A roadmap for a reset Anglican Communion - with Paul Donison & Glenn Davies
Vložit
- čas přidán 7. 07. 2024
- The chair of Gafcon Laurent Mbunda and chair of Global South Justin Badi Arama are to meet to work out a roadmap for the resetting of the Anglican Communion.
Global South Anglicans have endorsed the Former Sydney Archbishop Glenn Davies call for the communion to be reset on biblical foundations. The Global South have called on their Primates to work with the GAFCON Primates Council and other Orthodox leaders to reset the communion on its biblical foundations as a matter of urgency.
In other Anglican news:
1 The Church of England General Synod is meeting in York. They are considering whether to press go to move towards the next stage of endorsing their bishops’ proposals for same sex blessing. Orthodox Anglicans united under a banner called The Alliance are calling for structural differentiation in England (essentially a new province) (bit.ly/4cVgVwJ). The Bishop of Oxford has hit back telling The Alliance to take a running jump (bit.ly/45XJSWl).
2 Orthodox Anglicans from across Australasia gathered in Brisbane last week (bit.ly/3WeOCn6). New daughter churches are being planted within the fledging diocese of the Southern Cross.
3 A new Archbishop appointed to lead the Anglican Church of North America. Steve Wood will replace Foley Beach.
4 A collective meeting of orthodox leaders in Cairo has met for a week on ways that faithful christians might be able to reset the Communion. The Global South Anglicans met in Cairo the week before that and voted to call for the chair of the Global South Justin Badi Arama to work with the chair of Gafcon to reset the communion.
Our guests are new General Secretary of Gafcon Paul Donison and new Bishop of the Diocese of the Southern Cross (and former Archbishop of Sydney) Glenn Davies.
www.thepastorsheart.net/podcas...
Thank you! For keeping us Aussie Orthodox Anglican’s updated on everything with Gafcon and the southern cross diocese! God bless. Praying for unity ❤
Not forgetting. This is all about the Church following The Holy Spirit call to God as revealed in The Word. The Battle is Spiritual.
Agree Prayer is the answer.
The human condition!
Are you excited about the Chinese Christian Council and the Three Self Patriotic delegation being invited and warmly received the leaders of the Global South Anglicans?
Are bishop elected or appointed in Australia?
Appointed by an Archbishop.
I HAVE THREE POSTS HERE - READ THIS THIRD
If anyone out there is like me they will either have been confused - or are confused - about the relationship between how people who profess a faith behave - and how we should view their spiritual status before God.
How should we respond when a church like HTB in London (part of The Alliance referred to in this video) remove God’s holiness, justice, judgement, mercy, and the need for repentance from the gospel - but still claim a faith? Many Sydney Anglicans will feel certain they have the answer to that question - “those who did this cannot be treated as family - since they undermine the holiness and justice foundations of the gospel”. (John 14:15).
How should HTB respond when Sydney Anglican leadership (and many Sydney Anglicans) refuse to welcome God’s Spirit - but welcome his word? I wish I could say that HTB would have an answer to that question - that they would consider that behaviour a reason not to treat Sydney Anglicans as a denomination as family - but having spent eight months at HTB church I can assure you - as those who refuse to welcome God’s word - they couldn’t care less one way or the other (they certainly couldn't care less in 2017). I can therefore speak only in my own name - to refuse to welcome and rely on the Holy Spirit is no less serious (John 5:39).
I need to prove that last point - I need to prove that refusing to welcome God’s Spirit is no less serious than refusing to welcome God’s word.
1 Samuel 15:23 ESV
For rebellion is as the sin of divination, and presumption is as iniquity and idolatry.
Because you have rejected the word of the LORD, he has also rejected you from being king.”
To ‘obey’ the bible without reliance on God’s Spirit is presumption. Presumption is no less serious than rebellion.
What I didn’t understand however was when and whether to reach conclusions about the soundness or not of the faith of people who either refuse to welcome God’s Spirit - or refuse to welcome his Word. It was not until I read a recent tweet of Michael Reeves (quoted below) that I had confidence on this issue. Please don’t misunderstand - the single sentence statement of the tweet (below) is not in my opinion correct - but it had the effect of leading me to understand things that I was not clear on. Here is the tweet:
It is not the imitation of God that makes sons of God; it is sonship that makes imitators. Luther
My reply was long - you can web search for the sentence above if you want to read it - however I intend only to focus on only one part of my reply (the thing the tweet caused me to learn).
