If you wanted any proof TEC has apostasised…
…here it is, just waiting for you to press the play button. All the fun at the consecration of Mary Glasspool. It beats me how anyone can argue that TEC is orthodox trinitarian after watching this. Feel free to catalogue the heresies below – I lost count.
Podcast: Play in new window | Download
Subscribe: RSS
Hi Peter. The video above won't work for my Mac for whatever reason. Is there a youtube version?
My recent post About That Fitness Thing
There might be a drinking game in this. The first person to spot each heresy takes a drink.
My recent post Friday Cute
The man with the thurible had some pretty good moves :)
My recent post Less hopeful?
Matthew
That sounds like a challenge to me! Tell you what, I'm busy right now but later on this evening we can start to play 'Count the Heresy'. I vote that we all post in each heresy, with a short narrative supporting each case. Peter to adjudicate and I'll stand the winner a bottle of 12 year old Glenfiddich!
I'm not sure I can face watching it again…
My recent post Less hopeful?
What's a thurible and is it legal between consenting adults! I'm very low church so I genuinely don't know!
It's to do with swinging…
Kinky! Does it have anything to do with swinging and smells (and possibly even bells)
I'm afraid he made me think of this kind of thing.
Ah, I see what you mean HO! Thanks for the link – that's some pretty talented poi swinging going on there. Although I enjoyed the 'Pulp Fiction' track even more :)
My intial reaction was to laugh, but in fact this is not really any laughing matter.
There is surely no way that TEC or its apologists can maintain that their leadership are preaching "the faith once delivered to the saints". This is barely monotheism, let alone Christianity!
This kind of dangerous Pelagian/syncretist/pantheist drivel is on a par with Gene Robinson's "God of our many understandings" waffle at last year's inauguration.
Niall
I laughed because otherwise I would cry. And I suspect that many of the orthodox evangelical and charismatic Christians (ECC) posting on Peter's website felt the same way. Yes, it's dead easy to make fun of ECUSA and its antics when you watch a video clip like this. And yes, it's fun to spoof all his liberal drivel which is really like a continuous-loop video play of every 'trendy liberal vicar' comedy sketch that you've ever watched.
But I agree with you, Niall, something far more serious spiritually is going on here. Living in South Africa, I don't know ECUSA well, although Anglicanism here is somewhat of a special case where most evangelicals split off from an overwhelmingly high church Anglicanism way back in the late C19.
Niall
As I watched the clip I was breathtakingly shocked by the magnitude of the pantheistic heresy on show. ECUSA is, after all, still officially in the Anglican Communion and has an importance drawn from its cultural position, wealth and history. (See the size and grandeur of the cathedral in which this inauguration was taking place!)
But as I watched it struck me once again and very strongly that the locus of orthodox Christianity has shifted to the two-thirds world where I live and work. 80% and rising of ECC Christians now live in Africa, Asia or Latin America. I think of the many, fine, African ECC Christians that I know, working and praying to both break spiritual strongholds that hold sway over human sin, and to raise communities out of the widespread grinding poverty of so much of Africa.
Niall
They would be genuinely befuddled at this ECUSA showpiece. They would not understand how a church could be so lost as to promote interfaith worship for 'Mother Earth'. They would not understand the constant message of tolerance, diversity and love coupled with such a hard edged and blatant promotion of a false, 'One World' gospel over the core Gospel message of sin, forgiveness, redemption and restoration. In short, they would wonder what on earth had gone wrong! And my heart grieved for them and for the many deeply hurt orthodox Christians in ECUSA, and turned to prayer
No, the real Gospel centred diversity of orthodox Christianity now lies in dynamic ECC Christianity of Africa, Asia and Latin America where all the races of our Lord's creation are coming together to fulfill the Great Commission. And, increasingly, coming to evangelise the world-weary, cynical and lost peoples of Europe and North America. 'The first shall be last, and the last shall be first'.
