This is Life!: Revolutions Around the Cruciform Axis

Good work, Clifton--getting yourself evicted from a discussion group dedicated to free speech (so-called). That lengthy interchange on the group was enlightening. But I'm probably not "enlightened" as would be understood by the orthodox members of "Episcopal Free Speech," any more than you are so conceived.

I tried to find this discussion group, but cursory searches turned up only information about "Episcopal Free Speech," not contact info for the group itself.

Here's something like what I had in mind to say:

"You know, I've read through a summary of what's been said here, and the reasons given for barring Cliff from this discussion; and I can't help but think: I'm sorry.

"I'm sorry that the Episcopal church, that part of the body of Christ that has nurtured my faith for most of my life, has come to this point in its history.

"I'm sorry that much of our leadership, liberal and conservative, has been so intransigent.

"And I'm sorry that we cannot seem to listen respectfully to views that differ from our own. I will grant you that Cliff's take on the controversy at hand stands in stark contrast to the majority of those participating in this discussion. And I will admit that his detail-oriented, philospohical style of argument, quite frankly, sometimes just gets on my last nerve. But as aggravating as that can be, I have also learned to respect him, tremendously. Cliff is honest and above-board, a decent man and a committed Christian.

"Let me be clear: from what I have heard and read (as an admitted outsider, from the Diocese of Northern Indiana), Bp. Beckwith's actions appear at the very least unpastoral, if not excessive and overcontrolling. I would be very uncomfortable in the circumstances you describe in your diocese.

"But to suggest that Cliff has ulterior motives, to circumvent his questions, and then ban him from discussion because his probing makes you think, and explain, and articulate your position... This impugns the validity of your supposed stance in favor of "free speech," and leaves you just as guilty of the sort of oppressive censorship as your bishop seems to be."

There was more, but you get the gist.

Free speech indeed. Gotta love the guy who signed his post "proudly seeking God's grace." I wasn't aware pride was a spiritual virtue, especially in relation to grace. What was with the ----teaser name calling? How Christian! Was the person who called you that removed from the list?

Fascinating! Here's my three-cents worth:

1. I believe Jesus was understandably silent on homosexual behaviour because he was speaking to Jews, who were well-versed in what God's views on the subject were. I can only imagine his listeners' astonishment had he included an admonition against homosexuality, when they all understood quite well from the Mosaic law that homosexual behaviour was to be viewed as unholy and unclean. When the gospel was extended to the gentiles, instruction against homosexuality was once again graciously offered, to instruct those recently saved from paganism - a world-view and mindset into which the western world is now re-descending.

2. I don't understand the point of those who selectively reference the gospels only, seemingly rejecting the authority of what precedes and follows. They seem to be saying that they are prepared to accept Jesus' authority, but not Moses' or Paul's. Yet Jesus Himself clearly accepted all that had been Written as authoritative, indeed, although he was God's own Son, yet he viewed Himself as under the authority of Scripture. And isn't it this same Jesus who hand-picked the apostle Paul to be his apostle to the Gentiles? If we can't believe Christ's specially chosen apostle, we certainly can't trust any novelty being proposed today by those whom I can only characterize as lesser men and women.

3. I suppose that proponents of homosexual behaviour think that when Jesus conferred with Moses and Elijah on the mount of transfiguration that Jesus said something like, "well, Mo, you did a great job on the Red Sea crossing, but you got the sodomy thing all wrong." There is not a single jot or tittle in Scripture to suggest that Jesus thought that even the smallest part of the Mosaic revelation was defective or in error.

A lot of grief could be spared if the Church would study Jesus' view of Scripture - and seek to even half-way emulate it. I once proposed as a conference theme, "recovering an apostolic view of Scripture". It seems to me that even conservatives today have a view of Scripture that is often far lower than that held by Jesus, the apostles, and the early church.

The truth hurts and those who use the Episcopal Free Speech Yahoo group seem to believe that they are allowed to hurt others, but that no one is ever to be allowed to made them the least uncomfortable. Jerimiah said, "Choose life", but what they have chosen is the destruction of something which they could never have built. The present trials of the Episcopal Church, the fall in attendance and in contributions are the real result of what they have done.