Thank you gentlemen. Watching from Oz, where it is Winter. I was praying for Julian Dobbs, but in my view, a good outcome. God is sovereign. Very encouraged by what God is doing through the ACNA.
Social media is actually anti-social. People say things that they would never say in an embodied form of communication, such as face to face or even a phone call.
Bishop Wood sounds like a great choice. May God bless his ministry with love, wisdom and courage. May God bless the church with ( unusual ) loyalty and the ability to co-exist on second order issues.
I would say that there are some votes to gain by letting Assange go. His freedom has been an issue for a number of years among the anti-war left and the libertarian center, and Trump had been courting their votes. We're not talking about a huge number of votes, but potentially enough to swing a close election.
@@albertito77 I don't. Where I live (in Australia) the only diocese available is egalitarian. A moratorium on WO might be nice but you don't have the numbers.
1. Bishop Steven Breedlove "breeds love" for the Anglican Diocese of Christ Our Hope within the Anglican Church of North America. 2. Galatians 5:6 (KJV): For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love. 3. And if the King James Bible was good enough for St. Paul, then you know darn well who else it is good enough for.
It appears the division over women priests will continue, giving those in favor of them precedent, i.e. how long they have existed and increased in number. Based on Wood's prior toleration for women priests, opposition to them may become more difficult.
I'd have to affirm things I can't affirm and uphold, to join any church under Rome. Ditto with Eastern Orthodoxy. Being an Anglican allows me to affirm, uphold, and pursue the faith once delivered to the saints, without having to accept the add-ons required by each of The One True Churches. If they ever manage to truly reunite, then I could probably join with integrity.
@@marmeemarch7080 I would suggest that the allowance of women priests is not pursuit of the faith once delivered to the saints. The ACNA rejects women bishops but belongs to an international organization, GAFCON, in which three women bishops have been created. Of course, you are aware of the women bishops and priests in the U.S. Episcopal Church, Anglican Church in Canada, and Church of England. 🙂
@user-go5ii4wk5b yes, I think these are good considerations, and to the best of my knowledge, I'm interacting with genuine Church doctrine. Certainly, ordaining women is not part of the original practices and beliefs of the Church. I'm starting to think that we all need to go farther back than the time of Christ, and study the Old Testament, especially the Pentateuch, from the oldest perspective that we have, which would be basically Second Temple Judaism. That was the perspective of Jesus and all his disciples. I think we have succumbed to reading the Scriptures through modern eyes, and that's just not going to get us all back in line with the Church as Christ founded it.
@@marmeemarch7080 As Frank E. Wilson, a TEC bishop (d. 1944), wrote, "The Bible is important because of Christ--not the other way around. Christ did not come to deliver a book. He came to live a LIfe. The New Testament contains an account of that Life and a commentary on it. The Old Testament is a record of the preparation for it." Wilson also wrote, "We must keep the order straight. First Christ--then the Church--then the Bible."🙂
What is supported as a priest or bishop may not be what is supported as an ABp. Looking at the ACNA, it may be too unpopular on that wide a scale. Plus, that topic may not even be one of the top 5 he is thinking about.
I very much doubt if Reform will want to ally with the Conservatives. They have betrayed their foundations and principles and for a multitude of reasons become toxic to many ( small c) conservatives in Britain. I as a Reform member ( for a year ) would not welcome an alliance with the consocialists.
I do, however, believe that Reform will, (against the odds and opposition of the establishment from the establishment ) form the next opposition to government.
My understanding of the Constitution is that abortion is a state issue. The 10th admendment states that any power not given to the federal government in the constitution resides with the states or the people. Abortion is not covered as a right and is covered in the constitution therefore it is not a state right. It would require in my opinion require an admendment to make it a federal issue.
WO with tentative steps regarding authority (John Stott’s position) might not annoy as many on both sides as predicted, could be a wise unifier that can make us regain focus on evangelism and discipleship. Let us pray for our leaders and support them, not tear them down before they even start.
However I have been accused of heresy for taking this stance by leading You Tube Free C of E members. It seems that for some this is a first not a second order issue.
@@royquick-s5n is it? How so? Oh and folks - here is the issue. Some do count this as a first order issue even though it is nothing to do with salvation and sin....
