LIBERALS FRAME DEBATE FORCING ORTHODOX TO DEFEND THEMSELVES

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
11/22/2007

Whenever liberals excoriate the orthodox for holding to "rigid positions" on sexuality, they do it by making conservatives look fundamentalist, uninclusive, and lacking diversity, while ignoring the real issues like poverty, HIV/AIDS and a woman's right to free abortion.

Liberals and pansexualists also want to make it very clear, and underscore, that if the Anglican Communion splits it is the fault of narrow-minded conservatives who can't see beyond the end of their moral and theological noses. If they would just rediscover the big tent of Anglicanism with its Via Media approach to just about everything, all will be well and all manner of things will be well.

The man who comes in for the most bashing and vitriol is Peter Akinola, Archbishop of Nigeria. Now if Akinola were an African-American, white liberals would never dare say the things about him that they do. They get away with it because he is ensconced in Africa and does not have access to America's legal system. Bishops Spong, Griswold, Shaw, Bennison et all have all said things about Akinola and his fellow African bishops that would be deemed racist and be subject to lawsuits were they spoken on US soil to a US African-American bishop. They can say the things they do and know they can get away with because Akinola is a "fundamentalist" who lives in Africa, far from the litigious North American scene.

Pennsylvania Bishop Charles E. Bennison's memorable line likening the growth of the church in Africa to that of the Nazi Party will probably make the history books. On another occasion he called African Anglicans "extreme Anglicans." The majority are black and are tied to the Church of England even more than we are, he said. An enormous lie, if ever there was one. Liberals and pansexualists are constantly pleading their case with one eye firmly fixed on the Archbishop of Canterbury, begging him to accept New Hampshire Gene Robinson to Lambeth next year regardless of what Dr. Williams might think about sodomy. American liberals would build an altar and sacrifice Akinola on it if it would guarantee an invitation for the homoerotic bishop of New Hampshire - and these people don't even believe in the atonement and the blood of Jesus to cleanse them from all their sins. But Akinola is certainly worth sacrificing for the greater cause of Anglican unity!

Something calling itself the Inclusive Church held their first conference in Derbyshire, England recently, and Dr. Jenny Te Paa Principal of the College of St. John the Evangelist in Auckland, New Zealand, a member of the 2003 Lambeth Commission, and someone assisting in the St Augustine's Seminar responsible for planning the detailed content for the forthcoming Lambeth Conference 2008 (talk about the loading dice for what the content of the Lambeth Conference will be) had this to say.

She condemned what she called the 'reach of enmity' among Anglicans. In a strong speech, Te Paa reminded her listeners "how pervasive the reach of enmity has become amongst us." She told her audience "not to notice the bad behavior of the few, but the good behavior of the many."

So who exactly are those who have enmity and who practice "bad behavior"? Mrs. Jefferts Schori and her legal pit bull David Booth Beers as they sue dioceses and parishes? I don't think so. Jon Bruno Bishop of Los Angeles who is repeatedly suing three orthodox parishes for their properties? I doubt it. What about uninclusive liberal dioceses that refuse to allow graduates of the evangelical Trinity Episcopal School for Ministry exercise their gospel ministry in their dioceses? Not a prayer. Or the 2,000 pansexualists in The Episcopal Church who are pounding the bricks for sodomy seven days a week in every parish and diocesan convention, bullying priests and bishops (look what Louie Crew had to say about SW Florida Bishop Dabney Smith recently). http://tinyurl.com/2b4n4p

Sodomists are TOTALLY RELENTLESS in their pursuit, read behavior, of inclusion. The Episcopal-recognized organization Integrity has its leader Susan Russell running to her computer at every opportunity to push LGBT issues to the forefront on every occasion. She is utterly and totally relentless to the point of viciousness in making sure that anyone, bishop or priest who stands in the way of the full inclusion of non-celibate sexual behavior in TEC is included in every statement. The only sexual behavior not to get a pass in The Episcopal Church is, of course, adultery.

Dr. Te Paa lamented the church's obsession with drawing lines that exclude, which is distracting us from the enormous suffering so many people face. We must not "fret and fight" while people are literally dying. Perhaps Mrs Te Paa should talk with Archbishop Bernard Malango of Central Africa whose province is being torn apart over sexuality issues. This province is dying not because of poverty or HIV/AIDS but the relentless pursuit of sodomite acceptance by a bishop and a wannabe English cleric who wants to be a bishop resulting in the destruction of an entire province.

