A community is either a group of people living near one another or a group of people with the same interests. Since lesbians are interested in women, homosexuals are interested in men, bisexuals are interested in both and transsexuals are confused about who they are interested in, that amounts to four “communities”. He seems to have forgotten that the sexual deviancy alphabet has gone forth and multiplied to include at least LGBTQQIP, Queer, Questioning, Intersex, and Pansexual; by this time next year there will undoubtedly be more. Where will he find the time to listen to them all?
And what about the heterosexual “community”? Will he listen to them? Probably not; no-one listens to them.
I suspect “LGBT communities” was a circumlocutory way of saying Changing Attitude.
It would have been far more interesting, refreshing and radical if he had announced that he wants to listen attentively to same-sex attracted individuals who are attempting – with little help from the church – to resist the attraction. Too much to hope for, I suppose.
From here:
On another divisive issue within the faith, he said that there must be “no truck with any form of homophobia, in any part of the church” while seeming to acknowledge the difficulty that view causes foreign adherents.
“What the church does here deeply affects the already greatly suffering churches in places I’ve mentioned like Nigeria,” he said. “I support the House of Bishops’ statement in the summer in answer to the government’s consultation on same-sex marriage. But I also know I need to listen very attentively to the LGBT communities, and examine my own thinking carefully and prayerfully.”
I too am concerned both by what the bishop has said recently and by the warmth of the welcome his appointment has received from American liberals, but I also think we should not prejudge him until we see what he actually does.
I will be very interested to hear the reactions from Africa and South America.
I agree. It could be he is just being diplomatic.
prayerfully? is that CoE for knee-jerk?
Practically anyone will be better than Rowan. Even an open revisionist will be better than the fence sitting do nothing but talk Rowan. At least that way will finally know if the ship is lost or not.
If what I read here about this guy is accurate, than my impression is that he is being “managed”. Saying all the right things, not rocking Rowans boat. Within a year we shall know where he stands on the pressing issues of our time, or if he stands for anything.
Given that he came to faith at Holy Trinity, Brompton and is known to be an open/charismatic evangelical, I’m pretty sure he does stand for something, recognises that there are limits on the diversity of Scriptural interpretation, and is not, at heart, a revisionist.
The question for me is not so much what he believes as what he will do about it.
The analogy of “Rowans boat”, reminded me of Paul’s exhortation to young Timothy,”This charge I commit to you, son Timothy,…..that by them you may wage the good warfare, having faith and a good conscience, which some having rejected have suffered SHIPWRECK.”
I fear this battle for the faith is lost, the immutable Word of God is questioned, and the supremacy of Christ Jesus has been abandoned, and the shipwreck has taken place on the reef and altar of LGBT.
Let me preface my comment by saying that I think the ABC is relatively irrelevant. The living breathing parts of the global Anglican communion have learned to not look to Canterbury for direction.
However it would be nice to have a good irrelevant ABC. Alas I fear this may not be the man. There are signs of the now-familiar pattern: put a “conservative” in charge, he builds the trust of the remaining Christians, then he goes through a personal “process of discover” including “listening” and over a period of years tries to bring as many of the faithful as possible with him to a liberal point of view. Not long after that, of course, the newly-minted liberals realize that they can get morality-free, theologically-agnostic fellowship at Starbucks for less money and without exposing their children to x-rated ideas, and they leave the church.
This has worked well over many years, as evidenced by the declining membership in North America and the UK.
Precisely. It’s a very old song by now.
Now is the time when we juxtapose!
“… he said that there must be “no truck with any form of homophobia, in any part of the church … I need to listen very attentively to the LGBT communities, and examine my own thinking carefully and prayerfully.””
In other words, the establishment has appointed yet another stooge to get the gays into pulpits as quickly as possible. After all, we all know by now that the technique to ram something down the throats of the unwilling is to silence them with “raaaaaccccist!” (or similar charming hate-filled chants) while “listening” to whatever it is that they intend to promote.
At least, it doesn’t seem to me to bear any other meaning, or be capable of any other meaning.
Which explains the fawning congratulation from the unbelievers.
Its time for Her Majesty to admit defeat to the Pope and return everything her ancient predecessor took from Rome.
The former Cardinal Ratzinger would make short work of the old C of E and then maybe tell Mrs. Schori that all those churches that popped up in the colonies are really Rome’s.
I can’t see the one year bishop now ABC getting due deference from the rest of the Bishops in (what remains of) the Communion.
The ABC, respectfully, is irrelevant. He is, in truth, last among equals.
I think he sounds fairly thoughtful and kind.