Not too shy to talk Joined: 2006/6/27 From: Southwestern Va. Posts: 31 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings An astute point, well made. But Bp. Harris doesn't even agree with this! Wow.
And, remember, the end of Romans chapter 1 was excised from the lectionary when it was revised in 1945, I believe. That old, outdated portion of Scripture hasn't been relevant or needed for over 60 years now! Get with the times! Clemmitt |
| ACLins | Posted: 2009/7/15 17:16 Updated: 2009/7/15 17:16 |
Home away from home Joined: 2005/3/31 From: Kentucky Posts: 284 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings The 76th General Convention of the (Pagan) Episcopal Church has removed the final canonical obstacles to the "full inclusion" of non-celibate homosexuals. They may now be ordained as deacons and priests, they may be consecrated as bishops and their "unions" may be blessed in the churches. Of course, this has been going on for a good while in TEC so this isn't really news.
The story behind this story is the Anglican Church of Nigeria, which was blasted by a leading gay-rights activist who believes that divorce contradicts sexual ethics and because it is permitted in the Church, so should homosexuality be permitted (even 'celebrated', as Gene Robinson insists). This leading activist is my former bishop and the man who has to sign my retirement papers in 2 weeks. He said: "It is time for the church be liberated from hypocrisy under which it has been operating about our gay brothers and sisters. Divorce contradicted sexual ethics. Our gay and lesbian members don't think much about what other Anglicans around the world think. The Nigerians are our most ardent critic. The Scribes and the Pharisees tied people up in burdens..." Bishop Sauls stated, "The Nigerians are our most ardent critic." Humm... Perhaps we should ask why that is? The Nigerians know the Bible and Holy Tradition because they live in the crucible where Abraham's faith was formed. Kain and Seth married daughters of the chief of Nok (Nok is in the Jos Plateau of Nigeria.) The Jebu (Jebusites) intermarried with the descendents of Kain. The largest group of Jebusites today lives in Nigeria. Noah's homeland is Bor'nu near Lake Chad in northern Nigeria. The priestly lines, from which Joseph and Mary come, originated among the ancestors of the people (who in modern times) came to be called Yoruba who live in Nigeria. All of this has been documented and verified through linguistics, biblical studies and cultural anthropology. So the weight of Holy Tradition is on the side of the Anglican Church of Nigeria and its Primate, Archbishop Peter Jasper Akinola, who is vehemently hated and constantly vilified by TEC pagans. |
| aspire1983 | Posted: 2009/7/15 18:28 Updated: 2009/7/15 18:28 |
Home away from home  Joined: 2004/10/12 From: FORMERLY Diocese of Virginia / Now CANA Posts: 421 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings Quote:
The resolution goes on to invite the wider Anglican Communion into this process. The Bible believing remnant of the Anglican Communion sends regrets to The Episcopal church in response to their dubious invitation to join them in their apostacy. |
| USAsoccer | Posted: 2009/7/15 20:35 Updated: 2009/7/15 20:45 |
Just popping in  Joined: 2009/7/15 From: Posts: 3 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings Quote:
The problem is that the Baptist teaching is once baptized, always baptized -- with which Anglicans emphatically agree -- means once saved, always saved -- with which Anglicans emphatically disagree. This is why Baptists "backslide." They can backslide, but they can never lose their salvation. I am a Southern Baptist who for whatever reason have watch this sad process play out. I am always stunned by the lack of biblical reference which is the heart of the problem for Episcopals. Clearly, anyone who has read Romans 1 would know that the actions of the TEC is inconsistent with God's word. However, I am compelled to respond to this post. We are all saved by Grace, not of works. Since Salvation cannot be earned, and is a gift from God, salvation is eternal: He that BELIEVETH on the Son hath everlasting life:. . ." John 3:36 "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever BELIEVETH in him should not perish, but have everlasting life." John 3:16 We are NOT saved by WORKS. The Bible makes it clear that OUR WORKS has nothing whatsoever to do with our salvation. We don't receive it by our works — and we don't keep it by our works! " NOT BY WORKS of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us,. . ." Titus 3:5 "For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: NOT OF WORKS, lest any man should boast." Ephesians 2:8,9 Salvation is a FREE GIFT gift of God. If we had to work to keep it — it would not be a free gift —and God would be a liar! ". . . the GIFT of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord." Romans 6:23 ". . .by the righteousness of one THE FREE GIFT came upon all men unto justification of life." Romans 5:18 Salvation is a NEW BIRTH. Salvation is not enduring or a process, but an event in time. Salvation is a NEW BIRTH. Just as your first birth happened on a certain time and day, so does the second birth. "(For he saith, I have heard thee in a TIME accepted, and in THE DAY OF SALVATION have I succoured thee: behold, now is the accepted TIME; behold, now is THE DAY OF SALVATION.)" 