Jesus The Thinker: November 2004 So it's ok to say no to God, eh?

I come from a church background that is fairly unencumbered with hierarchy. Other church groups (eg. Roman Catholic and Anglican) are known for their ecclesiastical hierarchy. For this reason, I'm finding it strange that the diocese of New Westminster here in B.C., Canada, can flagrantly flaunt the desires of the Anglican Church and seemingly get away with it. Also, it is inconceivable to me that a practicing gay could be elevated to bishop in the United States Episcopal Church over the protests of Anglican prelates around the world.

Surely, the key question in all of this is where the Church's authority lies. For centuries, the Anglican church has found comfort in its traditions and very strong hierarchical structure. That seems to be being undermined by this latest development in the Anglican communion.

The Archbishop Of Canterbury, ostensibly the practical head of the Anglican Church worldwide (technically the Queen is head of the Anglican Church), convened a commission to deal with developments in the U.S. and Canada. As I understand it, the Lambeth Commission was made up of leading prelates from around the world. They deliberated for some time and reached the conclusion that the two bishops in question should stop blessing same-sex marriages and that the U.S. gay bishop should abandon his gay lifestyle. If not, they were "requested" to leave the church. Curious, eh?
"Requested"??? Since when was that the Anglican way. Historically, the Anglican Church has simply ordered dissenters to leave. Take, for example, some of my spiritual forefathers in England (eg. John Bunyan) who were at odds with the established Church (Anglican). They were forced out. Has the Anglican Church lost its teeth and become a paper tiger?

Possibly the greatest question of all is, "Will the Bible be our guide for faith and practice or not?" The Bible is abundantly clear on the question of homosexuality (cf. Romans 1:18-32, I Corinthians 6:9-11). Although some may try to twist the Scriptures to their own ends, God is clear. Homosexuality is sinful, an abomination in the eyes of a holy God.A person is not born a homosexual, but becomes one by choice (even though it may be very early in his life). How, then, could a Christian clergyman bless "same-sex" unions. This is not to say that the Church should not love and welcome homosexuals. But it is clear in the Bible that a rebirth is necessary. By the power of Christ, they must be inwardly made anew (II Corinthians 5:17). Surely this is what the apostle Paul implies in I Corinthians six when he says, "Such were some of you (i.e. idolaters, adulterers, male prostitutes, homosexual offenders, drunkards, swindlers, etc.). But you were washed, you were sanctified, you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ and by the Spirit of God" (I Cor. 6:11).

So, in this whole question of church authority in the Anglican Church, one must maintain church discipline or else the whole structure may well begin to crumble.
We say to the two deviant bishops that their conduct might be summarized in the question, "So it's all right to say no to God, eh?" After all, if one can say no to God (the Bible), what's the difference if one goes against a preponderance of church
prelates?