Wednesday, March 19, 2014

Double Standard?
FacebookShare on Google PlusTwitterHootsuiteLinkedInHootsuiteBufferCustom Sharing Tool
I see no difference between the “Reconciliation” promoted by Canterbury and the “Reconciliation”practiced by Dean Salmon at Nashotah. And yet there are some ACNA leaders who, seeking Communion legitimacy, would repudiate one and turn a blind eye to the other. The object, the precious ring, ismembership in the Anglican Communion. Anglican legitimacy and denominational unity, it is suggested, can only be found within the embrace of world-wide Communion structures. Perhaps Canterbury’s recognition might serve to snuff out or at least quell inter-ACNA strife over women’s ordination, the nature of the Church, the perennial divide between Reformed and Anglo-Catholic forms of Anglicanism.
But at what price?

If the Archbishop of Canterbury continues forward with his reconciliation plans, considering teachers who lead people away from Jesus to be “Christian” teachers (they recite the Creed after all), violating in every way the New Testament instructions for dealing with false teachers, and the ACNA seeks to be and (and I know this is a long shot) is received by Canterbury into the Communion, this would mean that once more parishes like Good Shepherd that made every effort to defend the people under their care from the slew and rot of heresy will, once more, be in full Communion with those who reject the gospel and, worse, be set under the enervating leadership of those who cannot tell the difference between a Christian leader and a wolf.

No thank you. So, again, I commend this statement to parish leaders throughout the ACNA. We will not compromise the gospel in order to win Canterbury’s approval.

No comments: