Down Under we see things differently.
I think the reason for this, Peter, is that ACNA is so securely tied up with the political machinations of the GAFCON Churches that it finds itself unable to respond to this injustice in a way common to any other Anglican Province - that values common justice as a mark of the Christian Gospel
I fear, Ron, that on this point, you are correct!
Perhaps Peter there is yet another way of reading all this.Two wrongs do not make a right. While I certainly view the recent legislative approaches of both Nigeria and Uganda to be seriously wrong, even “unjust” (Ron’s oft used word), there is another way to evaluate - yes, that key word - what is occurring overall.BOTH TEC AND the churches of Uganda/Nigeria have succumbed unfaithfully in their respective and very different ways to worldly, cultural pressures. Neither has remained true to genuine Christian views of human being and dignity and sexuality. TEC has succumbed to our present western mores surrounding sexual ‘identity’ etc., while Uganda and Nigeria have succumbed notably to Islamic pressure in the region to the entire gambit of homosexuality, homosexuals, and homosexual behaviour. In which case, this piece by Episcopal Café can be viewed as pretty disingenuous ... And such a view I grant will win few ‘friends’ overall. Yet I venture that is really rather what I’d also expect from a thorough-going and genuine Christian view.
There might be, Bryden. But another reading is that ++Robert is in a cleft stick as he recognises that being 'counter-cultural' is not as easy as it might have seemed in the first days of ACNA working with Africa.Might we have at least expected from him some signal that he was carefully reviewing everything he was seeing and hearing from Africa?
" this piece by Episcopal Café can be viewed as pretty disingenuous ." - Dr. Bryden Black -As, of course, Bryden, can any other religious opinion seem to those who are in conflict with it - on their own self-validated grounds.Also, I find the cliche 'sexual identity', in context here, to beg the question as to however one can 'choose' a 'sexual identity'. For most people, it's a given - not chosen out of cussedness. After all, given the choice, and the problems involved, who would actually 'choose to be gay? Did you actually choose to be heterosexual?
It certainly makes a mockery of the hypocritical way some Western traditionalists try to bring progressive-minded people on board by claiming "radical and counter-cultural" for their beliefs while also saying (effectively) "poor Africans agree with us, so if you disagree with us you're being a neo-colonialist." These two stances are incompatible, because as Bryden points out, being "traditionalist" on gender/sexuality is anything but counter-cultural in Uganda and Nigeria (and, I would argue, in NZ either).
Post a Comment