CTE, the Ecumenical Movement and the Sodomite Breaking Point

https://www.christiantoday.com/article/churches-together-in-england-rejects-gay-president-nomination/133643.htm

Churches Together in England or CTE is an ecumenical body that seeks to bring together the various strands of Christianity within England. It's part of a larger network of similar bodies that seeks to tie together all ecclesiastical organisations with the British Isles. It's open to Catholics, Liberals, Pentecostals, Evangelicals and more and yet the organisation has recently fallen under some scrutiny over a controversy that developed over one of its six presidencies.

The British Quakers decided to nominate a woman who is in an open lesbian relationship and this is being resisted by some of the Evangelicals and more conservative groups within the larger organisation. As a result, the CTE has requested that the subdivision which nominated her 'refrain from enacting its nomination', basically indicating they should pick someone else. The Quakers have refused and thus it would seem the seat will remain more or less vacant for the term.

The coverage has focused on the 'pain' this move has caused and the BBC seemed to take special umbrage at the move. The Sunday programme's host seemed to be shocked that the lesbian Quaker wasn't being judged by her character and that her opponents weren't taking into account what a wonderful Christian person she is as evidenced by her life and devotion to charities and what not.

First it needs to be stated that she is indeed by judged by her character and actions. She's in a lesbian relationship in open defiance of God's commands. Is that not evidence of character? Does this not inform how we determine whether one's actions are wonderful or not? What devotion can we speak of when one has openly defied the commands of God? Those who oppose her are right in thinking she's immoral and in fact no Christian at all. Rather than be rewarded by a leadership seat on some kind of semi-ecclesiastical body, she instead ought to be rebuked and called to repentance.

Additionally the coverage demonstrates with great clarity that secular media outlets are unable to properly cover religious news. The reporters, journalists and programme hosts are inept and incapable at understanding the issues at hand. Others like the BBC's Edward Stourton are so taken by the cultural consensus and the assumptions of social progressivism that he's utterly blind to his own bias. He wasn't hosting the Sunday programme that day but I've been listening to his shoddy mumbling commentary and interviews for many years. The Sunday show while informative is often lacking but Stourton's lead is frequently the most irritating part of the whole experience.

I have yet to find a solid Christian outlet that reports the news in an informed, fair and yet Christian manner. Christians need not pretend they're going to approach all things from a neutral standpoint. Indeed in obedience to Christ, we cannot. But at the same time we still need to report the truth and we needn't be afraid to allow all parties to say their bit and make their arguments. Our judgments are not neutral but that doesn't mean we need to spin the facts and skew the reporting. I'm afraid many Christian news outlets are some of the worst when it comes to integrity and honest reporting. In terms of commentary they all too often turn to patronising if not juvenile commentary meant to steer the audience... not to give them the information and even the tools to let them work things out.

Finally, CTE is exposed as something of a farce. It's an ecumenical body which is fatally flawed. What is the basis of such ecumenical relations? Is it Scripture? Tradition? In either case the liberals and sodomites are surely excluded. Is it something nebulous like love? That cannot be the basis for unity when it is used as a means of watering down doctrine. In Philippians Paul expresses that he wishes their love may abound yet more and more in knowledge and all judgment, that you may approve things that are excellent. Surely this statement must be taken into account when one reads the famous love chapter of 1 Corinthians 13. One must not be used to negate the other but all too often groups are given to ignore the passages and doctrines that are inconvenient with regard to their agenda.

Love cannot stand alone, especially when the concept (theologically understood) is divorced from Christ. Love must be understood in light of Christ... well, now we're into doctrine aren't we? Surely Christ's role as Judge and the bringer of vengeance must be taken into account. What does that do in terms of ecumenical relationships? It causes divisions doesn't it? And yet will someone say what we believe about Christ isn't important?

And additionally love understood in terms of the Church requires some notion of what the Church is. And how is that defined? Scripture? What is Scripture? These questions must be reckoned with. Anything less is dishonest, farcical. And of course if these questions are genuinely wrestled with, any Church group (for the sake of argument I'm assuming the validity of denominations) will quickly conclude that rather than join up with an organisation like CTE, in fact they should eschew it and have nothing to do with it. It's a dead end rooted not in the Person and Work of Christ as taught to us by the Apostles. Rather it's rooted in a lowest-common-denominator approach, an ethos of avoid offense at all costs and culturally compromised presumption. It will always end badly.

To think we've come to the point that an ecumenical group is appointing a lesbian to a position of Church leadership, and people are getting angry and upset when there's resistance... demonstrates just how far gone the ecumenical movement actually is.

The bodies that opposed her presidency were right to do so but in reality they should abandon the CTE altogether.