The Anglican Cathedral of St. John The Baptist in St. John’s Newfoundland was founded in 1699 and claims to be the oldest Anglican church in Canada.
The church just married two ladies to each other, which goes to show that wisdom does not necessarily accompany age.
The church’s mission statement needs to be rewritten because it currently contains this gross misstatement: “The Cathedral Parish will, by the Grace of God….. Preserve Anglican heritage and tradition of Newfoundland and Labrador”
From here:
Susan Green and Brenda Halley chose the Anglican Cathedral of St. John The Baptist as their church 12 years ago, little realizing that they would be part of history.
But earlier this month the Cathedral of St. John the Baptist—the oldest Anglican parish in Canada, founded in 1699—has performed its first same-sex marriage ceremony, their marriage ceremony.
The couple has been together for 18 years and knew the church was friendly, because one of the church leaders, a deacon who is openly gay, was accepted by the church community.
Green says the Cathedral is what she calls “an interesting blend of history and tradition, modernity and progression.”
“an interesting blend of history and tradition, modernity and progression.”
But certainly not anything Christian nor Faithful to God.
There is a plaque in the grass in front St. John the Baptist Church which says “This is the House of prayer and the Gate of Heaven”.
apparently there is no prayer and the Gate is closed. If those apostates want to construct their own building and carry on their destruction let them build it BUT no they wont, they will try to drive out the people who sacrificed to build up the properties and they will inherit the whole estate according to the law and they know it. It will contribute to their own destruction, so, what do we do. intercede for them without malice.
there’s a terrible opposite to heaven.
Tragically we see another building that ceases to be a church — at least no longer a Christian church. The ACoC has descended very quickly into the pit of apostasy and that cannot be changed until the current APOSTATES are removed from office.
1699 Anno Domini
May 8,1698 Anno Domini
“…under the conduct of the Divine Providence and assistance”:
“The Society for the Promotion of Christian Knowledge” founded,
in 1705 circulating Bibles and Prayer-books throughout the Country.
Congratulations to these two women, may God continue to bless your relationship. My husband and I are in our 52nd year and we thank God for leading us.
But Lloyd, you seem to have forgotten that God will never bless sin.
To quote Jesus…
“Have you not read “male and female He created them. It is for that reason that a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, so that they are no longer twain but are of one flesh. Therefore those whom God has joined let no man rent asunder.”
Pretty clear by these words from our Lord that God never joins to women!
Interesting comments. I thought Jesus told us to love one another and to leave the judging to God. I’ve been Anglican my whole life and I’m all for celebrating love and being inclusive.
There are numerous passages in God’s Holy Bible in which we are actually instructed to judge, when judging is the appropriate thing to do. This is one of those times for what is happening here is a gross departure from the teachings of Jesus Christ, who said…
“Have you not read “male and female He created them. It is for that reason that a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, so that they are no longer twain but are of one flesh. Therefore those whom God has joined let no man rent asunder.”
Pretty clear by these words from our Lord that God never joins two women!
The new commandment that Jesus gave us was “To love one another as I have loved you.”. Never did Jesus change the design and intent of God the Father, but rather confirmed and strengthened it. Jesus always told us the truth, even when it was something that we did not want to hear.
The truth is that God does not do homosexual marriages, and anyone that pretends otherwise is going against God and His Word.
To be Christian one must fully accept the authority of SCRIPTURE and not changes that are made by so-called bishops that are clearly APOSTATE. As Christians we are called to witness to the world and NOT to be taken in by anyone – including so-called bishops – who are determined to steer us from the GOSPEL. The Scriptures are very clear on the matter of homosexuality and as true Christians we MUST accept that authority regardless of the colour of our vestments or collar. Tragically we are witnessing the ACoC rapidly descending into APOSTASY. Further you state you are all for celebrating love and inclusiveness but in checking history you will know how genuine Christians have not only been evicted from properties they have paid for but have had these properties legally stolen.
Good for them. God is love and love is love.
Love does not always mean affirmation. Sometimes it means saying, in love, “You’re on the wrong path.”
The plaque needs no revision: preserving the Anglican heritage and tradition is to express modernity and progression! Congratulations to the happy couple and the congregation that responded “we will” to the challenge to support them in their vows to one another.
But Thom, you seem to have forgotten that God will never bless sin.
To quote Jesus…
“Have you not read “male and female He created them. It is for that reason that a man shall leave his father and mother and cleave to his wife, so that they are no longer twain but are of one flesh. Therefore those whom God has joined let no man rent asunder.”
