Anglican Enablers, Spreading Poison in the Name of Peace

I wanted to add a comment, but the article is so accurate in describing and - if you will - ‘breaking it down’ truthfully and succinctly that any comment from me would be superfluous.

I was, however, saddened to hear that Nicky Gumble is lending his support to Fr. Baucums effort. He’s a beloved figure to myself and many others who have benefiited from and found salvation through his presentation of the gospel.

Well said, Matt. 

There is no reason Christians and heretics can not work together for a common good such as manning a soup kitchen.  However in the context of worship we must not give the appearance that we tolerate heresy even for the sake of showing a peaceful face to the world.  We must show an allegiance to the truth for we know that all truth is grounded in the person of Jesus Christ who is the Truth.  To do otherwise is to lie.

I don’t care much if people think I am intolerant or bigoted or judgmental for following the commandments of God.  I do care very much if I sell my new birthright for a mess of the world’s porridge.

In light of this, it’s unclear to me - just why did they leave TEC?

Thank you, Matt+ for having the courage and insight to post this.  I find the compromise represented by this “reconciliation” effort to be breathtaking.  And sad.  It makes me wonder if some who have sacrificed so very much to leave revisionist jurisdictions and the brave Primates who have supported them might take a step back from this situation and ask themselves “Is *this* what we have worked so hard to bring about within Anglicanism?”

Interesting development, especially given that when Holy Trinity Brompton supporters did a church plant in the Virginia / D.C. area, they made it non-denominational. (Jamie Haith of HTB has just taken over as vicar.) I had assumed they did that so the apostate Episcopal Church could not claim jurisdiction over them.

http://www.htchurch.us/
http://www.alphausa.org/Articles/1000126183/Jamie_Haith_Moving.aspx

What Tory Baucum seems not to realize is that he’s come dangerously close to discrediting his entire parish and church.  If what Shannon Johnston teaches is adiaphora, no big deal, nothing that should keep us from working very closely together, then Truro should have remained Episcopalian.  The whole premise of all the upheaval, the lawsuits, and the money thrown down the drain was that the Diocese of Virginia had evolved to a point that was no longer compatible with this kind of close relationship.  Not to say the two sides would have hated each other, but they certainly wouldn’t have been back-slapping and communing at each other’s altars as though nothing had happened.

Baucum is essentially saying his ECUSA detractors were right all along.  If I were a Truro parishioner, I’d be hugely demoralized by that fact alone.

Actually, I am wondering if Nicky Gumbel made that comment with full knowledge.  It was around when we first commented on Tory’s+ inviting the wolf in with the sheep.

I said then and I reiterate now - I wonder if Nicky Gumbel is aware of Shannon Johnston’s heresies?

I have never met Nicky Gumbel personally, I only know him second-hand through his videos and from having met other people who are at HTB.  But I get the impression from what I have heard his personality is to be gracious with everyone he meets, whatever their viewpoints.  That’s in line with the whole Alpha philosophy, which is not to be confrontational but to let the Holy Spirit do His work on people.  So maybe he’s thinking that the Holy Spirit will work to changes folks’ hearts here, as well.

Hi Jackie,

Gumble’s letter indicates that he is well aware of Bishop Johnston’s stance as well as the past history between Johnston and Truro…hence the reference to “healing” “unity” and “peace”

This is very much the same sort of fuzzy thinking on the orthodox side that led us into this mess: “doctrine divides the Spirit unites”

#10 Matt—Perhaps, but as a charismatic Gumbel really believes in the Holy Spirit working in the Church, and doesn’t use Him as an excuse to do all sorts of things contrary to God’s will.

I would distinguish that from the apostates who continually justify their sinful and rebellious actions by claiming the “Spirit is doing a new thing.”  I think the latter is an example of the “unpardonable sin” that sends you to Hell.

Hi Jim

“Perhaps, but as a charismatic Gumbel really believes in the Holy Spirit working in the Church, and doesn’t use Him as an excuse to do all sorts of things contrary to God’s will.”

Except that in treating a heretic as a brother and promoting his ministry he is doing just that.

Matt—Yes, that is the problem, and that’s the one we all face.  That’s why I decided a number of years ago I had to leave the denomination. I’m not advocating for anyone else to do that (not trying to get myself banned), but ultimately that is the issue.  And now I’m an elder in the PCUSA (in a faithful Bible-believing, Christ-centered church) and see the whole pattern repeating itself again, and having the same discussion about what do we do.

One thing I note is that Chartres and Welby seem fine with the ACNA being on an Anglican par with TEC in the communion.  Setting aside whether that is advisable, or even whether all of the global south would accept it, I have wondered if the next ABC might be forced to accept the facts on the ground and decide that there are two Anglican provinces in North America.  I always thought that, to many, it was more important to create ACNA as an orthodox Anglican province than it was for the ABC to punish TEC, and that had Williams not been so willing to be directed by TEC in its many efforts to subvert the ACNA, he might, for example, have invited both Robinson and the ACNA bishops to Lambeth.  While many bishops would still have been unhappy, they more likely would have been expressing that at the conference rather than having the bishops for over half the communion staying away.  Well, the enthronement may be another opportunity to discover whether the revisionists want to define the communion by who is not part of it.

I said in a comment on another article that, when I was in ECUSA, my bishop invited me to be a part of the leadership team to encourage “reconciliation” among the various sides.  At the time (c. 2006) I believed him to be orthodox, and I agreed.  However, within four months, after meeting others involved in our diocese and in the Diocese of LA (the group we were partnering with to try to bring about a nation-wide “reconciliation process), I came to see that the aim was not to be on the best terms possible with those who believed that same-sex sexual practices and Christianity were compatible while remaining distinct from them, but to make the issue a secondary one, adiaphora.  I resigned from the leadership team.

The sexuality question is not on a par with some others, such as the Trinity - but it has huge implications about the nature of God and the trustworthiness of his Word, and if those implications are followed out, we find that the god who doesn’t mind same-sex sexual activity is NOT the God whom we worship.

I think it is possible for a person to be both a Gospel-believing Christian and a practicing same-sex attracted person - but not for long.  The more one gets to know the God of the Bible, the more one is responsible to live in obedience to him, and to deny oneself in order to rejoice in the lifegiving, transforming grace of God.

As many of those above have said, if what Baucom is doing is OK, there was no point in leaving ECUSA.  I am a peace-loving person, but there is point at which the cost of peace is integrity, and that price is too much to pay.

It seems rather superficial to me, all this patty cake with Bishop of VA who has made his position re same gender and trans-gender a matter of record, now. I really fail to understand what Tory’s bordering-on-whinny stance is to accomplish in real terms, since he is so attuned to concrete results. This political dalliance is really quite disagreeable.

Thanks for publishing this, Fr Matt.  I am still reserving judgment on a number of issues, but whatever the case these things have to be discussed openly by Christians, and at as early a stage as possible.

While I understand the focus in most comments on Baucum and Gumbel, IMHO the focus should be on ACNA Bishop Guernsey who seems to be tolerating this and therefore approving this.  For those who left TEC at the cost of being deposed, the passive support of the Baucum/Johnston relationship by Bp Guernsey is a slap in the face.