Committed to building up Christ's Church in North America and beyond
Pages
▼
Wednesday, October 12, 2011
Church of Ireland's gay row 'puts unity in danger'
The Church of Ireland Gazette has expressed concern that plans by bishops for a study of same-sex relationships in the Church “could be a charter for years-long argumentation”.
The Gazette, which retains an independent stance in the Church, also expressed fears that the issue could “imperil” the very unity of the Church of Ireland itself.
The current controversy arose after the disclosure that the Dean of Leighlin, the Very Reverend Tom Gordon, entered into a civil partnership this summer with his companion of 20 years.
Evangelicals are also concerned that the Dean was appointed by Bishop Michael Burrows with full knowledge of the relationship. To read more, click here.
An interesting concept that I heard back in the 1970's from an anglo-catholic "priest" was that the bishops were the defenders of the faith. We lowly laymen didn't have to worry about defending the faith because the bishops were doing it for us. But my experience has been just the opposite. I do believe the old Celtic churches had it right. All bishops should be kept in a monastery under a abbot (usually not a bishop himself) and only brought out when his function was seen as necessary, such as ordinations. Bishops are human and have no special relation with God by virtue of their consecration as they would have us to believe. This is sad.
One of the Diocese of Sydney's objections to the Anglican Communion Covenant (See Sydney Synod opposes adoption of Anglican Communion Covenant, posted above) relates to the role of bishops as defenders of the faith:
(c) Inflated view of the Anglican bishop: The final text contains a highly inflated view of the Anglican bishop. Why, for instance is the teaching of bishops highlighted in §1.2.4? They are authorised teachers within our polity but so is every priest or presbyter and even each deacon. Neither the Ordinal or the Articles presupposes a distinction between them at this point. The teaching of all is to be tested by the Scriptures themselves. Similarly, to suggest that ‘Churches of the Anglican Communion are bound together … by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of bishops in conference’ (§3.1.2) is problematic, notwithstanding the fact that this was the language of the Lambeth Conference of 1930.2 In contrast to the trend in some circles to elevate the Anglican bishop, recent history and the current crisis make clear the need to highlight the accountability of bishops to live and teach according to the Scriptures rather than to suggest they (or anyone else) stand over the Scriptures as in some way privileged interpreters.
In the Prayer Book Ordinal presbyters as well as bishops bind themselves to be "be ready, with all faithful diligence, to banish and drive away from the Church all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's Word...."
In Better Bishops Mark Burkill makes this salient point:
"A bishop, and indeed any other church leader, can only be a focus of unity insofar as he teaches Christ's word faithfully, sets a godly example, and exercises discipline in accordance with the Word of God. When bishops do not do this then they will do immense damage to the Christian community and far from being a focus of unity, the Bible encourages us to view such leaders as wolves (Acts 20:29-30)."
He goes on to write:
"Synodical and chapter meetings of godly clergy and lay people exist to serve as a check on sinfulness and folly in bishops. Although synods (and bishops) must not be allowed to contradict biblical teaching, they can provide godly wisdom when the Christian community and its leaders are faced with major issues. Bishops must not be allowed to be tyrants and there must be effective means of holding them accountable to Scripture."
Better Bishops can be found on the Reform UK website: http://reform.org.uk/resources/media-downloads/src/publication/11/title/better-bishops-mark-burkill-2009
An interesting concept that I heard back in the 1970's from an anglo-catholic "priest" was that the bishops were the defenders of the faith. We lowly laymen didn't have to worry about defending the faith because the bishops were doing it for us. But my experience has been just the opposite. I do believe the old Celtic churches had it right. All bishops should be kept in a monastery under a abbot (usually not a bishop himself) and only brought out when his function was seen as necessary, such as ordinations. Bishops are human and have no special relation with God by virtue of their consecration as they would have us to believe. This is sad.
ReplyDeleteOne of the Diocese of Sydney's objections to the Anglican Communion Covenant (See Sydney Synod opposes adoption of Anglican Communion Covenant, posted above) relates to the role of bishops as defenders of the faith:
ReplyDelete(c) Inflated view of the Anglican bishop: The final text contains a highly inflated view of the Anglican bishop. Why, for instance is the teaching of bishops highlighted in §1.2.4? They are authorised teachers within our polity but so is every priest or presbyter and even each deacon. Neither the Ordinal or the Articles presupposes a distinction between them at this point. The teaching of all is to be tested by the Scriptures themselves. Similarly, to suggest that ‘Churches of the Anglican Communion are bound together … by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of bishops in conference’ (§3.1.2) is problematic, notwithstanding the fact that this was the language of the Lambeth Conference of 1930.2 In contrast to the trend in some circles to elevate the Anglican bishop, recent history and the current crisis make clear the need to highlight the accountability of bishops to live and teach according to the Scriptures rather than to suggest they (or anyone else) stand over the Scriptures as in some way privileged interpreters.
In the Prayer Book Ordinal presbyters as well as bishops bind themselves to be "be ready, with all faithful diligence, to banish and drive away from the Church all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God's Word...."
In Better Bishops Mark Burkill makes this salient point:
"A bishop, and indeed any other church leader, can only be a focus of unity insofar as he teaches Christ's word faithfully, sets a godly example, and exercises discipline in accordance with the Word of God. When bishops do not do this then they will do immense damage to the Christian community and far from being a focus of unity, the Bible encourages us to view such leaders as wolves (Acts 20:29-30)."
He goes on to write:
"Synodical and chapter meetings of godly clergy and lay people exist to serve as a check on sinfulness and folly in bishops. Although synods (and bishops) must not be allowed to contradict biblical teaching, they can provide godly wisdom when the Christian community and its leaders are faced with major issues. Bishops must not be allowed to be tyrants and there must be effective means of holding them accountable to Scripture."
Better Bishops can be found on the Reform UK website: http://reform.org.uk/resources/media-downloads/src/publication/11/title/better-bishops-mark-burkill-2009