on Sunday, 14 October 2007 at 3.30 pm by Simon Sarmiento
categorised as Church of England
Alan Wilson, who is Bishop of Buckingham in the Diocese of Oxford, has written on his blog:
What kind of party spirit am I on? Someone asked me if I’m going to the Lambeth conference.
Read it all…
Wonderful. This should be sent to all the bishops in the communion.
Nice! Approve! Recommend!
ps does he want to borrow my stab-proof vest for Lambeth?
Beautiful. He reminds us that Jesus sat and ate with Judas. Appropriate imagery as there are those who self-profess with pride that their strategies include guerilla warfare to maim and destroy others’. In Latin America, one strategy was to hand over enemies to “death squads”, the Judases of our time.
“In Latin America, one strategy was to hand over enemies to “death squads”, the Judases of our time.” Cheryl Va. Clough
And the beat goes on at a slightly different pitch…what is it?…”the animals change but the circus remains the same!”
I sent it to my bishop. We need more Bishops like Bishop Wilson to speak up. When holiness, humility and humor combine, it is a wonderful thing.
I wonder what this means, bishop?
1 Corinthians 5:11
“But now I am writing to you not to associate with anyone who bears the name of brother if he is guilty of sexual immorality or greed, or is an idolater, reviler, drunkard, or swindler—not even to eat with such a one.”
(note – it is not just one particular sin mentioned here (so it is not appropriate to cry persecution) – a lack of repentance on any of the various sins mentioned by St Paul should not be acceptable in the church leadership)
1 Corinthans 5:11
And where did Jesus say the same thing?
What needs be discussed first, NP dear, is how authentic this passage can be – including all of prestent (that is early 13th century) “chapters” 4 and 5, from 4:17 (with its mentioning of “Timothy” of Pastorals fame) to 5:13.
For whatever co-habitating with one’s fathers 3rd or 4th wife may be (5:1), it most certainly isn’t porneía; prostitution, in a n y sense – sacral or otherwise…
I wonder what this means, NP?
‘Judge not, that you not be judged. For with what judgement you judge, you will be judged, and with the measure you use it will be measured back to you.
And why do you look at the speck in your brother’s eye, but do not consider the plank in your own eye?’
You will have noticed on Bishop Alan’s blog a link to the following – what he appropriately describes as a Matthew 7.1 free zone:
Goodness NP, I think your cover may have been blown!
I’m so glad you mentioned 1 Cor 5:11 NP.
Are there no greedy among your brethren NP?
Are there no revilers? You might be described as a reviler yourself, no?
As to sexual immorality – the whole point, as you well know, is that those who defend loving, life-long, faithful homosexual relationships, and those who aspire to them, do not accept that they can be characterised as sexually immoral – quite the contrary.
So, let’s get back to the easy bit. Where do you stand on revilers?
“Goodness NP, I think your cover may have been blown!”
Hardly, this woman didn’t mention Lambeth 1.10 once!
So many picking up the torch! I pray you have more success than me, NP is a difficult nut to crack. Romans 14 and 15 aren’t a part of NP’s Bible. And Jesus telling us not to judge means nothing, and Paul, as NP has so often told us, gives us “authority” to judge. And it’s all about judging, Christianity is a religion of judgement.
Erika – do you really want to defend your position that unless you have something from the lips of the Lord it is has little or less authority? (note, it is not a strong position) badman – again, interpret in context. 1 Cor 5 has the context of dealing with immorality in the church and people justifying certain sins. You quote a passage about not judging which is part of teaching aimed at teaching all about our universal sinfulness….. and it comes from the same Lord who also teaches about wolves looking like sheep (clear implication there is avoid the… Read more »
Forgive me, NP, but I did not quote a passage about not judging. You seem to be confusing me with someone else.
I put a pointed challenge to you about revilers, and I will be interested if you care to re-read my post and respond, specifically, to that.
“Re the bishop who wants an “anything goes” Lambeth – well, there is zero biblical support for that, especially as we are talking about a conference of leaders as there are very clear (OT&NT) biblical standards for leaders.”
