How low can the Anglicans go? Desmond Tutu this time.

[jay29]

Michael Buerk, who was the BBC correspondent in South Africa before the fall of apartheid, spoke of his experiences of Archbishop Tutu:

“His moral authority — inside and outside the Church — is unique. When he says his Church has lost its way, is obsessed with people’s private lives rather than the great public issues of war and disease and oppression; that it is obeying fallible scripture rather than the divine priorities of Christ — the world listens.”

What kind of nonsense is he speaking of here? Fallible scripture? What the hay?

“Tutu said to Lord Carey that he was ashamed of the Church as long ago as the 1998 Lambeth Conference, believing that the Church had become homophobic . He has instead pleaded the case for an inclusive church which sees homosexuality as an orientation rather than a lifestyle choice. He also said in his interview with Buerk that if God was homophobic he would not worship him.”

I never knew about this garbage.

He described Tutu as regarding the Bible as “a useful guide rather than a repository of unqualified truth”. Whilst strong conservatives like Stephen Green view the Bible as “divinely inspired to such an extent that he would like to see its Scriptures incorporated into British law”.

The best statement out of this article is this:

Buerk also spoke of Catholic MP Ann Widdecombe’s view that “Tutu is blurring all the edges . . . between the sinner and the sin, between orientation and action — above all, between right and wrong”.

The morality of the Anglican/Episcopal churches are awful.

christiantoday.com/article/conservative.christians.to.challenge.tutu.on.homosexuality/14845.htm

 

[manualman]

In fairness, an Anglican could match a catholic tit for tat in listing wayward catholic priests, bishops and prominent laymen for a lonnnggg time. But I expected more from Tutu as well.

 

[inthecloud]

True, the Catholic Church have also her lot of kooks too.

 

[1ke]

In fairness, an Anglican could match a catholic tit for tat in listing wayward catholic priests, bishops and prominent laymen for a lonnnggg time. But I expected more from Tutu as well.

Well, yes and no.

With the Catholic Church you know who’s wayward and who’s not because there is one, definite, and unchanging Truth by which to measure it.

With the Anglican Church/Episcopal Church there can be a multitude of teachings within the one “communion” even if those are diametrically opposed to each other-- all for the sake of preserving the “communion”. So, can one actually say that Tutu is “wayward”? No, because the AC/EC lacks a supreme authority and refuses to uphold one, unchanging Truth.

This is what happens when one lifts anchor and sails away from Rome.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Well, yes and no.

With the Anglican Church/Episcopal Church there can be a multitude of teachings within the one “communion” even if those are diametrically opposed to each other-- .

This puts me in mind of something William F. Buckley (whose wife is Anglican, by the way) said long ago. He said that the Anglican Church is so eclectic that no one, from the Pope to Mao Tse Tung, could say with any degree of certitude that he is NOT an Anglican.

 

[manualman]

Well, yes and no.

With the Catholic Church you know who’s wayward and who’s not because there is one, definite, and unchanging Truth by which to measure it.

With the Anglican Church/Episcopal Church there can be a multitude of teachings within the one “communion” even if those are diametrically opposed to each other-- all for the sake of preserving the “communion”. So, can one actually say that Tutu is “wayward”? No, because the AC/EC lacks a supreme authority and refuses to uphold one, unchanging Truth.

This is what happens when one lifts anchor and sails away from Rome.

Well, yes and no. Unless I missed the memo where we all got the pope’s cell phone number we only get hard clarification on some issues. For example, for MANY years people like Father Matthew Fox and Hans Kung had catholic credentials for teaching the faith, but what they taught was beyond the pale. It took YEARS for these two to be censured and the confusion they caused still reverberates. I’d hate to guess how many others fall into a similar category as these two, but with a lower profile they may NEVER be censured and their confused followers corrected.

We need to develop well - formed consciences so that we can recognize loonies when we see/hear them. Anglicans ca do that too. Hopefully, we have better tools to do that than the Anglicans who never censure anybody. But not everybody in a catholic pew gets that formation - tragically.

 

[Mr.Ex_Nihilo]

Well, yes and no. Unless I missed the memo where we all got the pope’s cell phone number we only get hard clarification on some issues. For example, for MANY years people like Father Matthew Fox and Hans Kung had catholic credentials for teaching the faith, but what they taught was beyond the pale. It took YEARS for these two to be censured and the confusion they caused still reverberates. I’d hate to guess how many others fall into a similar category as these two, but with a lower profile they may NEVER be censured and their confused followers corrected.

We need to develop well - formed consciences so that we can recognize loonies when we see/hear them. Anglicans ca do that too. Hopefully, we have better tools to do that than the Anglicans who never censure anybody. But not everybody in a catholic pew gets that formation - tragically.

Very good point.

 

[AllSaints1631]

Michael Buerk, who was the BBC correspondent in South Africa before the fall of apartheid, spoke of his experiences of Archbishop Tutu:

“His moral authority — inside and outside the Church — is unique. When he says his Church has lost its way, is obsessed with people’s private lives rather than the great public issues of war and disease and oppression; that it is obeying fallible scripture rather than the divine priorities of Christ — the world listens.”