Looks like a Mamas and Papas tribute band to me – without the catchy melodies.
Peter, you appear to have posted a Eurovision Song Contest reunion video by mistake. Can't understand why people in dog collars keep appearing in it though.
I don't want to be provocative (well, maybe just a little), but I think it's significant that none of TEC's defenders have showed up on this thread. Perhaps because the TEC leadership's participation in this ceremony shows beyond doubt that they are heretics.
See how our resident Cathedral Canon neatly sidestepped having to give his judgement on the ceremony. Let's see how he handles a direct question.
Perhaps that is because the video that is being discussed here is of the "Celebration Gathering – featuring music and dance highlighting the cultural diversity of our diocesan community" conducted BEFORE the "Liturgy for the Ordination and Consecration of Bishops Suffragan."http://www.ladiocese.org/digital_faith/dfcfiles/7…
If it is heresy to include representatives of the cultural diversity of the diocese then what is it to exclude them?
We're not talking about cultural diversity, we're talking about Bishop Bruno *participating in* in a smudge ritual and ancestor worship. That's pagan worship and deeply anti-Christ.
Really? If someone comes up to the altar rail, crosses their arms and receives the blessing of one of our priests, don't we appreciate their humility and participation in our tradition, regardless of their faith? Should our Bishops not extend courtesy to people outside the church? Should they not express gratitude for the kind welcome expressed by those people? Do you think the LA Diocese's mission and ministry to Native Americans was helped or harmed by this gesture?
I don't think I'd want to encourage participation of communion on the basis of 'participation' of the tradition.
Your follow on point would only really apply if the ordination of the bishop was part of a Native American ceremony, surely? There's a lot of clear water between appreciation and syncretism – just as between interfaith dialogue, and inter-faith worship. The service seemed much closer to the latter than the former.
My recent post What's in a name?
I'm surprised to hear that. When I was converting to Christianity, I was very touched that the church had made provisions for someone not baptized to participate during communion. It helped me feel a part of the family, and that sense of welcome put me on the road to baptism.
Likewise, I was touched to see the representatives from the tribes speak so lovingly about the Episcopal church, and to see the church be so gracious in the shared expressions of welcome. And I don't think there's any liturgical harm done. This was all done before the start of the ordination service, which was completely by the book, as far as I know.
I suppose that's just to say that I'm too concerned with, or deeply schooled in, questions of due process for pre-ordination festivities, but I was struck by that particular portion of the afternoon as being thoughtful, courteous, and heartfelt.
In which case you took part on a different basis to simply 'participating in the tradition'.
There's a difference between a 'shared expression of welcome', which seems an odd way of putting it to me, and some kind of shared spiritual experience – which would seem to be what took place in the pre-service service. To start with a 'smudging ceremony', for example, is not shared welcome, but a move towards syncretism/universalism/pluralism.
My recent post What's in a name?
I suppose that my confusion is just that I can't see any harm being done here. A shared spiritual experience! Good for us! Some tribal elders are honoring our bishop and our church! Seems great to me; I honor our church and bishop, too! We got two excellent new bishops and the goodwill of our guests that afternoon. That all seems good, right?
I've been spending hours and hours over the last few weeks reading theological articles, news stories and blog posts about this ordination and the broadly inclusive efforts of the Episcopal church. I just don't get it. The Episcopal church seems to be saying, "hey, come on over, we're having a party, all are welcome." That seems like a great thing to do when ordaining new bishops – we want everyone to meet them! It seems like an especially great thing to do in the US, where a lot of people are spiritually hungry, but wary of Christianity.
Just so I'm clear. Are you saying that it's a good thing to worship other gods, and that if you can do it as part of a Christian service, that's even better?
My recent post What's in a name?
I'm only saying that it's good to be courteous and welcoming to one's neighbors. I don't really think there are other gods to be worshiped – isn't that the point of avoiding idolatry? Real worship connects us fully with God, while false gods at the best can only touch on the Creator at an oblique angle.
