Pat Ashworth has written on the Church Times blog about The Lambeth Reader. A sample quote:
…“There are occasions when a church falls out of sympathy with its bishop on matters of doctrine or conduct. It must not be the case that the mere fact of ease and communication of travel become the excuse for choosing a leader in another territory to be one’s chief pastor. In the case of serious and extensive conflict, it becomes the duty of diocesan bishops to provide pastoral support in particular congregations. When a diocesan bishop fails to undertake his duty, the matter becomes a provincial responsibility.”
Reflections offered to the Primates emphasise mutual accountability. “The cost of genuine dialogue is considerable… If conservative voices are not to be driven out, it must be possible for an admonition about recent issues to do with homosexuality to be delivered, clearly argued from biblical sources. Not all such arguments are well expressed and would be supported by scholarly writing; but it is a mistake to dismiss all of them as if their sole basis was literalism or naive fundamentalism.”
The paper continues: “On the other hand, if progressive views are not to be ignored, new knowledge has honestly to be confronted. Though there is still much uncertainty, it is evident that the existence in some people of homosexual inclinations has to be understood in a way not available to biblical writers. It has to be recognised as a cost of the engagement of the gospel with the world, that Christians remain open to changing ideas with their attendant uncertainties and controversies.”
I agree with the spirit of this post and despite all the evidence I believe there must be a way to work with this difference of understanding in a new and different way. I read the blogs and engage in conversation but all I see and hear are either silence or the usual “war-like” mentalities on both sides of this issue. We need “new information” in the area of conflict resolution and we must stop our playground antics because it is our tribal mentality that arises in issues such as this that will be our demise. Its not about the… Read more »
“it is evident that the existence in some people of homosexual inclinations has to be understood in a way not available to biblical writers. It has to be recognised as a cost of the engagement of the gospel with the world”
Duh!
(Sorry. It’s been 10 years since 1.10, and I don’t feel very “listened to” by Lambeth. I hope _The Reader_ is beginning to make up for that.)
“it is evident that the existence in some people of homosexual inclinations has to be understood in a way not available to biblical writers. It has to be recognised as a cost of the engagement of the gospel with the world”
Gee, it is evident that the existence of some souls of eunuch attributes has not been understood by biblical writers, nor their obligations of justice to eunuchs per se, and others who suffer similar conundrums. The failure to do so has to be recognised as a cost of failing to engage the gospel with the world.