Tish Harrison Warren, a woman believing herself to be a "priest" in the Anglican Church of North America wrote an article for "Christianity Today," which was published yesterday (May 11th) on the publication's website. You can view that article here.
Now I'm no big fan of CT. Their articles over the last four years have been anything but encouraging to me as a conservative evangelical catholic. But I am even less impressed by Tish and her work for them. She is a fine writer, better than I will ever be, and her books sell very well. But might I suggest that that's not necessarily a good sign or a testimony to her orthodoxy.
Tish has said some very problematic things in the past and for whatever reason her bishop hasn't been too concerned with her. He should be. From supporting and being on the board of REVOICE, to suggesting that those who voted for Donald Trump are racist, Tish is a significant problem for the church today. In large part to her being a liar.
Take for example that above article. How is it a lie? Its a lie because she gives you the notion that the only way you can talk about Jesus is by being ordained. She very cleverly presents the case that she is tired of the debate surrounding women's ordination and that she just wants to talk about Jesus. But that's a red herring, because we all know that you don't need to be ordained to talk about Jesus. So then she had embraced the age old Anglican error of clericalism and if you're not careful you're going to buy it.
The Merriam Webster dictionary defines clericalism as, "a policy of maintaining or increasing the power of a religious hierarchy." That's precisely what Tish is guilty of here by telling you that being ordained some how made it easier or even gave her more right to talk about Jesus. But you don't need to be ordained to talk about, write about or teach about Jesus. In fact... If you're a Christian, regardless of your status, it is required that you do so and often. Tish's article gives the reader, whether she intended it or not, the very mistaken notion that, you have to be ordained to talk about Jesus. That's repugnant.
Now I'm willing to bet that she would come back at that criticism with the, "that's not what I said" argument. But that's how logical fallacies work. That's not really what she is saying. What she's saying is that she believes that talking about women's ordination is far less important than talking about Jesus, but in reality they are one and the same.
The former bishop of the diocese of Fort worth put it this way, "The Celebrant at the Altar is a symbol of Christ, the church gathered at the Altar is the Bride of Christ. If the priest at the Altar is a woman you have a lesbian church." Now that can be interpreted as a rather polemical statement, but is it wrong? Part of my repeated frustration with Tish has been her very low view of the sacraments. She might get dressed up like a high churchman, but she is really snake belly low church. All women who profess to be clergy are, because by the very nature of their "ordinations" they are denying what is taking place in the Eucharist.
In the Eucharist Jesus gives himself to us. The priest is not the minister of the sacraments, that is Jesus' role. The priest is only standing in for him and ministering on his behalf. Now if you don't think anything happens at communion, or perhaps that communion is just a teaching aid, then you would have no issue with a woman doing that, because there is no meaning in any of it other than what you give it. But if you're a high churchman. If you believe that the sacraments are the life giving body and blood of Christ, then you should have a problem with it, because it's not Jesus giving you the bread and wine, but some lady who wants to look cool to her feminist friends.
The bottom line here is that Tish isn't an Anglican. At least not theologically. She's just another progressive evangelical who believes dressing like an Anglican gives her an edge. My pastoral advice to you all is to avoid her like the plague. I'll not read her books or take her opinions into consideration, because in everything she does, she undermines the faith once handed down by the apostles and that is grievous unto those of us who take our tradition seriously.
So don't put your trust in Tish. Her entire mission serves, whether she intends it or not, to undermine the faith and the Anglican way. That has always been the plan for women's ordination. The age old question, "Did God really say..." is at the heart of the entire debate and the answer is yes... God really did say that women are not to be ordained. There is no biblical warrant, there is no theological argument and there is no possible way for a woman to be ordained. It goes against created order and the God ordained structure of the church. Whatever they do on the altar is utterly null and void and a complete mockery of the sacrament. Even the term priest, which is a masculine word, has been hijacked by these people because "priestess" is offensive to them.
Heidt, Michael. “FIFNA Bishops Stand Firm Against Ordination of Women.” Forward in Christ Magazine, 16 Aug. 2018, www.forwardinchristmagazine.com/2018/08/fifna-bishops-stand-firm-against.html.
No comments:
Post a Comment