The ordination in Los Angeles was an opportunity to show how our tradition can embrace and enhance other cultural modes of worship, because it is based on the unique gift of worshipping God as He showed up and lives with us, a faith of the real and the actual.
What alarms me is this: I saw what happened in LA that afternoon and I think that may be what genuine, loving evangelism looks like, yet many Christians seem appalled and frightened by it. This ceremony struck me as an opportunity to continue a process of reconciliation. Reconciliation is called for because of the damage that the people who carried Christianity to the Americas brought alongside their faith, yet that is a faith which our neighbors from the tribes spoke about with deep respect.
I don't think any of those tribal representatives went back home thinking "those Episcopalians are real jerks." I hope that they went home thinking "those people are loving, joyous, and humble," and if they see that in us, I think they are very close to seeing Christ. If they see that, I hope that they are going to be glad when our ministers come to their community. Isn't that good? Isn't that the point of Christ's charge to us on Earth? To love one another, and to show his goodness through the way we lead our lives in His name?
Likewise, I don't think that any Episcopalians went home that afternoon thinking, "screw it, I'm going to go light some sage and try to entice a demon to do my bidding." On the contrary, all the reports around the Diocese are of cheerful baptisms and confirmations, of feeding the hungry and housing the homeless, of giving away our time and treasure to help the needy around the world, and all those good things that Christ asked us to do in his name.
"The ordination in Los Angeles was an opportunity to show how our tradition can embrace and enhance other cultural modes of worship, because it is based on the unique gift of worshipping God as He showed up and lives with us, a faith of the real and the actual."
I'm pretty sure that's a decent working definition of syncretism!
Your logic seems to be: there is only one God, therefore there can be no such thing as idolatry; to worship any god is in some way worshiping the one true God. That position is the 'all paths lead to God' of universalism, and that's not what the Bible says. From the beginning, the one true creator God commands our sole worship.
If this was not a serious issue, why would it be such a big deal through out the whole of the Bible. God's people are called to worship God alone, not to worship 'God and…'. If the early Christians had been able to worship God and the Roman Gods, they wouldn't have been killed. If Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego had been able to worship God and Nebuchadnezzar, they wouldn't have been thrown into the fiery furnace, etc. etc. We can't have 'God and…', we can only have 'God alone'.
I suspect the Episcopalians and the tribal representatives may well have gone home thinking that their ceremony was just as valid as the others – that it doesn't matter what you believe, as long as you're sincere, that all paths lead to the same God. Neither of that is the case.
There maybe 'cheerful baptisms' and the good works you mention are taking place. In to what are people being baptised and confirmed, to which god to the good works point? If they don't look to Jesus who said, 'No one comes to the Father except through me.' is their faith a real hope, or a faith in nothing?
My recent post What's in a name?
I think a more accurate summary of my view on this is that faith is not a zero-sum game. I disagree that all paths lead to God, but would say that many paths point in God's general direction. Some clearly do not. Others do in part, but not in full. I think that our Anglican practice does it right in very large degree, but a brief survey of Prayer Book revisions would give the lie to any claim that we have it down perfectly!
It may be that where our ways really part, though, is over the authority of Scripture versus the presence of Christ. In the Episcopal churches I've been involved with, there is a great deal of emphasis on Christ Incarnate as an example for personal conduct and relationship, and on the necessity of listening for the Holy Spirit in prayer. I think it would be fair to say that I start there and reflect back on Scripture; do you approach your vocation differently?
I suppose the short answer is 'yes' :)
I see the Bible as the basis of our understanding of God and salvation. The authority of Scripture is thus fundamental to the basis of Christian theology. That's not to say that other things can't inform that theology, but the basis is from the Bible. The Church of England is very good at expressing the correct way of thinking about this; canon A3 (1), for example ends with 'is agreeable to the Word of God': The Book of Common Prayer is consistent with the Bible, but sits under its authority.
