I have a meeting this week and, unlike the FCA members, it will be in Birmingham. Now don't get me wrong but I'd rather be in Bermuda, not because I don't like Birmingham (and what is there not to like?) but because Bermuda sounds much, err, warmer, sexier, distant?
Venues apart, I am still struggling with some aspects of this FCA thing. I totally and absolutely endorse anything that seeks to maintain, uphold or in certain areas re-introduce Biblical principles and standards into the life of the Church (universal) and the church (Anglican).
Their latest missile starts of brilliantly in that they (FCA top table chappies) affirm the reason for the FCA as being "To give witness to the life transforming gospel of Jesus Christ and the trustworthiness of the Bible." Hallelujah!
I am all in favour of any movement that, "Delivers spiritual and practical outcomes to faithful Anglican Christians around the world," and am also concerned / dismayed / saddened / [insert word here] over the election of mary Glasspool (whom I am sure is a nice enough lady, but that of course is not the issue is it?).
I also recognise that restraint is merely a word used by Rowan, maintained by the orthodox and totally ignored by the liberal elements amongst us. Thus it appears, once more, that the FCA and I are in total agreement.
So why am I confused?
I am confused because certain people continue to tell me that I need to sign up for this and that 'my church' (it's 'mine' because I belong to it, not because I 'own' it) also need to subscribe and 'be ready to make a stand' (by which they mean 'leave'). I keep pointing out that by leaving this becomes the Fellowship of Confessing Ex-Anglicans and the point is surely lost. Isn't the key to stand and remain within the body committed to the traditional Biblical truths, values and standards rather than start a new denomination?
Told you - I'm confused.
No comments:
Post a Comment