Has the Episcopal Church been "Falsely Accused" Part III

Stand Firm ^ | 8/29/2006 | Matt Kennedy

[sionnsar]

If you were to walk into any given parish on Sunday morning and question the average Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican or evangelical believer regarding the official doctrines of his or her denomination, no doubt you would come away with at least some mistaken ideas. It would be unfair not to mention illogical to use this very particular and anecdotal evidence as a basis for judgment for or against his or her entire denominational body. The only fair way to measure or consider the faith of a given denomination is to examine the official teachings of that body.

---

In yesterday’s article I argued that that the “accusations” of heresy and apostasy against the Episcopal Church do not rest on the presence and/or influence of John Shelby Spong or Dr. Marcus Borg, but on the historical fact of the election, consent and consecration of V. Gene Robinson to the office of bishop in the state of New Hampshire. By this official legislative and sacramental act, the Episcopal Church crossed the boundary between right and false doctrine, orthodoxy and heresy. The transgression was confirmed, officially, at GC2006.

Why is nailing this fact down important to the debate?

If you were to walk into any given parish on Sunday morning and question the average Roman Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican or evangelical believer regarding the official doctrines of his or her denomination, no doubt you would come away with at least some mistaken ideas.

It would be unfair not to mention illogical to use this very particular and anecdotal evidence as a basis for judgment for or against his or her entire denominational body.

The only fair way to measure or consider the faith of a given denomination is to examine the official teachings of that body.

If having done that, you find a real deficiency; say a denial of the doctrine of the Trinity, then there is good cause to examine a wide range of evidence, including the prevalence and influence of false assumptions, teachings, and ideas within the denomination in hopes of determining the source or foundations of the error.

If, for example, you find that thirty years prior to the official change in Trinitarian doctrine, a radical teacher arose within the denomination, denying the authority of divine revelation and breaking with core doctrine at a number of key points including, significantly, the nature of God, then you would have good reason to keep digging. If upon doing so, you find that this radical teacher and his disciples gained popularity, influence, and a substantial following in the denomination and that denominational leaders frequently lauded his work and invited him to speak and teach in their districts, then you would likely have, at the very least, a good reasonable basis for suggesting that this false teacher and his followers played a major role in pushing the denomination over the line between orthodoxy and heresy.

The mere presence of the radical teacher and his followers in the denomination does not, in itself, constitute heresy (though they themselves are heretics). The denomination fell into heresy when the official teaching changed. Historians working to find the origins of doctrinal change may well point to the lack of ecclesial discipline and to the fact that the false teacher was permitted to spread his teaching unhindered, but regardless, the organization did not officially fall until it adopted heretical teachings officially.

Lest you think I’ve gone too far abreast, I believe this distinction between the error itself and the root causesof the error gets to the core of the problem with Fr. Tom’s apology. He puts the cart before the horse.

Let’s take a look at the first section of his article:

“These groups justify their attacks on The Episcopal Church by claiming our leaders hold and teach “pagan or alien doctrines.” They seem to take delight in claiming we hold beliefs such as the following:

1. Jesus is only one of many paths to God instead of the Only Way (John 14:6).
2. Loving a person means acceptance and love of that person’s sins.
3. The Holy Scriptures are merely historical relics and are not be taken seriously.
4. People can propound any new teaching as long as it makes the listeners feel good (2 Timothy 3:3-4).
5. Heaven and Hell are only figurative terms used in the Bible; liberals believe it is wrong to frighten people with such old ideas in the modern world.
6. The resurrection of Jesus never happened.
7. The Episcopal Church has abandoned its faith and embraced the heresies of Bishop Spong and Marcus Borg.

It is quite possible to find some or all of these views extant somewhere within The Episcopal Church; but you have to look very, very closely to find them. However, it is dishonest and a complete distortion to jump from finding one person holding such a view to charging hundreds or thousands of others with holding the same belief. For example, a couple of years ago a clergy couple was discovered to be interested in Wicca (pagan religion). Anglican Communion Network (ACN) spokesmen immediately rushed to charge the entire progressive leadership of our Church as embracing paganism!

First of all, you do not have to look that closely at all to find prominent leaders who teach and preach variations on at least one or two of the positions (somewhat inaccurately articulated) by Fr. Tom above. As we saw yesterday, the PB elect, +Katherine Jefferts-Schori herself is enough of a supporter of the teachings of John Shelby Spong to invite him to lead a clergy day in her diocese. And, as we will begin to see in tomorrow’s installment, many on the list of supporters of Episcopal Majority publicly teach the 7 errors above with impunity and without shame.

But second, and more to the point, Fr. Tom misconstrues the orthodox argument. The case against the Episcopal Church is not that there are influential false teachers in the church and therefore the Church is heretical. Nor is it that “hundreds or thousands” of parishioners hold beliefs consistent with the heretical teachings espoused by the false teachers above and therefore the Church is heretical.

No.

The Church is in error becuase the election, consent, and consecration of V. Gene Robinson officially moved the Episcopal Church beyond the limits of orthodoxy.

The orthodox emphasis on the influence of Spong, Dr. Borg, +Pike, +Righter, et al and on the 7 asserted errors Fr. Tom mischaracterizes above is not intended to “prove heresy” but to explain the root origins and causes of the heretical acts of 2003.

In other words the assertion is that the Episcopal Church officially stepped away from orthodoxy and into heresy in 2003 because the false teachers and errors above, over the course of thirty years, significanly influenced the collective body of the Episcopal Church and played a major, if not definitive, role in the decision to give consent to the election in New Hampshire.

The fact that the Epsicopal Church has erred is indisputable, the video Choose this Day and the orthodox attention to the influence of false teachings in the Church seek to explain that fact.

Here’s Fr. Tom’s description of Choose this Day:

In it [Choose this Da] an ACN spokesman charges, amongst even more outrageous statements, that “the leadership [of The Episcopal Church] have embraced a foreign and alien and pagan religion.” That sort of thing takes one’s breath away by its sheer ignorance and vindictiveness.

The point he misses is that the “embrace” occurred in 2003, the seduction leading up to the embrace was long, drawn out, and, in fact, did and does include alien and pagan forms of religion.

[sionnsar]

Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams.

FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this moderately high-volume ping list (typically 3-9 pings/day).
This list is pinged by sionnsar, Huber and newheart.

Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com
More Anglican articles here.

Humor: The Anglican Blue (by Huber)

Speak the truth in love. Eph 4:15