October 17, 2003
Thank God for the Africans
As you may or may not be aware, the issue of homosexuality has recently proven to be quite explosive in the Anglican Communion, especially the Episcopal Church (USA). The Diocese of New Hampshire recently ordained an openly gay man as its next Bishop, much to the displeasure of conservatives. The Diocese of New Westminster in eastern Canada made provision for the recognition of gay marriage. This provoked a firestorm of controversy. This week, ending today, the Primates of all of the churches in the Anglican Communion (except for the Primate of the Philipenes) met at Lambeth Palace to discuss the issue. They issued a statement, which can be found here. The gist of it is this:
"...therefore, we must make clear that recent actions in New Westminster and in the Episcopal Church (USA) do not express the mind of our Communion as a whole, and these decisions jeopardise our sacramental fellowship with each other."
The champions of orthodoxy in this case have been the Africans, especially Kenyans and Nigerians. If they are what we need to preserve orthodoxy, then more power and God's blessing upon them. If Archbishop Williams and the rest of the Communion did not recognize something along the lines of the current decision, it is likely that not only Africa, but Asia, South America and conservative America would probably have left the Communion as they had promised. The Bishop of Pittsburgh is quoted as saying, "For Rowan Williams [the Archbishop of Canterbury], the last British Empire is his to lose."
I think this is an excellent and profound result. The Primates declared that the current homosexual agenda is innovative, and condemned the innovators as threatening to the unity of the church. It would be one thing if the innovators were trying to re-establish a forgotten orthodoxy. But as they are introducing something that has never before been allowed in the Christian church, they cannot be allowed to continue. The council condemned, not conservatives for being closed minded, but liberals for being divisive.
Still, I have reservations. The council maintained the provision that deviant "sexual orientation" does not jeopardize one's status as a faithful member of the Body of Christ. That makes me nervous. But as even the Africans were willing to sign on, I'm slightly okay with it. At least no ground was lost, and as the ECUSA was impugned for being divisive, some ground may well have been gained.
I think it is wonderful that so much of the denomination is taking a stand for the historical (and Biblical) doctrines of the Church as they relate to this issue. I understand why you'd be nervous about the one provision, but here's my take. A person committing habitual, unrepentant homosexual acts should be treated the same as a person habitually and unrepentantly committing any other sin, but having a gay "orientation" while living chastely should not jeopardize a person's status in the church.
Posted by: John at October 17, 2003 02:39 PM