Thursday, July 13, 2006

What Is Most Damaging to the Body of Christ?

Marc Heinrich poses an interesting question on his site, Purgatorio: Which of the following is most damaging to the Body of Christ?:
    1. The Anglican's naming a woman Presiding Bishop who supports ordination of practicing gay clergy:

      Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori became the first woman elected to lead a church in the global Anglican Communion when she was picked Sunday to be the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church. ... In 2003, the Americans shocked the Anglican world by electing the first openly gay bishop—V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. Placing a female bishop at the head of the denomination may further anger conservatives overseas and within the U.S. church. And Jefferts Schori voted to confirm Robinson.

    2. The PCUSA's allowing the renaming of the Trinity to "compassionate mother, beloved child, and life-giving womb" instead of "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit":

      At the recent 217th General Assembly meeting, PC(USA) commissioners voted to allow the denomination's churches to use the phrase "compassionate mother, beloved child, and life-giving womb" instead of "Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" when referring to the Trinity. This was just one of the 12 phrases approved by the Assembly as permissible substitutions for the traditional names of the Godhead, another being "rock, cornerstone, and temple."

    3. The SBC's resolution on alcohol:

      RESOLVED, That we urge that no one be elected to serve as a trustee or member of any entity or committee of the Southern Baptist Convention that is a user of alcoholic beverages.

      RESOLVED, That we urge Southern Baptists to take an active role in supporting legislation that is intended to curb alcohol use in our communities and nation ...
While I believe all three positions are unbiblical, it is my contention that #3 (i.e., the issue of liberty vs. legalism) is the most damaging to the Body of Christ. Why do I say that? Because those churches who agree with #1 or #2 have already demonstrated that they are not part of the Body of Christ.

2 comments:

marc said...

Lee,
Although I really haven't let the cat out of the bag at PURGATORIO on what I think on this issue, I tend to agree with you. I also think number 3 is the most subtle and insidious, the others are obvious affronts to the Word.

Bill Green said...

I agree. #3 encourages a legalistic view of Christianity. The Son of man came "eating and drinking" and looked forward to eating "the fruit of the vine" again in the kingdom.

LinkWithin

Related Posts with Thumbnails