My recent post What's in a name?
JJN
I guess it comes down to what you think is actually going on, spiritually, when you are involved in worship with other religions. Theological liberals often tend to the view that 'We are all worship God, albeit in different ways'.
However the Bible gives us the many wonderful characteristics of the one true God and therefore makes it clear that other religions are worshipping a different god, as they describe a god with very different characteristics. To assert this is not descriminatory but simply a matter of reading the various religious literature and then using logic.
As I said in my earlier post, although I have no knowledge of Native American religion I have enough knowledge of indigenous African religion to know that the underlying religious approach based on the necessity of appeasing or seeking the favour of nature-based or ancestral spirits. The article on 'Stand Firm' shows that Native American religion is also based on this approach.
Involvement in such religions is very dangerous and can open you up to either oppression or possession by evil spirits. See the testimont from my experience in the article that I posted earlier.
Hi Phillip – I think most of what I replied to Hopeful Ordinand applies here. Who fears evil sprits when they are secure in Christ? As Christians we have the really real; false gods and so-called demons vanish before that. As for our bishop's participation, shepherds have to go where the sheep are, even if the sheep are a little bit off course or wandered in from some other flock, right? I thought that our clergy's involvement in that ceremony showed a great deal of wisdom and evangelical confidence.
Maybe TECs supporters are too busy watching the inevitable splits now emerging between ACNA and AMiA. As Matt Kenedy at Stand Firm (hardly TEC supporters) has comented:
"2. The biggest down side of this for the ACNA is that it seems to fulfill the predictions of her many critics…that the internal disagreements between the various member organizations would make long term unity impossible. There is no way for the ACNA spin this as an entirely positive thing (while I think there may be some hidden positives in it) and I think it would a huge mistake to try. The best bet is to acknowledge the loss with grace and charity and get on with the mission of the ACNA
TEC has many faults – as does the C of E. As does every other church. Who ever pretended otherwise?
So tell us then what you thought about Bishop Bruno being involved in a Smudge ceremony and engaging in ancestor worship with the Indians? Is that Christian? How can you possibly not condemn such pagan practices?
I can't play the thing on my machine either. So can't see it and therefore can't comment.
Well that's easily solved – Click on this link and you can go to it direct –http://www.firelightmedia.net/lad/LA_Webcast.asx
Canon Andrew:
You're a senior clergyman, so I'm going to assume that you've been to theological college.
Do they not teach you the difference between schism and heresy? ACNA et al are perhaps schismatic, but they hold closely to historical credal Christianity.
"TEC has many faults…As does every other church".
As Peter pointed out a few weeks ago, what's important for the Christian is not how many faults we have, but our attitude to those faults. TEC is embracing sin and heresy.
Every church organization is far from perfect; but the question is whether an organization (or leader) can reasonably claim to be part of the church whilst rejecting the teachings of Jesus and His apostles? I think not and, in my view, they should be ex-communicated now… until they repent.
Peter
Here in sunny South Africa today I've unexpectedly got some time on my hands. So I've amused myself by watching the whole ordination (it's LONG) and would like to post my observations from both an evangelical and charismatic Christian (ECC) perspective, and as a development economist who works mostly alongside people coming from a secular left/liberal perspective. I'm going to try to be as fair as I can, although that is of course for others to judge.
I watched the video on the link that you posted to 'Stand Firm' as it seems to run better and also took the opportunity to read the posted comments. Some of them from conservative posters are frankly abusive towards Mary Glasspool and should be deplored. I think that this also reflects the intensity of emotions on both sides in the American 'Culture Wars' and is something that all other churches would do well to avoid.
I'm going to post as a series of stand alone comments as I write as IntenseDebate cuts me off quite quickly. If you want to link them together, fine, as they should be read as a whole, although I'll try to keep individual posts on a 'topic'.
