Anglican split goes far deeper than gay dispute
by Tom Heneghan
Reuters
February 09, 2007
PARIS -- It's not all about gays.
The worldwide Anglican Communion is on the brink of schism, with African prelates leading a charge against the U.S.-based Episcopal Church for consecrating a gay bishop. A showdown is shaping up for an Anglican summit next week in Tanzania.
But the split in the 77-million strong Communion runs far deeper than the dispute over Gene Robinson, the gay cleric made bishop in 2003, historian Philip Jenkins thinks.
Liberal Anglicans in rich countries and traditionalists in the Global South read the Bible in such different ways that they could be in quite different churches, he argues in his recent book "The New Faces of Christianity."
"There is an absolutely fundamental division over the nature of authority," Jenkins, professor of history and religious studies at Pennsylvania State University in the United States, told Reuters by telephone. Widely varying views are the result.
While liberals base their beliefs on the New Testament's message of love and inclusiveness, he said, Christians in Africa focus more on the Old Testament with its plagues, visions and healings watched over by a stern and demanding God.
"That corresponds more to the world they live in," he said.
So a traditionalist challenge led by Nigeria's Archbishop Peter Akinola would not disappear if the liberals retreated on gay bishops and blessings for same-sex unions, he said: "It's a lot more fundamental than people are arguing."
INTERPRETING LEVITICUS
The primates (leaders) of the Anglican Communion's 38 provinces will meet in Dar Es Salaam on Feb. 14-19 for a summit overshadowed by the divisive issue of homosexuality.
Liberal churches in rich countries have become increasingly open towards homosexuality. In Africa, where the Bible is read much more literally, traditionalists believe the issue was settled when the Book of Leviticus called it "an abomination."
"If you're arguing over homosexuality and quote Leviticus, most western Christians say that's just in the Old Testament and has nothing to do with them," Mr. Jenkins said.
This different reading leads to practices that embarrass many liberals, such as exorcism of demons. Some African churches also refuse to join the majority and allow women priests. In Nigeria, a sometimes violent frontier between Islam and Christianity, Muslim respect for the Koran, male leadership and heterosexual marriage rubs off on Christians.
"Christians do not want to be seen paying less attention to their own scriptures than Muslims devote to the Koran," Mr. Jenkins wrote in his book.
ANGLICANS AT THE SHARP EDGE
More than half the world's Anglicans now live in the Global South and their numbers are rising rapidly. Their influence can only continue to grow, Mr. Jenkins thinks.
"It is only within the last decade that most western Christians have even discovered that this kind of Christianity is even there," he observed.
The Anglican Communion is at the sharp edge of the shift, he said, because it holds its global Lambeth Conferences every 10 years to agree on a consensus on teachings.
"Other mainstream Protestant churches have been extremely nervous watching the Anglican experience, but it's not so pressing because they don't have global conferences," he said.
The split among the Anglicans has gone so far that at least 45 traditionalist parishes in the United States have broken ranks and switched allegiance to African bishops.
Mr. Jenkins did not think this tiny minority could form a rival bloc there but saw a schism looming at the global level.
"In the Anglican Communion, the prospect is quite high that the Episcopal Church is basically kicked out of the Communion or politely asked to leave before 2008, when they have the next Lambeth Conference," he said.
http://tinyurl.com/3e5ckz
END
| Poster | Thread |
|---|---|
| lapittengr | Posted: 2007/2/10 11:40 Updated: 2007/2/10 11:40 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/1/21 From: Posts: 195 |
As usual, both the revisionists and the press don't get it.
Quote: While liberals base their beliefs on the New Testament's message of love and inclusiveness, he said, Christians in Africa focus more on the Old Testament with its plagues, visions and healings watched over by a stern and demanding God. Quote: Liberal churches in rich countries have become increasingly open towards homosexuality. In Africa, where the Bible is read much more literally, traditionalists believe the issue was settled when the Book of Leviticus called it "an abomination." Quote: In Nigeria, a sometimes violent frontier between Islam and Christianity, Muslim respect for the Koran, male leadership and heterosexual marriage rubs off on Christians. Quote: The Anglican Communion is at the sharp edge of the shift, he said, because it holds its global Lambeth Conferences every 10 years to agree on a consensus on teachings. pax, LP |
| Romans828 | Posted: 2007/2/10 11:53 Updated: 2007/2/10 12:27 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/6/27 From: Posts: 244 |
Liberals keep getting it wrong on Leviticus. I can even remember a scene from 'West Wing' when liberal President Bartlet tells off a conservative religious figure over her alleged hypocrisy on the book of Leviticus..."Do you stone people to death? Is it all right to play with a pigskin football?"