The tweet is wrong because instead of it being only one way - it goes both ways - sonship leads to people imitating God - and imitating God leads to sonship.
Christianity has two dimensions:
-Christ died and rose for us
-Salvation is dying and rising WITH Christ.
The first is sonship leads to imitation.
The second is imitation leads to sonship.
Consistent with this the bible has two ways in which it explains salvation:
1. That those who trust in the lordship of Christ (earned through him alone behaving with perfectly self-giving character) are saved (Acts 16:31)
2. That those who endure to the end will be saved (Matt 24:13).
So then - at last - what have I learned? I have learned that if one has TRULY received God as either Word or Spirit - it ALWAYS leads to one receiving God as the other. I learned that if HTB under Nicky Gumbel persisted in their liberalism - despite YEARS of correction aimed at ensuring they turned towards the authentic gospel - they should not be treated as family - and I also learned from attempts in the last year - that Sydney Anglicans persisting in their commitment to Calvinism instead of welcoming God's Spirit is reason to relate to them as if they are not family.
I therefore conclude that if any Anglican church or denomination is committed to any of the following behaviours/beliefs they cannot be part of any communion which wishes to proceed under God’s blessing:
-Welcoming God’s Spirit (though not truly) but not his Word (and refusing correction)
-Welcoming God’s Word (though not truly) but not his Spirit (and refusing correction)
- Egalitarianism (see 1 Cor 6:9-10 - which reveals indirectly - but absolutely - that sex differences are at the very heart of the gospel - and therefore refusing to recognise them is primary disobedience)
- Calvinism
- Belief in the false gospel based on God’s unconditional love (not everyone who believes this gospel calls themselves a Calvinist - but everyone who is a Calvinist believes in the false unconditional love gospel). The true gospel is founded on God's UNCHANGING love. (There is no LOGICAL inconsistency between these two belief systems).
I know that GAFCON welcome people who believe/behave in more than one of the wrong ways listed above - it therefore cannot be a body under which the faithful gather.
And I know that THE GLOBAL SOUTH welcome ACNA even as it allows egalitarianism under its umbrella - and therefore it cannot be a body under which the faithful gather.
Does any Anglican province behave faithfully in relation to all of the areas of wrongdoing I listed above? (This may not be enough for it to be faithful - for example an Anglican province might teach God’s word consistent with what the bible says - but then not relate appropriately with money). If there is such a province they should be the ones to set a standard which others are required to conform to in order to be members. (They should not recognise the leadership of provinces or churches who have been unfaithful - even if those people repent. In provinces where the leadership have failed to obey God in the ways I have listed above the faithful communion should instead welcome CHURCHES who wish to be part of the communion).
I presume that my second post has been removed by the moderators. Let those who had the chance to read it decide whether they think it was appropriate. A post should never be considered unacceptable only because of the extremity of its conclusions.
Since it was removed I replace it with this post (it was originally written for a UK audience - those at Ian Paul's Psephizo website - but I believe it is helpful counsel to all Anglicans at this time.
Is Anglicanism an invention of the state?
Does it matter?
Yes and no to the first question.
No because God sovereignly oversees the state. As I write this I have had a change in my thinking. I used to think that it was a big deal that the state appoints senior C of E leaders - but I have just realised that I should have understood this practice as like an arranged marriage. A Christian who has truly aligned themselves with God through faith is able to submit to his family’s cultural practice of choosing his bride - or her groom - knowing that God is sovereign over it. Can we similarly trust that God can make the monarch an appropriate head of the Church of England? A non-pastor/teacher head yes - a king or queen leader - or prophet - instead of a priest. I don’t see why not - but this freedom can only be enjoyed by the church of God - not the church of man.
That was the no case to whether it matters that the C of E is an invention of the state. Now the yes case.
The C of E and world Anglicanism are an invention of the state IF those who are part of the C of E BEHAVE as if the C of E and world Anglicanism is the invention of the state and wish to preserve it for that reason. To those people we need to say “No - to be an Anglican is unrelated to the state. Anglicanism is NOT the institution”. Every good thing that has ever existed within the C of E and world Anglicanism came from God - from a SOVEREIGN God.