Really. The only people drawing the lines in the Anglican culture wars are liberals and pansexualists. THEY and not the orthodox have drawn the lines (of exclusion) demanding full acceptance of a behavior that the church in 2,000 years has never endorsed by the vast majority of Roman Catholics, Orthodox and Evangelicals of all stripes.

At the same conference the Rev. Canon Giles Goddard, chair of Inclusive Church, said, "We are not a pressure group of the like-minded." He added, "We are ordinary Anglicans who love our church, and we are deeply concerned by the way in which the effort to exclude is overtaking the calling to live the Gospel."

That's a downright lie at least in the American Episcopal Church. No group has done more pressuring than Integrity, The few hundred LGBT folk use every diocesan convention, and for the last 25 years, every General Convention, to pressure the Episcopal Church into accepting their abominable behavior. It is a fiction to say otherwise.

Their tactics are nothing short of Stalinist. First preach, change a few lay people and priests' minds, raise unholy hell, convince a few bishops, and then coerce the rest. When the rest don't follow, pass a resolution demanding they do, then bully them, scream at them (you can take lessons from Jack Spong, Gene Robinson or Walter Righter) and then set out to destroy those who don't share the now "majority" opinion. Is it any wonder whole dioceses are fleeing the Episcopal Church. How much more should they take from "tolerant" liberals, read revisionists?

A case in point is women's ordination. What was initially a matter of conscience is now fully accepted and DEMANDED in The Episcopal Church. And if you don't conform you will be hounded out of the church. Just ask Ft. Worth Bishop Jack Iker and what he has had to put up with for the sake of his conscience on this issue. It has been nothing but misery in the way he has been beaten up by a single laywoman Katie Sherrod in his diocese who gets full liberal media attention and support from the national church whenever she opens her mouth.

One only has to scan liberal Episcopal bloggers to read the nastiness and anger at anyone who opposes the pansexual agenda of the Episcopal Church. It is a sight to behold. Their anger and vitriol would fill volumes. The informal HOB/D Listserv which features mostly liberals commenting on church issues occasionally has an occasional orthodox commentator. He is torn to shreds the moment he appears and dares to challenge the current zeitgeist.

Is it any wonder that in recent months four Episcopal bishops have fled to Rome, another has joined CANA (The Nigerian Anglican province). Bishops are now being consecrated in a half dozen African provinces with the Province of the Southern Cone now offering a safe place for fleeing orthodox dioceses. Two Canadian bishops have even leaped off the floundering Anglican Church of Canada for the spiritual safety of the Southern Cone.

The Inclusive Church crowd meeting in Derbyshire concluded with this statement: "180 people have gathered here at a time in which many people are concerned that the generous tolerance which has characterized Anglicanism is under serious threat from those who wish to divide the church."

GENEROUS TOLERANCE! Mrs. Tee Pa comes from the province of the Anglican Church of Aotearoa New Zealand and Polynesia that is more than 70% liberal. There is only one orthodox Anglican diocesan holdout in the whole country - Nelson - and I am told that there is now contention in this diocese over the issues. The Province doesn't have to "tolerate" orthodox folk. Like the Borg, most opposition has been stifled or absorbed.

If Anglican unity is being threatened it is being threatened by its innovators not by those who stand for the 'faith once delivered for all to the saints'. It is people like Robinson, Bennison, Bruno, Crew, Shaw, Schori, the majority of Episcopal bishops and laymen like Louie Crew who want to change the church's received teaching to make it conform to their desires.

Don't blame orthodox Episcopalians, or evangelicals like Sydney Archbishop Peter Jensen, or Recife Bishop Robinson Cavilcanti (who has still not received an invitation to Lambeth next year) while his liberal counterparts in Brazil have, or the CAPA bishops in Africa, or Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan. These men are KEEPING the faith not destroying it. Tolerance for sexual sin is not on their agenda, and they fear the eternal destiny of the immortal souls of those who don't repent. They will not join them.

To paraphrase: "Woe unto you, sodomites and self-righteous liberals, hypocrites! For you destroy the orthodox, and for a pretence preach inclusion and diversity: therefore you shall receive the greater damnation...Woe unto you, for you compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, you make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves."

Woe indeed.

END