Skelton was recently interviewed by the CBC (listen here, March 18 starting at 2:17:00). Her appointment as bishop, she tells us, was the result of “a thing called discernment”; nothing to do with a thing called career advancement ambition. Well, she didn’t actually make the latter remark.
In the interview, she states once again that she is fully supportive of the blessing of same-sex unions and that there is no longer much of a wedge between those who support same-sex unions and those who don’t. She has reached this conclusion by listening; to whom, I wonder? Obviously not to those who left the diocese over the issue.
Losing the majority of those with whom one disagrees and calling it “healing” would, in the secular realm, be a thing called spin. In the Diocese of New Westminster where selective listening is such a refined art, it’s a thing called discernment.
Just listened to her sounds pretty interesting has things to offer.
Just watched show in Passionate Eye Ch26 Holy Money about the Roman Catholic Church and its’ financial end. Well, the theme is that theological trained persons also need a good business side too.
The new Bishop has a business side is needed.
Also, the new See of Canterbury Archbishop Justin Welby also has a business side too.
Both situations are good.
Unfortunately the church is not a business and should not be run like a business ,but if we are going to that model ,there should be a lot in middle and upper management that should be fired for incompetence.
It would certainly make for a heck of a shareholders’ meeting.
“there is no longer much of a wedge between those who support same-sex unions and those who don’t”
?!?!?!?
Does she actually hear herself??? This makes absolutely no sense, none what-so-ever! Unless she means that “those who don’t” have either been forced out or left by their own choice out of disgust. In which case the more accurate statement would be
“there is no longer much of a wedge between those who support same-sex unions and those who don’t because those who don’t really don’t matter in my church and they have been ignored.”
There can be a great gulf fixed between those who “hold the purse” and those who uphold The WORD of GOD. + John 12.
Just further proof that she cannot claim to be a bishop or even a Christian. Clearly she rejects both the authority of Scripture and the uniqueness of Jesus Christ. There will always be a wedge between Christians and those who want to write their own edition of Scripture. She falls into the same pit as Michael Ingham.
Talking of discernment, I have now observed in person two episcopal elections in my Diocese, and discerned no discernment at all. “Quos deus vult perdere, prius dementat” (Whom the gods would destroy they first make mad) is the only possible verdict.
In any episcopal election, there is no guarantee that the members will vote according to the will of God. Christians often make mistakes. For example, in 1934 German Christians endorsed the action of Adolf Hitler as God’s working in history. “We are full of thanks to God that He, as Lord of history, has given us Adolf Hitler our leader and saviour from our difficult lot. We acknowledge that we, with body and soul, are bound and dedicated to the German state and to its Fuhrer. This bondage and duty contains for us, as evangelical Christians, its deepest and most holy significance in its obedience to the command of God” (G. C. Berkouwer, The Providence of God, 1952, pp. 176-177). The bottom line is that Christians of all theological positions are capable of making big mistakes from time to time.
You invariably make the most measured, reasonable points in these discussions, Michael. Thank you.
I’ll be interested in seeing how she’ll try to plug the leaks in the diocesan boat. Almost certainly it will involve closing parishes and selling the land. But will she sell to ANIC, given that “there is no longer much of a wedge between those who support same-sex unions and those who don’t” ?