Posted by
Playful Walrus on Monday, December 07, 2009 6:28:42 PM
The Los Angeles Times had a lot of coverage over the last several days about the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles selecting an unrepentant, openly practicing sinner to a bishop position.
The church I attend welcomes everyone. However, someone will not be placed (or allowed to remain) in a position of power or leadership if he or she continues to openly engage in the same sin, refusing to repent. This is about more than sexual behavior with someone other than your partner in holy matrimony. It is about Biblical authority. The church is not a social club. It is there to make disciples, draw them closer to the Lord, and to serve those in need.
How can a pastor counsel someone to turn from their sin when they are openly sinning themselves?
Duke Helfand had this blog entry.
"Dee" hit the nail on the head December 04, 2009 at 09:39 AM:
I'm confused...an organization whose purpose is to shepherd its followers in the way of the lord as revealed in the bible is choosing to elect "shepherds" who openly defy those teachings? Wouldn't that be like the democracy of the United States electing communists and fascists as its leaders? I have nothing against gays or even, in some cases, communists or fascists, but they should not seek to infiltrate and, eventually, pervert, the meaning of organizations whose beliefs are opposed to theirs. They could start their own religions, governments, etc. based on what they believe. That is, of course, what they would do if they were honest in their desire to worship God in their own way and not just activists trying to mess with the system. But what can you expect from a religion formed on a king's wish to divorce his wife?
Some people say that the Anglican Church’s split from the Roman Catholic Church was more complicated than that, but no doubt that simplistic perception assists all sorts of departures from tradition.
"Elizabeth" wrote December 04, 2009 at 10:47 AM:
I have nothing against intolerant so-called christians who prostrate themselves in idolatry before a BOOK written by men for men (Christ's message can be found therein but mostly in spite, rather than because, of its many writers and later-to-come manipulators/translators), but they should not have perverted the teachings of the original teacher: love one another.
Since the Bible is a "book written by men for men", I wonder how Elizabeth knows exactly what Christ's message is or isn't? Is she simply picking what she likes and calling that Christ's message?
"pasadena jag" wrote December 04, 2009 at 11:23 AM:
It amazes me how the Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles can get so much media attention. They barely have 70,000 members - with probably close to 20,000 attending each Sunday.
Good point. I think we know why the Los Angeles Times gives them so much attention. Meanwhile, churches that teach the whole Bible, including the parts about sex being for marriage and the reality of Hell, are growing.
"Jack", referring to condemnations of nonmarital sexual or pseudosexual behavior, wrote December 04, 2009 at 12:59 PM:
I am so sick of this "pick and choose" christianity.
It's called systematic theology based on a study of the whole Bible. Elizabeth is the one who is "picking and choosing".
Duke Helfand and Larry B. Stammer had this article.
Larry Stammer had this blog entry.
The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles today elected the first openly gay bishop since the national church lifted a ban that sought to bar gays and lesbians from the church's highest ordained ministry.
This is not accurate. The problem isn't that someone has a certain "orientation". It is the practice of certain behaviors that is the issue. I dare say that many of the "conservative" congregants would be supportive of having a leader who refrains from acting on certain feelings. Who better to preach to us how to defeat temptation?
"Thomas Leavitt" wrote December 05, 2009 at 04:35 PM:
It appears that the Episcopal Church is capable of evaluating a person based on their qualifications, not their gender or sexual orientation.
Ah, yes, qualifications...
1 Timothy 3:1-7: "This is a faithful saying: If a man desires the position of a bishop, he desires a good work. A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, temperate, sober-minded, of good behavior, hospitable, able to teach; not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but gentle, not quarrelsome, not covetous; one who rules his own house well, having his children in submission with all reverence (for if a man does not know how to rule his own house, how will he take care of the church of God?); not a novice, lest being puffed up with pride he fall into the same condemnation as the devil. Moreover he must have a good testimony among those who are outside, lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil."
1 Timothy 3:8-13: "Likewise deacons must be reverent, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy for money, holding the mystery of the faith with a pure conscience. But let these also first be tested; then let them serve as deacons, being found blameless. Likewise, their wives must be reverent, not slanderers, temperate, faithful in all things. Let deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well. For those who have served well as deacons obtain for themselves a good standing and great boldness in the faith which is in Christ Jesus."
Titus 1:5-9: "For this reason I left you in Crete, that you should set in order the things that are lacking, and appoint elders in every city as I commanded you—if a man is blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children not accused of dissipation or insubordination. For a bishop must be blameless, as a steward of God, not self-willed, not quick-tempered, not given to wine, not violent, not greedy for money, but hospitable, a lover of what is good, sober-minded, just, holy, self-controlled, holding fast the faithful word as he has been taught, that he may be able, by sound doctrine, both to exhort and convict those who contradict."
Let me know when you find the clear Biblical teachings that rescind those passages or the parts of the Bible that teach that sex is for marriage and that marriage unites a bride and a groom.
Larry Stammer had this blog entry.
Larry B. Stammer and Paul Pringle had this article.
Duke Helfand had this blog entry, noting that the Archbishop of Canterbury wasn't supportive.
Duke Helfand and Carla Rivera have this article in today's edition, examining the Archbishop's statement.
It is good to see the paper is keeping those vast numbers of homosexual Episcopalians informed, and letting the rest of us know where not to attend church.