What kind of nonsense is he speaking of here? Fallible scripture? What the hay?

“Tutu said to Lord Carey that he was ashamed of the Church as long ago as the 1998 Lambeth Conference, believing that the Church had become homophobic . He has instead pleaded the case for an inclusive church which sees homosexuality as an orientation rather than a lifestyle choice. He also said in his interview with Buerk that if God was homophobic he would not worship him.”

I never knew about this garbage.

He described Tutu as regarding the Bible as “a useful guide rather than a repository of unqualified truth”. Whilst strong conservatives like Stephen Green view the Bible as “divinely inspired to such an extent that he would like to see its Scriptures incorporated into British law”.

The best statement out of this article is this:

Buerk also spoke of Catholic MP Ann Widdecombe’s view that “Tutu is blurring all the edges . . . between the sinner and the sin, between orientation and action — above all, between right and wrong”.

The morality of the Anglican/Episcopal churches are awful.

christiantoday.com/article/conservative.christians.to.challenge.tutu.on.homosexuality/14845.htm

Before we go throwing stones at others’ morality, I think we should look at our own moral collapse in the Catholic church. We have lost much credability with many folks globally who rightfully held our clergy to a higher moral standard. They don’t anymore and who could blame them.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Before we go throwing stones at others’ morality, I think we should look at our own moral collapse in the Catholic church. We have lost much credability with many folks globally who rightfully held our clergy to a higher moral standard. They don’t anymore and who could blame them.

Actually, the effects of the sex scandals have turn out for the best. The end result is that better Catholic seminaries have formed better educated priests. Many of the new priests now are loyal to the Magisterium of the Church.

So the so called moral collapse in the Catholic Church is not true.

 

[AllSaints1631]

Actually, the effects of the sex scandals have turn out for the best. The end result is that better Catholic seminaries have formed better educated priests. Many of the new priests now are loyal to the Magisterium of the Church.

So the so called moral collapse in the Catholic Church is not true.

Tell that to the many who have left the church.

 

[Mannyfit75]

Tell that to the many who have left the church.

They don’t make up the majority. I recommend you buy Fr. Corapi’s DVD set on why Catholics leave the Church. Sex Scandal should not be the reason for leaving the Church. Rather any Catholic who contemplate on leaving for the most part must pray often to God. Offer a Holy Hour before the Jesus in the Tabernacle, Offering Sacrifices, give almsgiving to the Poor.

Don’t tell me you are one who left. In 2006, the world population of Catholics increase to 1.1%. Even as the claim that many left the Catholic, there are those who enter the Catholic faith. It evens out.

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=42515

Between 2003 and 2004, the world’s Catholic population grew by 12 million. But with overall world population growing at a considerably faster pace, the percentage of baptized Catholics among the world’s people declined from 17.2% to 17.1%.

 

[Mannyfit75]

In 2007 it even increased.

Vatican, Feb. 12, 2007 (CWNews.com) - The world’s Catholic population grew by 17 million in 2005-- the last year for which full statistics are available-- according to the annual Vatican yearbook, the Annuario Pontificio.

Despite an increase from 1.098 billion to 1.115 billion, the Catholic proportion of the world’s population remained virtually, because the Catholic population grew at a rate (1.5%) barely above the overall population growth rate (1.2%).

Cardinal Tarciscio Bertone, the Vatican Secretary of State, formally presented the first copy of this year’s Annuario Pontificio to Pope Benedict XVI (bio - news) at a private audience on February 12. Cardinal Bertone was accompanied to the audience by Archbishop Leonardo Sandri, the deputy Secretary of State, whose office is responsible for the annual compilation of statistics.

During the year covered by the latest volume, 2004-2005, the Catholic population grew most rapidly in Africa, at 3.1%, while overall population growth in Africa was 2.1%. The Catholic population also grew faster than the overall population in Asia (2.7% to 1.2%) and the Americas (1.2% to 0.9%). (The Vatican treats North and South America as a single continent for statistical purposes.) In Europe the Catholic population increased only slightly, but general population growth was almost flat.

The number of Catholic priests in the world grew slightly over the same year, from 405,891 to 406,411, or 0.13%. That growth was uneven, with increases in Africa (3.8%) and Asia (3.5%) nearly offset by declines in Europe (0.5%), the Americas (0.5%), and Oceania (1.8%). Similarly, seminary enrollment rose in Africa and Asia but fell in Europe and Oceania, with the Americas holding steady.

There were 12 new episcopal sees created during the year, and 9 metropolitan sees. Altogether there were 180 new bishops appointed in the course of the year.

cwnews.com/news/viewstory.cfm?recnum=49204

In 2004 it was 12 million, in 2005 its 17 million

 

[Mannyfit75]

This is the DVD set that I recommend for those Ex-Catholics:

fathercorapi.com/Come-Home-To-the-Catholic-Church-DVD-Set—906DVDS-P293C4.aspx

It’s only 45 dollars.