As I am unable to find any reference to “Lambeth” in the bible at all, I find this comment utterly impossible to understand.
If what people say contradicts the spirit of the gospels and especially Jesus’ words, then, yes, I find it difficult to see how they can be right.
I’m not sure why you think that’s a weak position.
badman – sorry about that….anyway, to your points re revilers or the greedy – there is nobody to my knowledge preaching that “greed is good” or “we are called to revile”….. so, unless you know of bishops who are unrepentant on these issues, like certain TEC bishops are re certain issues, we do not have a problem. Let me say, if we had a bishop preaching “greed is good”, I would be just as much against that as any other attempt to justify a sin. I am very pleased to see the chap in Harare being dealt with…. nice one… Read more »
“it is has little or less authority? (note, it is not a strong position)” So, the fact that Jesus didn’t tell us to pray to His Mum is not a strong argument? I knew it wasn’t, glad you agree. “We have to interpret any verse in the light of its passage, its book and the whole bible to see what God means….do we not?” Unless of course we try to do that WRT homosexuality, in which case you accuse us of fudging, selling out the Gospel to the world, and not believing in anything at all. This is the point:… Read more »
How silly of me! I thought the subject of Peter’s vision was not the food per se; I was under the impression that real subject was Cornelius himself. I’ll just have to stop looking for allegory and symbollism in the text.
“…unless you have something from the lips of the Lord it is has little or less authority…”
The person who quotes Paul against Jesus actually wrote this?
Korach bickering at its most absurd.
“You really think people would have St Paul’s support in telling me that Lambeth 1.10 should not stand?” Actually, yes, I do…because I think Paul was bright enough to realize that our understanding of the natural world and of human sexuality has changed–for the better–and thus realize that what he THOUGHT he understood about God’s revelation nearly 2000 years ago was mistaken. Of course, that also presumes that all our translations of Paul’s word from Greek into English are correct in the first place, a presumption I am not always willing to make. Somebody here probably knows this–did Paul write… Read more »
Pat: I have a feeling Paul almost certainly did read and write Greek: he couldn’t have made use of the Septuagint (LXX) otherwise. Josephus seems to have relied on the LXX in his citation of Jewish scripture, so we can assume that it was widely adopted even in Jerusalam. And there is textual evidence that Paul relied on the LXX in Romans, 1 Corinthians, and elsewhere. I doubt also that Paul would have been addressed the Areopagus in anything other than Greek, given his extensive travels in the Greek speaking world, and the early Christian communities outside Palestine, chiefly made… Read more »
Pat – do you make the same argument re greed?
Do you argue that we should not criticise greed in the church because we really cannot be sure that the bible actually is down on greed?
Do you read any other book in order to get it to mean the opposite to what it says consistently?
Ford – do you really think reading scripture in context supports in effect ditching Lambeth 1.10?
Either certain behaviours are “incompatible with scripture” or they are not….. so, was the 1998 problem that the AC bishops did not know that they should read scripture in context?
“there is nobody to my knowledge preaching that “greed is good” or “we are called to revile”…..
So unless you preach that it’s ok to do, you may go and do it to your heart’s content?
And where in the bible do you find evidence for that?
Erika says “So unless you preach that it’s ok to do, you may go and do it to your heart’s content? “
Where did I say anthing of the like?
“By no means”…might be St Paul’s answer.
Erika – I hope you can see the difference between all being sinners and actually trying to justify a sin, preaching it is good.
So, no, it is not ok to be unrepentant with regard to any sin whether one preaches against it or not.
The bible is quite clear on greed, NP. “Thou shalt not covet…” is pretty straight-forward.
But there’s no similar straight-forward “Thou shalt not…” regarding sexuality at all, except for adultery–not in either testament.
And don’t point me to something in Leviticus or Deuteronomy…if we’re not expected to follow the rules about clothing, or food, or land use in those books, why single out the ones about sex? (Especially since you keep insisting on using modern terms the authors had no knowledge of to interpret ancient words.)
