on Sunday, 3 August 2008 at 5.44 pm by Simon Sarmiento
categorised as Anglican Communion, Lambeth Conference 2008
Audio of the entire press conference is now available here.
A shrewd question from Christopher Landau about gay blessings. ABC doesn’t like the idea of liturgies expressing a pastoral response because of what the Church may be seen to be endorsing. But doesn’t liturgy always respond to human need? Otherwise what is it for?
What continues to amaze me is that the ABC never seems to be challenged by the press about why no out GLBT people are ever officially consulted about or asked to be members of the new committees and working groups he forms. The ABC speaks of GLBT people voluntarily sacrificing themselves. Why should they, if their voices are not valued enough as laypersons, clergy, and bishop for the ABC to call upon them for service? When will the ABC join Indaba groups with GLBTs throughout the Communion? Why doesn’t he see the need for trust-building? I listened to the ABC… Read more »
“The ABC speaks of GLBT people voluntarily sacrificing themselves. Why should they, if their voices are not valued enough as laypersons, clergy, and bishop for the ABC to call upon them for service?”
Because Christians are called to sacrifice themselves for others without a thought for personal reward or recognition?
“Because Christians are called to sacrifice themselves for others without a thought for personal reward or recognition?”–Ford Elms
Sorry Ford, but no. Justice trumps turning the other cheek every time.
“I hope and pray”…
What a forlorn note on which to end the press conference. I felt so sorry for the ABC because, of course, while, publicly, he may hope and pray that the rights and dignities of LGBT people are not at issue, he knows, full well, privately, that they are. How sad.
“Because Christians are called to sacrifice themselves for others without a thought for personal reward or recognition?” And they are called to be perpetual scapegoats too? If there is any indication that the sacrifice will actually help to allow the church to help its conservative brothers and sisters to grow into acceptance of lgbt people it makes sense. But if it’s just a means of avoiding to deal with its own abuses, the church has no right to ask the victims to remain quiet. And I don’t mean Western victims, but those who are constantly risking their lives simply by… Read more »
I think you’re missing sheila’s point, Ford.
Christians sacrifice themselves, willingly, “for the Kingdom of God.”
LGBT Anglicans, conversely (perversely!), are being asked to sacrifice ourselves (“back to the closet”), only to CONFIRM THE PREJUDICES of those who find us disgusting and sinful. In so doing, the sacrifice of LGBTs is only being used to THWART God and God’s Kingdom.
Heavens NO, I say! (as I believe, God willing, also will say the General Convention of TEC)
True liturgy is for the glory and worship of God!
One should always choose to sacrifice oneself for the _good_ of others. But in this case, sacrificing oneself to allow others to remain in what we believe to be error seems not to make much sense. If it did, then one might well ask why the “conservatives” should not sacrifice to allow the “liberals” to continue in error. All this talk is meaningless unless we can get to the nub of the issue: is same-sex behavior always wrong, or can it be permitted within the context of a faithful, life-long, monogamous relationship. That is the only question that is actually… Read more »
What is liturgy for? At its best it should be pointing us back to God. I see no reason to expect that recognizing God who is should confirm us in our opinions, liberal or conservative. JCF, I have heard it said that what Jesus promised was the Kingdom, and what we got was the institution called the church. It seems to me that there are plenty who would agree with the statement, but take it as a complaint against the church. Although there are plenty of things to grumble about in the church, I wonder if part of the reason… Read more »
Tobias, you angel! You have what I believe to be the only real answer to the current problem, And that is to live, and let live – as our social and cultural systems allow us. Paul would tell us to obey those (governments) who are put over us by God. However, where those governments are abusive of human rights, the Church ought, by faith in a just God, to oppose them. But where governments are seeking the good of all it’s subjects, then should not the Church be backing them up? However, in the present circumstances, it would seem that… Read more »
“Justice trumps turning the other cheek every time.” The two are not mutually exclusive. “If there is any indication that the sacrifice will actually help to allow the church to help its conservative brothers and sisters to grow into acceptance of lgbt people it makes sense.” Erika, and others, is there any indication that it won’t? Don’t refer to what has gone before. We have talked at each other, not to each other all these years. What if we refused to get married, but increased the pressure on conservatives to actually obey Lambeth? What if we went to places like… Read more »
Thanks Fr. Ron. This is a real problem in a “world-wide church” — which is one of the reasons I’m an Anglican — part of a fellowship of local or provincial churches. The whole point is that cultures differ from place to place. The tensions in Anglicanism come from Lambeth, they aren’t solved by it — it was an instrument of disunity in 1998. I’m glad to see that the position on sexuality described in the final summary this time moves us a bit back towards the position of 1988 — that is, it articulates the division of opinion. Will… Read more »