You could always start a blog :)
My recent post Less hopeful?
Smudging Ceremony (SC)
The Native American SC that opened the consecration was the most sinister component of the lot and quite rightly has shocked many posters here. It’s almost as if ECUSA wanted to open up with a hit-em-hard statement that ‘this is who we are’ and that is syncretistic, pantheistic Christians that believe it is acceptable to introduce pagan elements into their worship. Well, it certainly makes an effective statement but I really hope that they know what they are dealing with!
‘Stand Firm’ has a link to a good article on the SC which sets out its role in invoking and appeasing nature-based spirits and the ancestors. I note that both are mentioned in English in the SC, although of course I don’t know what is being said in the indigenous language.
I have no knowledge of Native American religion but I do have some knowledge and experience of indigenous religion here in South African. Some theologically liberal posters here may doubt the existence of evil spirits in indigenous religions. My ECC African friends could give you far more examples than I, but let me share just two experiences.
A couple of years ago a Sangoma (African traditional healer or witchdoctor) came to the front of the church after the service to give her heart to Christ. The pastors and elders of the church rapidly established her background (it’s not hard as Sangoma’s often wear heavily beaded braids and bracelets of beads or animal skin on their arms). With her permission, they began a deliverance from ancestral and nature-based spirits that would have been deeply involved in her practice as a Sangoma. She very quickly let out a huge shriek and was flung backwards through 6 (yes, six) rows of chairs (thankfully we have chairs and not pews!) scattering the people in them. The pastors and elders brought her back to the front and continued a very long and exhausting spiritual deliverance that, eventually, left her free.
On another occasion, a Sangoma got up in the church and began shouting at the pastor in a fowl and unintelligible tongue. A Xhosa member of the congregation received an interpretation from the Lord that it was a demonic curse. She was quickly escorted from the church and we prayed for protection for our pastor.
CS Lewis argued that we can make two mistakes with the devil and his demons. One is to see him and his operations behind everything that doe wrong in our lives and around us. The other is to not believe in his existence and his very real powers over many of the unsaved in this world. I hope that this goes some way to assure you of the existence and effects of evil spirits!
Smudging Ceremony
So Bishop Jon Bruno is very likely to have opened himself up to possession or oppression by demonic spirits by participating in the SC. And, yes, he did talk to one of the participants about the 'Holy Ancestors'. I could not believe the naivety of the man, Bishop or no Bishop.
Smudging Ceremony
The final Native American participant spoke about the past life of his ancestors on the land and, movingly, about how an earlier ancestor who was a traditional healer had 'wasted away in 6 weeks' after being taken from the land and incarcerated on an island.
Again, I have no real knowledge of Native American history but it parallels the experience of the indigenous Africans here. Colonial conquest was a brutal affair in South Africa. Here in the Eastern Cape, 7 wars were fought between the British empire and the indigenous Xhosa people over a period of about 100 years. The British lost more soldiers collectively in these 7 wars of 1780-1880 than in any other British imperial conflict between the Napoleonic Wars and the Boer War (called the South African War here). Atrocities were committed by both sides and promises of land rights, borders safe passage and restitution made by British colonial governors were repeatedly ignored or broken. After conquest, indigenous peoples were restricted to 'native reserves' usually on insufficient, poor quality land that keeps them impoverished to this day.
Smuding Ceremony
The violence, hurts and pain of colonial conquest remain to this day and the fruit of this historic injustice can be seen in both the violent seizure of land in Zimbabwe and the growing and similar noises being made in South Africa. As ECC Christians we do native and indigenous people a great disservice if we do not listen to their pain and then do not involve ourselves in their struggles for justice. Of course, correcting the injustice is a complex and long term task!
It has also had a spiritual impact on the white colonising population who originally stole the land by conquest and participated in the shedding of blood. 'The sins of the fathers are visited down to the fourth generation' and we see this in the blindness of many Christians (including tragically ECC Christians) who still ignore the injustices that have been committed. Two years ago my church took the lead in convening a provincial service of repentence for the violence of colonialism and apartheid (in the face of harsh opposition from some ECC Christians) which included commitments to work for justice.
