Look, Ben, the article above has a couple of quotes from the Archbishop of Canterbury either incomplete or with ellipses. So we don't know the Full Context of what he said. I'm trying to find the full statement, but haven't yet. So saying that the published remarks are incomplete is *not* saying that the BBC is "lying". But it's not the full story. (I'm always suspicious of ellipses, it makes me wonder what was left out and *why*? Reporters are not without viewpoints and bias of their own, sometimes.)
I never denied that it would be a good idea to find the Archbishop's statements on this new Bible, and in what way he "backed it". But BBC would not have said he did, if he didn't. And such a Bible honeslty shouldn't be supported or "backed" in anyway, and the fact the Archbishop of Canterbury has, is just another reason why Anglicanism shouldn't be taken seriously. Anything and everything goes! It doesn't take an expert to observe the Anglican communion over the past 40 years or so and see that anything and everything really does go!
Just how much do you know about the Right Reverend Rowan Williams that you aren't "surprised"?
Well I of course do not personally know Rev. Williams and I've never met him, but his actions speak for themselves:
He, in whatever context, has supported this absurd Bible, that is obviously playing down those parts of the Bible that aren't acceptable to the Pagan world. Hmm I wonder if this new Bible doesn't include the dozens of times we are told not to conform to this world and its evil ways.
He backs gay and lesbian clergy members (he has even openly admitted to ordaining one openly and active homosexual to the priesthood), supports women being ordained as bishops and also accepts divorced people re-marrying in church.
He has expressed his solidarity with the American Episcopal Church on gay rights issues, including the consencration of a openly and active homosexual priest to the episcopacy, on at least one occassion.
He has stated there is a case for "acknowledging faithful same-sex relationships."
Need I go on? He was known as a very liberal bishop from the moment he was elected, it is no secret.
And how much do you really know about the Anglican Communion?
Quite a lot, maybe not as much as you, but I certainly know enough about the history of the Anglican Church, esp its formation, and its core doctrines or beliefs to never ever become a member of the Anglican Communion. Believe it or not I almost became an Anglican, thank God I did some research before making such a decision.
People who care about it and are trying to keep it on the right track. The Rt. Rev. Peter Akinola of Nigeria for one and there are many others who haven't given up yet.
I am glad you guys have those who are trying to keep your Church on the right track, but unlike Orthodoxy and Catholicism, nothing is stoping the Anglican Church as a whole from abandoning basic Christian doctrine, morals, and values and embracing modernism, ecumenism, and liberalism.
Why? Maybe because it has taught them about God and worship and they have come to know the Lord of Life through it. Just a thought.
Diciples of Chirst (thats what I was before I became a Catholic) taught me a lot about God and really helped me to know Jesus personally, but I wasn't a member of the true Church, and there was no logical way for them to convince me that they were the or apart of the true Church. I just think that one should not just be a Lutheran, or an Anglican, or even a Catholic just because their Church taught them about God, everyone should strive to find the fullness of Christian truth, the One Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church.