2 Corinthians 6:2 "Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be BORN AGAIN, he cannot see the kingdom of God." John 3:3 "Being BORN AGAIN, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." 1 Peter 1:23 Once you are born again SPIRITUALLY — you become a child of God and nothing can SEPARATE us from our Father. Just as nothing can "negate" your physical birth, nothing can "negate" your spiritual birth. "For I am persuaded, that neither death, nor life, nor angels, nor principalities, nor powers, nor things present, nor things to come, Nor height, nor depth, nor any other creature, SHALL BE ABLE TO SEPARATE US from the love of God, which is in Christ Jesus our Lord." Romans 8:38 "My Father, which gave them me, is greater than all; and no man is able to pluck them out of my Father's hand." John 10:29 When the Bible speaks of possessing eternal life, it speaks in the present tense (hath, have, etc.) — SOMETHING WE ALREADY HAVE! If we had to work or endure to keep our salvation, this could not be true. "He that believeth on the Son HATH EVERLASTING LIFE:.. ." John 3:36 "These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that YE HAVE ETERNAL LIFE,. . ." 1 John 5:13 "Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, HATH EVERLASTING LIFE,. . ." John 5:24 Jesus will NOT cast you out ". . . him that cometh to me I WILL IN NO WISE CAST OUT." John 6:37 We are "perfected for ever" by Jesus Christ. How could the Lord say such a bold statement if we had to earn or keep our salvation? "And by that will, we have been made holy through the sacrifice of the body of Jesus Christ once for all.. . . For by one offering he hath PERFECTED FOR EVER them that are sanctified." Hebrews 10:10,14 What about the "backslider" or somebody that forsakes the Lord? The Bible says he will suffer loss (rewards, etc.) — but he himself shall be saved! "For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; Every man's work shall be made manifest: for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: BUT HE HIMSELF SHALL BE SAVED; yet so as by fire." 1 Corinthians 3:11-15 God is control. God is cleaning out His church. What is happening in TEC is a the fulfillment of prophesy. Jesus is returning soon. We should all live as though He were coming tomorrow! The Bible is God's word. Inerrant. Eternal. Inspired. |
| patulous | Posted: 2009/7/15 21:35 Updated: 2009/7/15 21:35 |
Home away from home  Joined: 2007/5/18 From: Posts: 1802 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings Well whip-te-do for TEC.....now they are bonafide suckers-at-large.
|
| hapax | Posted: 2009/7/15 22:07 Updated: 2009/7/15 22:08 |
Not too shy to talk  Joined: 2004/10/19 From: Oxford (for the time being) Posts: 30 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings @USASoccer:
You're right about the lack of submission to Scripture in TEC. When criticised by liberals in the church or by the secular press that the split is really about sexuality, the people in ACNA, GAFCON etc are at pains to point out that the dispute is not really about sexuality but ultimately a question of authority in the church. Is the Word of God authoritative in the church today -- yea or nay? True Anglicanism is steeped in the Scriptures and as a Southern Baptist many of the Christian books you and your pastors read and profit from have been written by Anglicans steeped in the Scriptures. (To take a couple of modern examples you as a Baptist may be familiar with just look at J.I. Packer or John Stott. And of course I would reciprocate that by saying that many of the books I have read and profited from as an Anglican have been written by Baptists who know the Scriptures.) But sadly for some Anglicans/Episcopalians (as well as for some Baptists) the answer is a very emphatic 'no': God's word is no longer believed to be authoritative. Much of the leadership of TEC falls into this camp with Scripture being sidestepped or simply ignored. Clear expressions of the will of God are passed over for motherhood and apple pie statements about love and inclusivity. Sad but true. But this is not limited to TEC. It's happening in other denominations as well. We all need to be on guard. Blessings, hapax. |
| SixDays | Posted: 2009/7/16 11:47 Updated: 2009/7/16 11:47 |
Home away from home Joined: 2006/2/23 From: Posts: 334 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings Heb 6:4-6 “For in the case of those who have once been enlightened and have tasted of the heavenly gift and have been made partakers of the Holy Spirit, And have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come, and then have fallen away, it is impossible to renew them again to repentance, since they again crucify to themselves the Son of God and put Him to open shame.”