I think the fact is that ALL Christians, regardless of theological bent, necessarily pick and choose which laws in Leviticus apply to Christians. They literally have no choice but to do so. For example, Leviticus 19 is full of social laws that defend others, including the law in verse 18 "Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself." (KJV) Liberal Christians sure think that Christians are required to obey that law! There's no throwing that baby out with the bathwater. As I see it, when various Christians are picking and choosing, they really are all appealing to the same principle, albeit applied in different ways. All Christians appeal to the principle that a law in Leviticus is binding on Christians if it is the will of Christ, and not binding if it is not the will of Christ. The provision of Leviticus to "love thy neighbour as thyself" is binding on Christians if it is the will of Christ. Homosexuality being an abomination is binding on Christians if it is the will of Christ. Where Christians disagree is over WHICH laws in Leviticus are consistent with the will of Christ, not over whether any laws in Leviticus are binding on Christians. |
| daveball | Posted: 2007/2/10 11:58 Updated: 2007/2/10 11:58 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/12/18 From: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 2281 |
It amazes me that the media remains so ignorant of the real issues at hand. I understand that these are secular publications but accuracy and completeness used to be desired qualities for reporting.
But the split in the 77-million strong Communion runs far deeper than the dispute over Gene Robinson, the gay cleric made bishop in 2003, historian Philip Jenkins thinks. Hard to believe that this is really worth reporting anymore. Liberal Anglicans in rich countries and traditionalists in the Global South read the Bible in such different ways that they could be in quite different churches, he argues in his recent book "The New Faces of Christianity." Unbelievable. The divide is not rich countries versus developing nations. There are liberals and conservatives in both places. It is the orthodox in the US who are fed up with the departure of the apostate TEC who are seeking to ally themselves with other believing Anglicans, wherever they may be. While liberals base their beliefs on the New Testament's message of love and inclusiveness, he said, Christians in Africa focus more on the Old Testament with its plagues, visions and healings watched over by a stern and demanding God. This is over the top. The New Testament is the basis of orthodox belief - it is the definition of Christianity. Its message is not "love and inclusiveness, it is about the love of God made manifest, about redemption, about salvation, about the Good News. And the OT is certainly about more than plagues and visions. Where did this guy read about the Bible? Some California Seminary? So a traditionalist challenge led by Nigeria's Archbishop Peter Akinola would not disappear if the liberals retreated on gay bishops and blessings for same-sex unions, he said: "It's a lot more fundamental than people are arguing." The argument is that it is about a lot more than VGR and same sex whatever. The argument is that the Word of God is contained in the Bible and in tradition and is not to be rewritten by man to suit his desires. This different reading leads to practices that embarrass many liberals, such as exorcism of demons. Some African churches also refuse to join the majority and allow women priests. In Nigeria, a sometimes violent frontier between Islam and Christianity, Muslim respect for the Koran, male leadership and heterosexual marriage rubs off on Christians. What is this loony talking about? Exorcism? Where is that part of the discussion? It is not only African churches that do not subscribe to WO. This is not the Faith delivered. Here or there. It has nothing to do with proximity to Islam The split among the Anglicans has gone so far that at least 45 traditionalist parishes in the United States have broken ranks and switched allegiance to African bishops. Try well over a hundred parishes and growing daily with entire dioceses seeking alternative oversight. Hardly a tiny minority as the writer alleges. Ask Bishop Lee. Blessings. |
| Cennydd | Posted: 2007/2/10 12:37 Updated: 2007/2/10 12:40 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/10/30 From: Los Banos, CA, Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin Posts: 6684 |
There are well over two hundred parishes if you include all who are partners in the Anglican Communion Network. Figure on an average of, say, 150 people each, and that gives you roughly 250,000 people. And it's growing weekly!
I'd say Mr Heneghan needs to do his homework more thoroughly. Cennydd |
| lapittengr | Posted: 2007/2/10 12:49 Updated: 2007/2/10 12:49 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/1/21 From: Posts: 195 |
Quote:
Where Christians disagree is over WHICH laws in Leviticus are consistent with the will of Christ, not over whether any laws in Leviticus are binding on Christians. Actually, we have apostolic injunctions on this issue. It's not a matter of personal opinion. Acts 15 (passim): But there rose up certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, That it was needful to circumcise them, and to command them to keep the law of Moses. And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter. And when there had been much disputing, Peter rose up, and said unto them... "Now therefore why tempt ye God, to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples, which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear?"... And after they had held their peace, James [first bishop of Jerusalem, and thus presiding over this Council] answered, saying, "Men and brethren, hearken unto me....Wherefore my sentence is, that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God: But that we write unto them, that they abstain from pollutions of idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood." The word for "fornication" in Greek, 'porneia', is the term technically used to refer to the Mosaic sexual prohibitions in Leviticus. So, no, there are some things in Leviticus we don't get to pick and chose from. Quote: What is this loony talking about? Jenkins is usually pretty good -- certainly some of his other books that I"ve read are. I think the "looniness" comes more from the cherry-picking of the reporter than the research of the scholar. pax, LP |
| cuervoria | Posted: 2007/2/10 13:10 Updated: 2007/2/10 13:13 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/6/15 From: College Station, Texas Posts: 537 |
Well, you beat me to it lapittengr.
