Comments on: Rick Warren to the Rescue of Anti-Gay Anglicans

By: grantdale

grantdale — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 23:34:51 +0000

Warren’s nauseating ‘bio’ of Akinola in TIME is available. The distorted presentation of the ‘Muslim-Christian clashes’ barely describes the violence that has killed hundreds, if not thousands. Far from confronting such a tribal mindset, Akinola is the perfect example of fundamentalism; ‘Third World’ or otherwise.

Of course, one might wonder what the heck TIME was thinking in having a Southern Baptist minister write a bio for Akinola in the first place. (Perhaps Richard Dawkins could write the one about Warren? Just a thought…)

By: Gary

Gary — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 22:31:18 +0000

Contrary to Fitch’s implication, United Methodist Church assets are held in trust by local congregations on behalf of the United Methodist Church.
Mainline protestant denominations are under attack by well-funded neoconservative groups, created and governed by people who are often not even members of these churches. The Institute for Religion and Democracy coordinates such attacks, attempting to silence the liberal or progressive voices of the churches on a variety of social issues. Read about IRD at:
http://www.publiceye.org/magazine/v20n1/clarkson_battle.html and at http://rightweb.irc-online.org/profile/1496.html.

By: Richard W. Fitch

Richard W. Fitch — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 20:08:26 +0000

Duncan: The matter is not as simple as you seem to believe. Unlike Baptist or Methodist or other congregational denominational forms, the EC-USA is a hierarchical structure with certain similarities to RC. When a parish/diocese becomes a part of the national church it accepts the canons of the church which state that the local level holds its property and assets in trust for the greater church. It is somewhat like turning your finances over to a stockbroker. You trust him to manage your money. If he goes to another profession, he must return your assets to you.

By: Duncan

Duncan — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 15:13:19 +0000

Whilst I disagree with Mr Warren and the anti-gay congregation on the schismatic issue, and I suspect his motives may more expansionism than charity, I do not see that his offer is unethical in principle. He may be encouraging a schism, but that just might be what the Anglican church needs. Open separation could be better than lasting, repressed conflict. And the anti-gay faction will be with like-minded people (problematic, but a church is not the best place for debate over a bitterly divisive issue). The congregation should not be forced to compromise its bigotry to keep its place of worship.

By: Jonathan Justice

Jonathan Justice — Mon, 12 Jan 2009 05:12:24 +0000

What a loon!

The breathlessly positive framing in the CT posting makes it even funnier. As I have suggested elsewhere, Warren has an affiliation problem where the people he affiliates with perform so badly that it raises questions about the doctrinal positions his writing and home church work would seem to be trying to advance. In this case he is in deep with a bunch of folks whose scandals would inspire Mark Twain more than St. Paul. Here he is, egging on a civil war in a denomination that is a lot better at advancing its purposes than he would appear to be at advancing his. I mean, what could be more unexceptional than an invocation at the Inauguration delivered by an Episcopal Bishop? Gene, Katherine, and Desmond are all such nice people, and so good at what they do. Meanwhile, Rick Warren is not holding up well under scrutiny, and the Team Obama invite is looking less and less like a favor. The Feast of The Epiphany has come and gone, and the guy is still twisting in the wrong wind.