Is God therefore asking anyone who has been part of world Anglicanism to give up Anglicanism? No (to the extent to which Anglicanism aligns with his word - I don’t believe every article in the 39 Articles aligns with scripture - and there are other Anglican practices which I have concluded are not in line with scripture - such as deaconesses - deacon is an OFFICE - where the office holder - as with the office of elder - is required to make spiritual judgements about pastoral issues - this responsibility must exist in harmony with both eldership and the headship of husbands in marriage) - and bishops - I cannot see how the idea of a bishop is not an alternative that gets in the way of people operating in the GIFT of apostle - see Ephesians 4 - it is not surprising to me that BISHOPS are the ones to have torn apart world Anglicanism - bishops are related to those they oversee only SEMI-organically). God is asking Anglicans to believe that Anglicanism IS THEM not the institution - at least that is so when they truly obey God.
Why might we not be able to believe that Angclicanism lives ONLY within faithful Anglicans? We might not be able to do so because we refuse to sufficiently burden ourselves. Before Paul is informed of his ignorance on the Damascus Road he is going out of his way to defeat followers of the Way. Did anyone give him this job? No - he chose to take it on. Paul was already CHOOSING to behave like an apostle - it was therefore no surprise that after his being enlightened that he WAS an apostle to the Gentiles.
So this is my message to ALL Anglicans. If you have trouble believing that YOU are Anglicanism instead of the institution - choose to be like Paul - choose to believe that God seeks ONLY whole of life sacrifice - people who CHOOSE to be WIDELY burdened - widely enough for not just healthy multi country Anglicanism - but for much much more than anything yet seen to be birthed and sustained. Do not be sad my fellow Anglicans - because to the extent to which you choose for it to be so - Anglicanism LIVES IN YOU.
(The entire post above is based on the belief that Anglicans must establish new leadership in Australia, the UK, and the US - the subject of my second post. I can offer no encouragement to Anglicans in any other circumstances - for reasons also explained in my second and third posts).
I HAVE THREE POSTS HERE - READ THIS FIRST
A brief word of warning to Anglicans in Australia, England, and the United States who are not Calvinist.
For decades my impression is that Sydney Anglican CHURCHES haven't been Calvinist (I grew up in one in which Calvinism wasn't even mentioned). Instead Calvinism has been like an additional accreditation for gaining entry into senior leadership - sort of like the higher knowledge of a Masonic lodge. It is the senior leadership of Sydney Anglicans which has been pushing the denomination in the direction of Calvinism.
My impression is also that in the Church of England the situation has been the same - the typical evangelical Church of England church is not Calvinist (although those churches have by now generally speaking been deceived by a false gospel built on God's unconditional love - the true one being built on his unchanging love) - it has only been the more prominent London churches which have been linked with Calvinism (St Helens is Calvinist, All Souls welcomes Calvinism, HTB isn't Calvinist but it has had links with Tim Keller - and has preached a false gospel built on God's unconditional love - instead of his unchanging love).
(This state of affairs makes sense - since the ordinary person gets nothing from Calvinism - he is the one who loses out in the favouritism of Calvinism).
I am not informed enough to comment on the ACNA's relationship with Calvinism and with the false gospel built on God's unconditional love.
However notice that in this video Sydney Anglican leaders are taking things a step further - without acknowledging that this is a form of change by stealth. They are aligning Sydney Anglicans with The Alliance - with this inevitably entrenching Calvinism/the unconditional gospel as the normal evangelical belief. That's a big deal - not something which Sydney Anglicans should sleep walk into. I am going to dare to state that this is part of a demonic strategy to destroy what remains of authentic gospel Christianity.
How should Sydney Anglicans - and non-Calvinist evangelicals in the Church of England respond? You should verify - if decades of the same behaviour hasn't made you certain - that your leaders (and breakaway leaders) prefer Calvinism to welcoming the Spirit - that they prefer the false gospel built on God's unconditional love to the true gospel built on God's unchanging love - that they will not change - and therefore you must separate yourself from Calvinism and the false unconditional love gospel - confident that it either has - or will - destroy its adherents.
See my second post here for why I believe that the Sydney Anglican denomination, and the Church of England, and the ACNA - are all 'finished'.