Can someone remind me where the legal protection and rights for eunuchs exist? How are they protected in terms of marriage, inheritance, caring for dependant e.g. legal jurisdiction to authorise medical treatment if their child is in an accident? After all, these were covenants promised and enshrined before Jesus’ incarnation – you know those things that Jesus and his priests had supposedly completely fulfilled. e.g. Isaiah 56:3-8 “…let not any eunuch complain, “I am only a dry tree.” For this is what the LORD says: “To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose what pleases me and hold fast… Read more »
“Either certain behaviours are “incompatible with scripture” or they are not”
Well, you don’t seem to care if your behaviour is compatible with Scripture, so where do you get off hurling this at everybody else?
Ford says “So, the fact that Jesus didn’t tell us to pray to His Mum is not a strong argument? I knew it wasn’t, glad you agree.” ok, I guess you are slightly tongue-in-cheek on that one Ford but… I am saying to Erika that just because we do not have a record of what the Lord said on a particular subject, we cannot then assume he agrees with us and use that to dismiss other OT and NT verses. The Lord is on record as coming not to abolish the law…and he was not that soft on sin (eg… Read more »
And according to his blog site, Bishop Alan is an alumnus of Wycliffe Hall.
Lambeth 1.10 = Council of Nicaea, or so NP would have us believe with his/her breathless repetition, and “challenge” to anyone who crosses quills with NP.
Sorry, but that’s nothing but male bovine manure, NP.
Ford – for the umpteenth time, 2 wrongs do not make a right …….. you would have a point if you had me on record trying to justify any behaviour “incompatible with scripture”….but you do not but even if I am a hypocrite and a sinner (which I am), the church should stand for biblical truth
Jerry – no, the strength of Lambeth 1.10 in my eyes is only that is refers to scripture and correctly identifies certain behaviours as incompatible with it….
I do not see the liberal ABC or his Lambeth Palace politicians getting Lambeth 1.10 amended or deleted next year, do you? Guess why?
I think a number of us here on TA believe that you spend much of your time here reviling those of us you don’t agree with, calling us liars, deliberately ignoring scripture etc.
I suspect you believe you are simply pointing out false teaching and that you are required to judge.
Even if that were the case, you display such a self-righteousness, such a lack of understanding and compassion for those you talk to, and such a lack of charity, that “reviling” really describes many of your contributions quite well.
“it is not ok to be unrepentant with regard to any sin whether one preaches against it or not.” You keep talking about what people teach, yet here you are saying it’s not whether or not they teach against a particular sin, but whether or not they are repentant. Fair enough. I agree in principle, though I am not so rigid on the matter, me being a sinner myself and all, and hardly qualified to question God’s choice of bishop for His Church, Paul not having given me his special grace of judgement. So why then do you idolize as… Read more »
Can’t help noticing that while Ford, Erika, Cheryl and many others post their comments to NP using their full names, NP hides behind a set of initials. I don’t wish to suggest that this is a cowardly act, – perhaps it is just habit. However, I do wonder:
1. If he/she would be a little more respectful of others if he/she “came out” and used his/her real name.
2. Where he/she finds the time to take on so many correspondents. The cynic in me wonders if he/she is paid to do this work, hence the secrecy.
“for the umpteenth time, 2 wrongs do not make a right”
And for the umpteenth time, I am not, have never, claimed they do.
“if you had me on record trying to justify any behaviour “incompatible with scripture””
I have. Many times. Each time you have produced a fudge argument as to why that particular behaviour is acceptable. Such arguments are no more acceptable for behaviours you like than they are for things you don’t like, NP.