Pretty clear by these words from our Lord that God never joins two women!
In the case of two men*, you get around (or whatever Newspeak
is for “get around”) Jesus’s “cleave to his wife” by re-defining
“wife” to be one of the two men. But please don’t ask for me for
the corresponding re-definition of “cleave”, and of “are one
flesh” – I have old-fashioned aversions which could likely be
corrected by re-education.
* And, of course, if the concept of the mutually exclusive Oldspeak
categories of “male” and “female” have still not yet been expunged by Inclusiveness.
Never has Anglican heritage and tradition been about modernity or progression. True Anglicanism is the English reformation. Note that this is REformation and not TRANSformation. REformation means to restore back into the original, and this is not going to something modern nor progressive. TRANSformation is changing into something that has never been, and that is what modernists and progressives are attempting, and it is wrong for it goes against the design and intent of God.
Perhaps you’re forgetting that the Anglican Church itself would not even exist were it not for such TRANSformation, since it was a particular king who wanted to change what you have wonderfully pointed out about marriage (“What therefore God has joined together, let no man put asunder” Mark 10:9) because he wanted to get divorced simply because he couldn’t seem to father a boy.
Since the Anglican Church has already been TRANSformed from that which is strictly Biblical, according to your definition, then this decision to honor the love of two people before God actually seems to be closer to the Bible than that which formed the Church to begin with.
But all that aside, I have 3 much more pertinent questions for you:
1) How does that decision harm your personal relationship with God?
2) What are you so afraid of, that you feel the need to attack a wonderful expression of love?
3) How can you speak to the intent of God? After all, thr Bible is written by man. Inspired by God, yes, but once the translation goes through a human, much of the message is lost or (Perhaps even more importantly) deliberately left out because it does not serve the purposes of the person transcribing said message. This is why we understand the Bible to be fallible, while God is not. The Bible is NOT God, and should not be held in higher standing than Him, which is what it seems like you are trying to do… Just some food for thought…
J.C. In response to your questions:
(1) The decision to endorse this sin by a “church” means that this “church” has turned itself into an abomination. And it being and abomination means that I can no longer associate myself with it, and therefore a means through which I once was able to participate in communal worship has been taken away from me.
(2) That you presume I am “afraid” speaks to your own intolerance. You feel a need to portray me in some negative light. Fact is that what these women and that parish has done is most certainly not a “wonderful expression of love” but is instead a sin against God. It is my love for God and His ways that compels me to speak out against this sin.
(3) You statement that the “Bible is written by man” is a tactic used by the evil one. A tactic long in use, even all the way back to the garden of Eden in which through the serpent the evil one brought into question what God had said. It is your mistaken belief that the Bible was written by men that enables these sins to be accommodated in the first place. The Holy Bible was and is “God breathed” and that makes it the Holy Word of God, every word of it. I can speak of the intent of God for I have read what God has written and He has made His intentions perfectly clear. Perhaps it is because His intention for Holy Matrimony is so perfectly clear that you feel a need to be like the serpent and attempt to bring into question the Word of God.
I was a witness-in Edmonton- at a vestry meeting no less- where the Bishop singled out by name the families/individuals who were no longer welcome -families/individuals with 35+ odd years of service -it was ugly and heartbreaking- it was like throwing a hand grenade into our Church family – all in the name of climate change and homosexuality-
S.P.C.K.- The Society for Persecuting Christian Knowledge…because “it is 2015…2019…”.
Glen,
Those individuals that were excluded by this supposedly inclusive bishop, were these the people that have been the strongest supporters of their Parish? My gut is telling me that they were.
Wow! Is that really true? It would be interesting to hear in which parish this was. (I’m in an ANiC parish in Edmonton)
Could you explain more what happened here and what went on?
I was replying and was finished when I was alerted that I was not connected to the internet and couldn’t get rid of the notice, but, did you get any of the reply?
Gord, the concept of romantic love is not relatively new unless you consider a thousand yesrs is a day and a day is a thousand years, notwithstanding, Gen. 29:20 says that Jacob served seven years for Rachel and they seemed unto him but a few days, for the love he had for her. God compared His church to a marriage whereby the wife submitted to her husband BUT the husband had to lay down his life for his wife, Sound familiar. The Church was His wife and He was the husband, and what did He do. He despised the shame but He laid down His life on the Cross and if that isn’t love I don’t know what is. Love was born in the Heart of God and He is the epitome of it. Personally, I thank God for His redemptive Love, past, present and continuous (Future).