Smudging Ceremony
But the other extreme, common on the radical left, is to generate an uncritical reading of pre-colonial life as some idyllic rural Eden, which the final Native American participant also stated by (amazingly) talking of a previous non-violent (did he actually say 'sin-free'?) existence for a 1,000 years. Again, no knowledge etc, but in South African pre-colonial history tribes fought each other and oppressed each other. The deaths in warfare were not as great as the warfare technology was not as strong (spears, bows and arrows versus the later colonial introduction of guns). The C19 romantic ideology of the 'noble savage', untainted by the white man in his pre-colonial existence, is present in the minds of many unthinking radicals, and is just as wrong as the racism of the original colonists.
Entertainment value
After the appalling and dangerous SC, I enjoyed most of the remaining music and dances and would have paid decent dollar to watch it as a show. As always, when it comes to music especially, the high church knows it's stuff. The following (Korean?) dancers were a bit half-hearted and unco-ordinated but the following (Chinese?) dancers with the scarves more than made up for it with a stunningly beautiful, intricate and professional dance presentation.
I also enjoyed the bagpipes from the City Firemans Band, although it seemed to go on for too long (Was this because it was an excuse for everyone to do the 'Peace' thing that Anglicans do – I couldn't see!).
The dancers to the great and powerful Christian R&B of Kirk Franklin were also great fun. Shame that he wasn't there in person, although I suspect that he's too theologically orthodox to participate in this ECUSA shindig.
Mongolian opera singers, Psalms, drumming, etc. All good stuff. All in all, a really fun show, and you could see some of the Bishops jigging along in a semi-rhythmic manner. Mary G herself, the star of the show, also seemed to be enjoying herself!
Diversity
The symbolic point of diversity was obvious after the first 10 minutes, but I disagree with the American commentators that have been posting snide comments about this feature (again, 'Culture Wars' rooted I suspect). I love a good multicultural show and it makes the necessary point that God loves all people equally, a point which still needs to be taken on board by some people here in South Africa.
As long as it doesn't compromise the Gospel and theological integrity!
The 'Singing Nun'
I doubt that she was a nun, but you know what I mean. I creased up the moment that she came to the stage. Seriously, it pushed every cliche button in the book from 'Sound of Music' through to 'Airplane'. Who needs to spoof people when they do it to themselves!
But boy could she sing! A beautiful, soulful rendition of the moving, 50s and 60s folk era standard 'All my trials', a staple of the civil rights movement. It was a beautiful rendition of a classic song and clearly stirred the congregation.
The 'Singing Nun'
Panning over the congregation at this point revealed a half-full church, overwhelmingly of ageing WASPs, which would appear to be ECUSAs main niche market. It's easy to be cynical at this point and pour scorn on these ageing hippies and social activists, as many American commentators are doing. Easy, but also cheap and wrong. The theology of ECUSA social activists of the 50s and 60s may have been liberal, but they were part of a profound and vital movement for social and racial justice. Unless you've worked and lived in situations of deep institutional racism, such as the pre-civil rights USA or apartheid South Africa it is easy to ignore the injustice of such situations. ECC Christians in the USA and South Africa largely stood apart from these struggles, and they were wrong to do so.
Side comments
The microphones were picking up side comments (I’m assuming from the bishops and possibly KJS herself). I couldn’t hear most of them but one was very clear (It’s at about 29 minutes on the second video clip). A female voice (KJS?) sharply announces: “You know all these processions have a background in warfare!” in a tone that clearly will broach no disagreement. An anxious male voice then follows: “Do you want me to talk to them?”
