Posted on 07/06/2020 1:43:46 PM PDT by knighthawk
The Church of England is “too white” while “Jesus was a black man”, according to the new Archbishop of York.
Speaking to The Sunday Times, Stephen Cottrell praised the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement, and said his inauguration this week as a white man replacing outgoing Archbishop John Sentamu — who is black — is “awkward” for the church.
“The leadership of the Church of England is still too white, and I hope under my watch we’ll see further changes on that,” he said, asserting that the church has work to do “addressing the deep systemic issues of exclusion and prejudice”.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
OK, fine! He was a black man. He could have been purple for all I care. Can we all just please read His Gospel and act accordingly? I’m sure rioting and arson and murder aren’t the best way to follow Him.
I don’t think God told us His color for a reason...church like heaven...color of water...this symbolism matters...Likely skin tone was like the actor in “Chosen”. Look at the people in the area at the time...logic isn’t rocket science.
Identity politics is skin deep. It is a sad state of affairs to be born with al you are or all you’ll ever be.
Influenced by the Good Times episode?
He was probably at least ‘olive skinned’ coming from the middle east, after all.
Yes, it is silly.
Everyone knows Jesus was a Chinaman.
This still won’t fill your pews reverend.
It is EXTREMELY unlikely that Jesus was black. It is much more likely that he was similar to the people of the Eastern Mediterranean and was of average height, olive complexion, and dark, coarse hair and beard. It is hypothesized that he was able to escape several times because he was so average that no feature stood out among the people of Judea.
and this is exactly why God said, you shall make NO GRAVEN IMAGE of Him.
No, Jesus was NOT a black man. If anything he was a swarthy-ish Middle Eastern man. I grew up with the image of a blue-eyed European looking Jesus. I went to a Catholic church in the Bahamas years ago. What stands out in my memory was that Jesus was depicted as European and his flock were people of all colors.
If the story were different, and Jesus was a Black man,
would it really make any difference?
If Africans instead of Jews had been God’s chosen people,
it wouldn’t make any difference at all. Salvation through
faith would still be the guiding theme.
As it is though, the story doesn’t include Africans as God’s
chose people, and any words otherwise are essentially
blasphemy.
For several years, I’ve been watching the British mystery series, “Midsomer Murders.” I’ve complained that its portrayal of the Anglican clergy is absurdly bigoted and false, portraying a real-life liberal clergy as 17th century witch-hunting maniacs. I no longer give a damn how the C of E is portrayed; they deserve no defense.
Matthew 24:23-25
23 At that time if anyone says to you, ‘Look, here is the Messiah!’ or, ‘There he is!’ do not believe it. 24 For false messiahs and false prophets will appear and perform great signs and wonders to deceive, if possible, even the elect. 25 See, I have told you ahead of time.
Wonder what Henry VIII would think about what he started.
That’s a decades old irrelevant claim. There are Black Christ fiugres depicted in many places, as well as Black Madonna statues and paintings which have been revered for centuries by Catholics.
“The leadership of the Church of England...” disappeared long ago. It is my understanding that a major cleavage exists between the Anglicans of Africa and the sapolios who run the Church of England. Part of the problem that no one addresses is the indifference of the British royal family (which is German after all).
He could have had reddish hair-Esau did. He could have had green eyes-I’ve read that that is sometimes a characteristic of people from the Galilee area.
Charles may not be indifferent, in a detrimental way-I’ve read that he intends to change the oath to “defender of faith” in order to include Islam et al (wonder if that would include wicca). His forebear Richard the Lionhearted should haunt him.
He was Semite as were the later Arabs under Mohamadism. I say later because at one time they were not different. Odd is it not that we have two people of almost the same genetics that war with each other. The Jews are a most successful society. The Arabs under Mohamadism are a disaster to their society.
So glad someone else thinks this!!
Put on the armor, if you already haven’t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.