What is good to a liberal is evil to a conservative, and vice versa.

But what is truly good? And what is truly evil? How about a little exercise in compare/contrast?

::Humility, Grace and Freedom by Canon Dr Joe Cassidy::

So here’s what puzzles me: Given all this openness, why can’t we allow or even authorise the Episcopal Church to experiment with including gay lay-people, gay deacons, gay priests and, yes, gay bishops? Why can’t we allow the Episcopal Church to experiment with same-sex/quasi-nuptual blessings? Why can’t we ask the Episcopal Church to undertake, on behalf of the rest of the Church, a ministry of discernment within and alongside the various gay and lesbian communities? Why can’t we enable the Episcopal Church to push their idea of baptismal inclusiveness to the hilt to see whether it enhances holiness? Why can’t we do that? What is the real risk of doing so and what is the real risk of not doing so?In one sense, the answer is obvious: we can’t because many Anglicans in many provinces think the question is closed; others think the timing isn’t right; others think more theological reflection needs to occur before testing things in the field; others, hopefully only a few, write off the whole thing derisively as a pandering to modernity.

I take seriously what the Episcopal Church is trying to do. Unlike some, I do not believe that the Episcopal Church are a bunch of uncritical liberals, glibly and mindlessly embracing contemporary values as if they were obvious Christian values. My own theological and ethical instincts are decidedly conservative on most issues, but I do see the Episcopal Church taking a costly road, which admittedly is capable of jolting the foundations, and which would inevitably cause friction. I cannot but see a serious attempt to act with integrity. And that goes for all sides.

In one sense, I’m not surprised that this is occurring in the US, but I wouldn’t put it down to Episcopalian American liberalism. Rather, in a culture still barely coming to grips with a long and horribly-recent history of slavery, racial segregation, and racism, it should be impossible for the Church not to wonder whether we’re doing it again – only this time to another group identified as different in a different sort of way. That’s not American hubris, but real humility, an awareness of the possibility of grave sin.Because, if there’s any chance whatsoever that we’re doing it yet again, then not to take it seriously, not to take the possibility that we, the Church, might be caught in a long, deep cycle of social sin – well, that’s dangerous to the soul, a real sin of omission, one that can be profoundly destructive to a great many people.

In any event, taking it seriously means testing it, testing the direction the Episcopal Church is moving in to see whether it is ‘of the Lord.’

The entire essay is well written and well reasoned, and and it offers a new perspective that casts a lot more light than heat – a refreshing change from most opinions offered in the current unpleasantness. I’ve highlighted the part that seems to be resonating with a lot of people over at Father Jake’s. This is a considered opinion from a more conservative viewpoint that exercises a lot more intellectual rigor than usually seen from that end of the spectrum.

Compare and contrast with an editorial from a Nigerian news site, that from its tone is strongly pro-government, and is thus pro-Akinola, who carries the anti-gay flag for them.:

Akinola’s Anti-Gay Campaign

It is true that the American society largely runs on a liberal path. Its social ethos is strongly anchored on near laissez-faire attitude. That explains why the American society is very elastic in terms of tolerance of sometimes strange, if not outlandish habits.

However, if the social norms could accommodate such dispositions, the sacred order of religion is supposed to be tempered by some restraint and moderation. But the curious ordination of Jean Robinson, a gay Bishop, a couple of years ago, manifestly proves that not even the sanctity of divine laws espoused by the major religions can tame the wild libertine philosophy of the American society.

Archbishop Peter Akinola, the primate of the Church of Nigeria, (Anglican Communion) has been in the fore of the fight against this weird intrusion into the Christian faith. Just like most parts of the world were shocked with that ordination, Akinola has earned accolades from around the world for his doggedness in condemning the practice; at one point threatening to lead other African countries out of the Anglican fold if the practice of gay ordination continues. Time magazine named him among 100 most influential persons in the world.

It is bad enough that the Episcopal Church in America could condone sodomy in accommodating gay adherents in its fold. Yet, it is worse that even a gay man could be ordained a priest. Even then, that such a gay priest could indeed become a Bishop, a spiritual head of the church is revolting. It is as strange as it is antithetic to biblical stance.

No doubt, the idea of gay-priests and same-sex marriage as practised in American Anglican (Episcopal) Churches and some parts of Europe is a double-barreled affront on the doctrine of chastity and continence as enunciated in the Holy Bible.

Not so rigorous, is it? Not terribly well written, not factually accurate, full of half-truths twisted into non-truths.

Also, not terribly Christian, either. I can’t bring myself to quote the whole thing on my front page, but my gut tells me that this story might disappear from the news site if it causes enough of an uproar, as happened before when Bishop Orama’s words were twisted by another Nigerian reporter.

The Nigerian news services certainly seem to want to beat that big gay drum, because the government wants scapegoats to draw attention away from its many and manifest sins.

The rest of the Nigerian editorial is in the extended entry.
UPDATE: Fooey. The “MORE” tag isn’t working, the whole disreputable thing is here.
Continue reading →