The doctrine of once saved always saved is a misunderstanding of scripture. SD |
| USAsoccer | Posted: 2009/7/16 18:59 Updated: 2009/7/16 18:59 |
Just popping in Joined: 2009/7/15 From: Posts: 3 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings Six Days:
You are misunderstanding the author of Hebrews and drawing the wrong conclusion. In point of fact, it is you who is failing to understand the scriptures. This scripture was written to those who beleieved in performance based Christianity...that is too say, that our works earn our salvation... From http://www.middletree.net/hebrews6.asp Many have read Hebrews 6:4-6 and interpreted it to mean that someone can be saved, choose a sinful life, and then can never recover their salvation. However, a close examination of the surrounding scripture makes it clear that what the author of Hebrews was saying has nothing to do with the impossibility of returning to God.... Why does this passage say that it is "impossible" to be brought back to God? The truth is, it doesn’t. The statement is that it is impossible to be brought back to repentance. While it is true that one must repent to become a new Christian, one need not be a new Christian to repent. The key phrase in the NIV is "brought back", but King James and NAS say it is impossible to renew them again. The question is, who's doing the renewing? It may be impossible for you or me to bring them back, but that doesn't mean that God cannot. This idea of what is "impossible" shows up in the Gospels, when Jesus is talking. Take for example the following verses, which are parallel: Matthew 19:26, Mark 10:27 and Luke 18:27. The Luke verse tells us: "Jesus replied, 'What is impossible with men is possible with God.' " So don't let the word 'impossible' fool you into thinking that this passage in Hebrews means that there is no way a saved person can leave God and come back. It happens all the time, actually..... So if this passage isn’t about the loss of salvation, what is it about? A key to the answer to that question is in the second half of verse 6, which says 'since they again crucify Jesus'. This is where the context is useful. Please take a look at the end of Chapter 5 through the first two verses of Chapter 6. A modern paraphrase might be, "OK, enough talk about the simple issues of salvation; because we could go on and on and talk about resurrection, eternal judgment, the laying on of hands, etc. But there are deeper issues to discuss in order for you to see measurable growth in your Christian walk." It is important to keep in mind who he was writing to. The recipients of this letter were Hebrews (hence the title of the book), a group of folks who had a hard time getting rid of the concept of salvation by works, because it was something they grew up with. The writer is imploring the Hebrews: Jesus paid for your sins with His death, now accept it and move on. Bottom line: this passage is about performance-based Christianity, a line of thought we all need to be careful not to fall into.... The intended point of the writer of this passage in Hebrews is that those of us who have tasted what the Lord offers should not let ourselves get caught up in the idea that our works are what saves us, because it is a slap in the face of the One who died for us. Rather, we should concentrate on maturing as believers so that we can reflect Him more. Unfortunately, the whole idea of “Performance Christianity” is more prevalent among Christians than we think. It is true that almost all believers will say that they believe salvation is a free gift, most of us at one time or another still fall into the trap of believing we can get more of God’s love by performing, and that we risk the very existence of our relationship with Him based on our actions. God doesn’t like our failures, but when we don’t fail, it is because of Him and the abilities that He has put into us that enable us to move forward in our Christian walk. Get out of the trap of worrying about the effect your actions might have on your salvation, thank God daily for His free gift, try to be more and more like Him, and tell others the good news! |
| jfmckenna | Posted: 2009/7/19 0:03 Updated: 2009/7/19 0:03 |
Home away from home Joined: 2006/2/4 From: Posts: 717 |
Re: GC2009: House of Bishops Discuss Same Sex Blessings With general social approval being showered on people cohabitating, committing adultery, glorifying sex outside of marriage, winking and leering at every form of pornography, this surge toward approval of homosexuality is just enough to push the foundation of society off the edge of the canyon -- with these bishops giving it the final shove. And make no mistake about it -- it's social approval that has been the main factor that have moved all the statistics in these categories away from support for children needing a stable mother-and-father family.
|