Yes, NP …. If your point of view is intended to promote Christianity, shouldn’t you be able to accomplish that end with love and charity? OR perhaps it is about condemning others which is to imply that you are somehow better than they are. A speaker I heard recently recalled that when an unchurched person was asked what their impression of a Christian was, they replied: “someone who thinks they are better than everyone else”. Is this the version of Christianity you wish to promote? If so you are doing an excellent job! And please realize that although your ostensible… Read more »
Jesus promised gentleness and he refused to stone the adulterous woman. What does forgiveness mean in some families? If you don’t sin, then I won’t beat you with the belt or rant accusations at you? That makes sense; such parents only beat and insult their children because they sinned. If their kids never misbehaved, they would never be in trouble. Silly me, I thought we were talking about a loving and forgiving God the Father. I didn’t realise some are worshipping the Accuser. “I do not see the liberal ABC or his Lambeth Palace politicians getting Lambeth 1.10 amended or… Read more »
NP: “I do not see the liberal ABC or his Lambeth Palace politicians getting Lambeth 1.10 amended or deleted next year” It has to be remembered NP, that Lambeth is NOT the Communion´s Parliament! The vast majority of bishops are not elected – they do not represent us in that sense. (Although they should be elected in my view, given how political the Communion has become). Get back to the original concept of Lambeth – pray and worship together, focus on matters of what it means to be a bishop, and calm theological discussion with no “Resolutions”. A sort of… Read more »
NP posted: “I do not see the liberal ABC or his Lambeth Palace politicians getting Lambeth 1.10 amended or deleted next year, do you? Guess why?” Why? Because, NP, it isn’t important. Besides, that one resolution has also been taken wholly out of context by people, like you, who only wish to focus upon things they like, rather than things they don’t like. But, Lambeth resolutions have no juridical authority anyway, NP. Also, as has been said, so many times, by so many people, the Church Universal has changed over the millennia, as God’s gift of human reason has combined… Read more »
Bautista – you seem very judgmental….but pls explain what “meaness” you mean. Jerry says of Lambeth 1.10: “it isn’t important. Besides, that one resolution has also been taken wholly out of context by people, like you…” – just me and a few mad Reform types or also the Primates of the AC and TWR? Jerry also says ” the Church Universal has changed over the millennia”…..indeed and have you noticed, Jerry, that TEC(USA) is out of line with the vast majority of Catholics and Protestants in the US (let alone the world)…..since you care about the views of the “Church… Read more »
Just a little while ago someone “in the know” (i.e. who knew NP’s name before the pseudonym) commented about how their postings had deteriorated since the name change. So loss of respect is an issue.
Whether they are being paid, are devoted or obsessed is a matter of conjecture. Not my place to judge.
Just know that their fruits are nasty and not consistent with the gentleness promised by Jesus.
Andrew – you worry about “NP” but do not worry on other names eg “cryptogram” and “badman” above….why is that? How do we know your name is really Andrew? How do we know you are not paid? How do we know you are some anti-liberal trying to squash discussion here? (easy to ask questions, ain’t it?) As I have said before, I am quite addicted to talking to people here….it is interesting seeing the arguments people come up with and testing them. I think we make progress sometimes but at least both sides are informed of other views…. this is… Read more »
“Jerry also says ” the Church Universal has changed over the millennia”…..indeed and have you noticed, Jerry, that TEC(USA) is out of line with the vast majority of Catholics and Protestants in the US (let alone the world)…..since you care about the views of the “Church Universal””
SOMEBODY always has to initiate the changes before they become universal.
“pls explain what “meaness” you mean.”
Good luck, Bautista!
Trolls go away when people ignore them.
NP prays me in aid for his pseudonymity. “cryptogram” is a cryptogram. One blog owner commented that it is far too easy to solve. Put together the hints given over many months and look at the appropriate reference book (OK, let’s make it easy, Crockford) and you shouldn’t have too much difficulty. And I have posted en clair.
NP could stand for anything. I think I did have the name which lurks behind the initials (Trinity Hall?) but it could just as easily stand for Numbskull Prot, Nice Prebyterian, Not Predestined…
The subject matter here is Alan Wilson’s opinions about attending Lambeth. I am not approving comments which do not relate to this. (Maybe some of the most prolific commenters will get the hint soon….)
Well, I liked Bishop Wilson’s comments very much (a very sensible Church of England bishop) — apparently the Crown Appointments Commission sometimes works (but suffragans are nominated by the diocesan, aren’t they?).