And so we hear the authentic voice of theological liberalism, that is willing to change orthodox Christian teaching on homosexuality, marriage, abortion and, well anything really, to be acceptable to the political left. But woe betide you if you disagree with them. ‘Tolerance’, ‘diversity’ and ‘equity’ will go right out of the window as far as your views are concerned.
What is it with Pointy Hats?
Can anyone explain to me what the thing is with pointy-hat bishops and their vestments? I'm low church and I genuinely don't understand it. The vast array of colours and fabrics on show really looked like an explosion in a paint factory! They really seem to love their vestments and the whole effect is, well, frankly rather camp.
Is this why the high church has a reputation for being gay friendly? You get to play dress-up! In loads of pretty colours! And wear lace! And swing nice smelling thuribles around (Yes, HO, I noted the nifty swing actions!)
I could speculate that the whole ecclesiastical show is a way of differentiating 'us', the enlightened, correct thinking, clergy, from 'them', the poor, ignorant sheep that don't know any better. Perhaps its my low church 'priesthood of all believers' thoughts coming out, but I saw alot of incipient elitism on show!
The mystery of the missing congregants
I've already noted that the congreation in the half-full church was overwhelmingly made up of ageing WASPs. I'm open to correction, but I didn't see any examples of the constituency that ECUSA claims have been calling for justice and inclusion. Namely, young gay and marginalised people. At the risk of stereotyping I didn't see any butch lesbians, leather men, stud-wearing S&Mers, you can just keep going really … I just saw alot of nice white polite middle class people. It really wasn't a good advert for diversity and inclusion (at least in the congregation).
The mystery of the missing congregants
And I think that there is a good reason for this. The argument from non-Christian gay activist groups has never been 'Change your theology and we'll believe in your God'. It has been 'Change your theology because we say it's offensive'. And now that, in the case of ECUSA at least, they've got what they want, they're not interested in the church anymore. They never were interested anyway, they just wanted the precedent and the access to cultural capital that comes from getting the church to saw that homosexual behaviour is not a sin. To the secular hard left, the bold theologians of ECUSA are like Lenin's 'Useful Idiots', to be used until they have achieved their purpose in the overall scheme of progress.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Useful_idiot
The mystery of the missing congregants
In the end, people who are not Christians are not fooled. They can see the integrity of people's beliefs and whether they rest on rock or sand. And, even if they don't agree with you, they will respect firmly and sincerely held conviction rather than the modification of one's views to fit the changing winds and currents of prevailing opinion.
To that end, here's an interesting piece by an atheist South African commentator which amply shows the intellectual bankruptcy of liberal theology and lowest-common-denominator, inter-faith, syncretistic religion. (Hint to non-South Africans: Jacob Zuma, our morally challenged President, was the head of the Moral Regeneration Movement in an earlier incarnation. No punchline needed!)
http://hades.mg.co.za/article/2008-08-06-a-charte…
Over and Out
Philip Cole
An interesting sequence of comments. I might disagree at a few points – most specifically this statement:
"The theology of ECUSA social activists of the 50s and 60s may have been liberal, but they were part of a profound and vital movement for social and racial justice."
That is certainly not how I would describe a decade as disastrously bad as the 60's.
… more to follow
Even so I wanted to register agreement on one very important point that you made.
"I love a good multicultural show and it makes the necessary point that God loves all people equally, a point which still needs to be taken on board by some people here in South Africa. As long as it doesn't compromise the Gospel and theological integrity!"
The one small moment of light in the first 40 minutes was the Mongolian singers. I dared to hope that they were actually singing a Christian worship song based upon Psaml 100. But this is TEC, and for all I know they were singing a song about an animal spirit on plains of Mongolia. The display of Psalm 100 could have been simply a synchretistic allusion. Who knows? But I did hear the singers give out with 'Alleluia' and that gives me hope. There are few things so affecting as hearing God praised in a non-western tongue. It reminds us that Christianity is universal, and not of the West. And it prefigures the last day when every nation together will praise Him.
carl