July 24, 2007
Rehabilitation
The Rocky Mountain News ran an article on July 7th with the heading SUSPENDED Episcopal priest says she’s Muslim. According to the report, Rev. Ann Holmes Redding of Seattle, a priest for 23 years, has been a practicing Muslim for 15 months. If that won’t give you a religious migraine I don’t know what will. I have a hunch some parishioners may have known something was amiss, but they had to wait on the church hierarchy to take action. For me the real kicker to this story is that Ms. Redding has been suspended from the priesthood for one year. Suspended, what does that mean? Do the leaders think a year will give her time to pull her head out from under her arm pit?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Gail;
-----Paul wrote to the Philippians, “Whatever you have learned or received or heard from me, or seen in me - put into practice. And the God of peace will be with you.” (Phil 4:9) Paul and many other authors wrote a lot of divinely inspired principles that are collected into the Bible and are beneficial, “…for teaching, rebuking, correcting, and training in righteousness…” (II Tim 3:16) Each of us has a unique measure of obedience and disobedience to His Word. But the reality that His instruction is carried by the principles in the Bible stands firm regardless of any technique one uses to dodge it. Whenever we walk against one of these principles, or merely twist it a tad, we participate with Cain in his offering.
-----From the beginning until today, and continuing until the end, the attitudes of all men can be analyzed into two basic categories. There are the Cainzish attitudes. Cain desired to know God and receive him, as evidenced by the fact he brought an offering to God. His anger at God’s rejection of the offering was evidence that he was intent on giving to God according to his own principles. The offering was perfectly acceptable according to him. It had value to man as food and cloth. It was a product of an important talent he possessed - tilling the ground, a task God gave man to do. And it was sacrificial of him to give to God. Cainish attitudes view man and God through principles man concludes from valid observations of his own facts and circumstances, only. Then there are the Abelish attitudes. Maybe Abel concluded to bring God an offering of his flock according to the same reasoning Cain used --value, talent, and sacrifice. But, in faith, he happened to be right. His conclusion corresponded to God’s principle, so his sacrifice was acceptable.
-----Cain was not rejected for his offering, but for his attitude. He refused to alter his determination of what was proper to match God’s expressed principle. All Cain had to do was to give his offering of crops to Abel in exchange for livestock and please God with a proper offering. But the fact that God insisted of Cain to abide in the principle He requires irked Cain. Surely, in his own mind, he thought the God of peace should have been with him too, because he was being reasonable with God in the light of his own facts and circumstances.
-----But God is not interested in our being reasonable with Him. He is interested in our being obedient to Him and in His being reasonable with us. And it is reasonable for Him to demand our obedience to what is beneficial to us. The principles of God’s Word are beneficial to us, and they are reasonable instruction from God. He expects our obedience to the Bible according to our ability to do so, and our confession of disobedience regarding our inability to do so. But never does he want His Abel’s to act like Cain’s by insisting that their own determined principles are not disobedience, and therefore, ought to be as valid as God‘s.
-----Ms. Redding is breaching numerous principles of God’s Word in the spirit of Cain. We are instructed by the Word to be humble, not “Reverend“. Maybe the title is meant to convey humility and servitude, but the doubts are supported by the more accurate conveyance of such in titles like “Humbled Ann Holmes Redding” or “Child Ann Holmes Redding.” And what is this “priest” thing? Jesus Christ is our priest according to Biblical principle, not the Humbled Ann Holmes Redding. But the addressing of those issues assumes she can even hold a position of authority in the church. The Word is quite pointed concerning women, the church, and authority. Our culture is in deep rebellion on that point, according to its Cainishness. And the church hierarchy has taken action at her being Muslim? Where were they on the first three offenses against Biblical principles? And what about the parishioners who waited for church hierarchy to act? Paul tells us to note anyone who refuses to follow Biblical principles and avoid them. Why should anyone be surprised at this happening in a situation so out of Biblical control?
-----I understand that it is not politically correct to point out the fact that some church is out of line with the Bible. In fact, publicly addressing differences between church practices and Biblical principles will get you sharp rebuke and flagrant condemnation. Those who desire to approach God by their own principles still murder the characters of those who submit to the written principle of the Word by beating on them with accusations of intolerance, bigotry, sexism, racism, hypocrisy, authoritarianism, exclusivism, and any other useful term, just as Cain jealously murdered Abel. With no apology, I will be glad take my position with the Abelish attitudes and the blows from the Cainish ones.
Post a Comment