Comprehensive Unity: The No Anglican Covenant Blog

Thursday, December 9, 2010

Christian Today Takes The Low Road

In his article in Christianity Today, John Martin uses the vote dishonestly. He writes, "With the vote at well over two-thirds in favour and near unanimous support by the Bishops (all voted for with one abstention) the odds of the Covenant faltering now seem remote." In fact the vote was not on an approval of the Covenant but on a motion to send it to the diocese.

There can be any number of reasons a delegate voted yes on the motion. The comments before the vote and many after, make it cleat that some voted yes merely to express loyalty to the archbishops, others for the covenant, still others because they believe the diocese should have an opportunity to discuss and vote.

Martin rather arrogantly ignores the vote of the GafCon primates which was on a resolution that says they won't attend the next Primates meeting and do not approve of the proposed covenant. At the moment, were the proposed covenant approved by the Church of England, it would mean full fellowship with Mexico and no one else. In fact I think fellowship with Mexico is important. But to suggest it will make the Church of England credible in Roman Catholic eyes is not a stretch, it is a fantasy.

Martin falls into three errors: he simply assumes the English diocese do not matter; he ignores the content of the motion and he (arrogantly) assumes all the national churches will follow the English bishops. In fact as both liberal and conservative churches have already demonstrated not a lot of other member churches are going to blindly follow.

The manifold benefits Martin claims will come from the synod vote are ethereal.



Blogger WSJM said...

Jim, I don't think John Martin's article is in Christianity Today (the American mainstream evangelical magazine) but in Christian Today, a UK publication (apparently both print and online) that seems to be of an evangelical bent.
This is not to exonerate Christianity Today, but as far as I know they do not currently have a horse in this particular race. (Unless, of course Christianity Today also published this article, in which case, as Roseanne Rosannadanna of blessed memory used to say, "Never mind!")

However, I quite agree with your comments about Martin's article, as I indicated in my own brief and slightly snarky comment about it over at Thinking Anglicans.

December 9, 2010 at 11:51 PM  
Blogger JimB said...

Yup, my bad. I have made the appropriate changes. No excuse I flat screwed up.


December 10, 2010 at 3:32 PM  

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]