 

[Metaron]

He described Tutu as regarding the Bible as “a useful guide rather than a repository of unqualified truth”. Whilst strong conservatives like Stephen Green view the Bible as “divinely inspired to such an extent that he would like to see its Scriptures incorporated into British law”.

The best statement out of this article is this:

Buerk also spoke of Catholic MP Ann Widdecombe’s view that “Tutu is blurring all the edges . . . between the sinner and the sin, between orientation and action — above all, between right and wrong”.

The morality of the Anglican/Episcopal churches are awful.

Ugh. Don’t say that! The majority of Anglican metropolitan Bishops and Archbishops are by far conservative. America and Candana and Scotland, and England even (and Tutu) are the minority. Anglican morality is not aweful worldwide, although I admit that some of the jurisdictions that have allowed contaception or women ordenation are otherwise conservative. We have our share of errant Bishops too, but, they are in a somewhat worse state…

 

[Metaron]

Tell that to the many who have left the church.

Oh, get over it already. You just want to have something to complain about. Cafeteria Catholics and errant Catholics are what make our Holy Church look bad. Just get over the problems you have, stop being errant!

You make it sound like millions of dissatisfied Catholics are leaving in droves, but here is the truth:

For example, in 1997—the most recent year for which global statistics are currently available—the Church had an overall increase in membership of over ten million, only a little more than half of which can be accounted for by baptisms under the age of seven, and an increase in spite of the loss of members due to death and defection.

And the Catholic Church is growing not only in the world at large but in America in particular. In 1998—the most recent year for which national statistics are available—the U.S. Catholic population had an overall increase of 455,000, including 162,000 conversions to the Catholic Church (i.e., cases of people joining other than baptisms of those below the age of seven).

It may be important to point this out to those who commit the “fastest-growing” fallacy and wish to represent the Catholic Church as stagnant or declining in membership. It is especially valuable to know the number of adult conversions per year, since an anti-Catholic might attempt to dismiss American Church growth as due only to infant baptisms or immigration.

Needless to say, the Catholic growth rates in both the United States and the world dwarf what any other church is doing. Nobody else in the world gets an net increase of ten million people in a year, and nobody else in America gets a net increase of half a million people in a year. And remember that these represent net increases in membership—after deaths and defections have been factored in—so the actual number of converts is significantly higher.

Even if we look at just U.S. membership growth without infant baptism, nobody else in America gets 162,000 new non-infant members in a year, nor does any other American church have an overall increase of half a million members a year. When you really look at the numbers, the picture that those who commit the “fastest-growing” fallacy often wish to paint of a stagnant, declining Catholic Church simply won’t hold up.

Catholicanswers.com

 

[Jaypeeto4]

I have never respected Bishop Tutu.
I’ve known about his aberrant teachings on morality since
before the fall of Apartheid in South Africa.

Jerry Falwell said it best back
in the late 1980s: Bishop Tutu is a Phony.

Any so called Christian who promotes
Bishop Tutu’s moral standards, IS a phony Christian.

 

[fin]

Bishop Tutu is misleading Christians. He should probably take up ballet to divert his attention from promoting homosexuality and so and so.

 

[Contarini]

I have never respected Bishop Tutu.
I’ve known about his aberrant teachings on morality since
before the fall of Apartheid in South Africa.

Jerry Falwell said it best back
in the late 1980s: Bishop Tutu is a Phony.

Any so called Christian who promotes
Bishop Tutu’s moral standards, IS a phony Christian.

You know what? I’ll take Bishop Tutu’s “phony” Christianity over Jerry Fallwell’s (may he rest in peace and may light perpetual shine upon him) Bible-believing fundamentalism any day. I find it unbelievable that you would set up Falwell over Tutu as an example of Christian morality. Do you really think morality is just about sex?

Bishop Tutu is wrong on this point, but he is wrong for very Christian reasons–he is trying to be compassionate and to avoid quenching the smoking flax.

Edwin

 

[fin]

Bishop Tutu is wrong on this point, but he is wrong for very Christian reasons–he is trying to be compassionate and to avoid quenching the smoking flax.

Edwin

Trying to be compassionate? In what way?

 

[Contarini]

Trying to be compassionate? In what way?

Trying not to tell people that they are sinners because they seek to have the same kind of faithful, loving relationship with members of the same sex that a normal person (no doubt not a term Bishop Tutu would use) would have with a member of the opposite sex. From the liberal point of view, given how deep-rooted and pervasive homosexual inclinations are, how deeply they are entwined with people’s identity, and how apparently harmless and even potentially virtuous they are from the perspective of love of neighbor (i.e., they are not like sexual inclinations that lead people to abuse and exploit others), it is inhumane and un-Christian to say that these inclinations are intrinsically disordered.

I do not agree with this position. I’m simply trying to explain how someone like Bishop Tutu could conclude that supporting the legitimacy of gay relationships was the moral and Christian move.

Edwin