@@johnhudghton3535 Not related to salvation and sin? Remind you Article VI states, " an article of the Faith," in addition to, "requisite or necessary to salvation." Nevertheless, some Anglicans do not recognize the validity of ordinations of women priests (in addition to bishops). Therefore the administration of sacraments by them, Eucharist and confirmation, are invalid. See Fort Worth Standing Committee Resolution. I would say the invalid administration of sacraments relates to salvation. I find Low Church, "Evangelicals," trying to split hairs with "first order" and "second order" differentiation. As time moves on, the Roman Catholic position on the invalidity of Anglican orders will be further confirmed where ordinations have been conducted by women bishops. I imagine the Eastern Orthodox Churches are already taking a second look.
@@johnhudghton3535 Reminder that Article VI covers "articles of the Faith" as well as what may be "necessary to salvation." Some Anglicans do not even recognize the validity of ordinations of women priests as well as women bishops. Therefore sacraments as Eucharist and confirmation administered by those invalidly ordained are invalid. (See Fort Worth Standing Committee Resolution.) As time progresses, Anglican holy orders will not be invalid by the Roman Catholic Church alone, but by ordinations conducted by invalidity ordained Anglican women bishops. I imagine the Eastern Orthodox Churches are taking a second look. I find the "first order" and "second order" differentiation to be a Low Church, "Evangelical," splitting of hairs, i.e. trying to make something look different than it is, rationalization, if you will.
If anyone ever doubted that an Episcopal Church is, merely, a 'Church of Clergy', then the introductory item here demonstrates my contention to perfection. It may be the 'presidential' tendency of the USA, which is similar to the 'persona' surrounding the Bishop of Rome, which places such an emphasis on the role of 'Archbishop'. Surely, the Church now needs to move beyond this Byzantine/Medieval conception of hierarchy. Certainly it is broken here in England. Most of our cathedral closes - to say nothing of the 'Royal Peculiars' - are simply bastions of fussiness; where immensely privileged people pretend to be serving the Kingdom, and Kingship, of God. In the conception of Existentialist Philosphy, Jesus of Nazareth had to have been the most 'authentic' human being who ever lived: a devoted Jew, whose entire life centred on the Father. However, he lived in the 1st-Century, in warm climes: so one cannot easily speak of the "imitation of Christ", in the 21st-Century. And then we arrive at SEX: and here is where the Churches' teaching (based on Jewish teaching) is so out of touch with reality: when it applies a 1st-Century 'code' to the 21st-Century. The Churches' are still teaching that a bride and groom who present for CHRISTIAN marriage, should both be 'virgin' as they approach the officiating 'priest'. Meanwhile, the Human Sciences teach us that boys and girls in adolescence are discovering their growing sexual maturity, are curious about it, and confused about it. I'm just reading 'LEAVING ALEXANDRIA', the autobiography of dear Richard Holloway, former Primus of the Episcopal Church of Scotland and Bishop of Edinburgh. The torment that man went through on his first sexual encounter with a land-army girl, as a direct consequence of the teachings of the Kelham Fathers, was awful. And that was a heterosexual encounter! Imagine being a young homosexual adolescent, raised in a Church, today. 'SAFEGUARDING' is not a means of protecting adolescents from predatory adults: it is a sick consequence of sick, puritanical, sex-hating, teaching about human sexuality. We do not 'throw-a-switch' from childhood to sexual maturity. It is a process; and it can be filled with confusion: but nowhere moreso than at the hands of the Churches. Back in the 1970s, I predicted (in correspondence with the late Monica Furlong) that, "the ship of the Church will founder on the rocks of human sexuality". And so it is proving. The Church (as Holloway testifies) continues to treat sex as though it is the most calamitous of 'sins': and ALWAYS as 'sin' outside of marriage. Never mind avarice, pride, theft or violence.....concentrate on sex! Just look at 'Catholic Unscripted', your own Channel, Calvin Robinson, Rev Dan, any and all of them are obsessed with sex. We should be obsessed with LOVE. And if you get your teaching on something as important as 'human sexuality' wrong, then what else are you getting wrong? Small wonder the Church is in it current parlous condition. The way to protect adolescents is sound teaching about what is happening to them, how natural it is, and of the pathogenic dangers they may face, if not fully aware. They may be taught, too, that they may have several sexual encounters (even in the form of an expression of interest); but - very occasionally - if they are very lucky, they will meet the person who triggers them to exercise an 'Act-of-Will'......"I want to be with you; if you'll have me!" But the Churches are as far from being able to teach such things at an official level as ever. 'Holy' scripture - read the wrong way - gets in the way!
