ACNAtoofar

To add insult to injury, they also claim the following in the statement: “Though we hold an assortment of personal views on gender and sexuality, we are united in our position of love and care for all survivors of abuse, with a particular tenderness for those facing social marginalization on top of abuse trauma.” But their clear statements of belief on the nature of sexual identity belies the truth that they do not, in fact, hold an assortment of personal views on gender and sexuality. They are espousing one view that is in stark contrast to the scriptures and the Church that ACNAtoo is seeking to denounce. In light of their demand for unconditional surrender of biblical and moral truth, there is not any room for respectful disagreement even as we share concern for survivors.

Given the animus of ACNAtoo towards biblical teaching on human identity, sexuality, and marriage, their disdain for “theological purity” and the Fundamental Declarations upon which this Church stands, ACNAtoo has forfeited whatever voice it once had among the “various publics” to which the presenting bishops in Ruch vs. Beach once referred. They are now demanding nothing less than an unconditional surrender of the very way we have sought to faithfully read and obey God’s word in the spirit and love of Jesus Christ. They have defined the issues to always reflect abuse even if the offending parties are simply holding the biblical line.

It is a bridge too far.

Or is it merely ACNA's LATCON mentality coming home to roost?

Time to fix it, boys.