Heneghan's attempt to shanghai Jenkins, a reputable historian, is reprehensible. The by-line is the only news here . . . same credibility as Mary Frances Schjonberg. Where is the Wall Street journal when we need it? ![]() Back to my morning coffee . . . de la Cuervoria |
| daveball | Posted: 2007/2/10 14:55 Updated: 2007/2/10 14:55 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/12/18 From: Pittsburgh, PA Posts: 2281 |
LP, Cuervoria,
Appologies to Mr. Jenkins based upon you comments. I am not familiar with the body of his work. Even more condemnation on Heneghan for "yellow" journalism. Blessings |
| Anglican06 | Posted: 2007/2/10 15:14 Updated: 2007/2/10 15:14 |
Quite a regular ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/8/20 From: Texas Posts: 68 |
Don't the Common Cause Partners represent around 500 churches now?
|
| Wilhelm | Posted: 2007/2/10 15:56 Updated: 2007/2/10 15:57 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/6/19 From: The Colonies Posts: 172 |
The title of the story is accurate. The content is highly debatable. I do know that the church to which I belong was established in a Dry Cleaners shop in 1976 by the former congregants of our city's prominent Episcopalian establishment,as such, it's conception had nothing to do with gay clergy! Thankfully, we've never had to address such issues as they'd be unthinkable. Undoubtedly the developments in the Episcopal Church were born out of the earlier departure from scripture and were somehow inevitible. The "28 Prayer Book Folks" were right, the whole place was going to hell.Our "compass" and "rudder" are bound by holy scripture. The church is in the Province of Christ the King. Thankfully, we are an American Institution much as in the same heritage of the Episcopal Church.
So yes, the split is way deeper. I don't believe we do this forum a service by referring to Islam in disparaging terms. I've known many Mohammedans in my life who bear no resemblance to the Militants,Terrorists,or Demigogic Mullahs of recent years. Remember too that Islam supplanted animism, idolatry and other primitive religions throughout much of the world. It was inevitable that we should clash. In the future, as in the not too distant past, it wasn't unusual that we could expect to live to some degree in harmony. |
| CalAggie | Posted: 2007/2/10 18:49 Updated: 2007/2/10 18:49 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/4/9 From: Davis, CA Posts: 156 |
WOW... what a load... To be honest... I haven't read all of levitics and what I have are what I've been told are Jewish laws like donkeys in exchange for offenses and seperation of persons who have excreted bodily discharge. When I was pondering the homosexual question, I didn't use leviticus since you would have to essentially pick and choose and it seemed a little inconsistent with me. So I had to use Paul and his letters to Corinth and Rome. Which I think justify the position of being a sin.
|
| lionheart | Posted: 2007/2/10 22:16 Updated: 2007/2/10 22:16 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/10/19 From: Posts: 354 |
"While liberals base their beliefs on the New Testament's message of love and inclusiveness, he said, Christians in Africa focus more on the Old Testament with its plagues, visions and healings watched over by a stern and demanding God."
Long ago there was once a gnostic named Marcion. He taught that the God of the Old Testament was an evil tyrant and different from the loving God of the Christ. He rejected the entire Old Testament and most of the New Testament except for a redacted version limited to an altered Gospel of Luke and some of St. Paul's letters. He was, of course, condemned as a heretic. Yet his spirit lives on, even today. lh |
| Joe of the Mountain | Posted: 2007/2/11 2:12 Updated: 2007/2/11 2:12 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/1/3 From: Posts: 3472 |
Jenkins is a Penn State professor. I've corresponded with him a few times. Worth reading and no, I have no idea about his politics!
|
| FatherR | Posted: 2007/2/13 15:42 Updated: 2007/2/13 15:42 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2007/2/9 From: Wisconsin Posts: 71 |
Duh! Of course the Anglican split goes far deeper than simple the sexuality issue. It is how we receive both Scripture and Tradition. After all the continuing Churches have been gone for over 30 years now and they left over the issue of Women's Ordination. Then there is PRayer Book revision, just how far can one go before it is no longer the Book of Common Prayer but an entirely new creation that bears no resemblance to what has gone before.
It goes to what fundamentally we are as Anglicans. The theologians of the Anglican Communion have for nearly 500 have maintained the the Anglican Communion has retained the same apostolic faith and order of the undivided church, merely stripped of its medival Roman accretions. We need to decide fundamentally are we Catholic or Protestant or the Via Media that we have long proclaimed ourselves to be. In the last 30 years it seems as though we have come out as a totally Protestant denomination. |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/13 16:00 Updated: 2007/2/13 16:00 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
FatherR, pretty good post...
i'd like to comment on; "We need to decide fundamentally are we Catholic or Protestant or the Via Media" Maybe just maybe we should have placed the via media between the RCC and The Orthodox Church. Why did we protest the RCC only to create more revisions to the original Faith? Would not have a better answer been to return to Orthodoxy? Many seem to be starting to understand that once they get past the RCC errors of the past. And then you hit the bulleye with; "In the last 30 years it seems as though we have come out as a totally Protestant denomination." Probably more than 30 years but i will agree with the result. humbly, gregory |






















