Reformed Churchmen

We are Confessional Calvinists and a Prayer Book Church-people. In 2012, we remembered the 350th anniversary of the 1662 Book of Common Prayer; also, we remembered the 450th anniversary of John Jewel's sober, scholarly, and Reformed "An Apology of the Church of England." In 2013, we remembered the publication of the "Heidelberg Catechism" and the influence of Reformed theologians in England, including Heinrich Bullinger's Decades. For 2014: Tyndale's NT translation. For 2015, John Roger, Rowland Taylor and Bishop John Hooper's martyrdom, burned at the stakes. Books of the month. December 2014: Alan Jacob's "Book of Common Prayer" at: http://www.amazon.com/Book-Common-Prayer-Biography-Religious/dp/0691154813/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1417814005&sr=8-1&keywords=jacobs+book+of+common+prayer. January 2015: A.F. Pollard's "Thomas Cranmer and the English Reformation: 1489-1556" at: http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Cranmer-English-Reformation-1489-1556/dp/1592448658/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1420055574&sr=8-1&keywords=A.F.+Pollard+Cranmer. February 2015: Jaspar Ridley's "Thomas Cranmer" at: http://www.amazon.com/Thomas-Cranmer-Jasper-Ridley/dp/0198212879/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1422892154&sr=8-1&keywords=jasper+ridley+cranmer&pebp=1422892151110&peasin=198212879

Showing posts with label Sodomy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Sodomy. Show all posts

Friday, December 20, 2013

12 Historical Quotes Against Sodomy That Every Christian Should Know

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=18381#.UrUGycKA1jo

12 Historical Quotes Against Sodomy That Every Christian Should Know
By TFP Student Action
www.tfpstudentaction.org
December 14, 2013

For millennia the Catholic Church has consistently opposed unnatural vice. Here is a brief sampling of useful quotes from Saints, Doctors of the Church, Church Fathers and Ecclesiastical Writers who condemn homosexual vice in their writings.

1. Athenagoras of Athens (2nd Century)

Athenagoras of Athens was a philosopher who converted to Christianity in the second century. He shows that the pagans, who were totally immoral, did not even refrain from sins against nature:

"But though such is our character (Oh. why should I speak of things unfit to be uttered?), the things said of us are an example of the proverb, 'The harlot reproves the chaste.' For those who have set up a market for fornication and established infamous resorts for the young for every kind of vile pleasure - who do not abstain even from males, males with males committing shocking abominations, outraging all the noblest and comeliest bodies in all sorts of ways, so dishonoring the fair workmanship of God."1

2. Tertullian (160-225)

Tertullian was a great genius and apologist of the early Church. Unfortunately, after an initial period of fervor, he succumbed to resentment and pride, left the Church and adhered to the Montanist heresy. Because of works written while still in the Church, he is considered an Ecclesiastical Writer and, as such, is commonly quoted by Popes and theologians. His treatise On Modesty is an apology of Christian chastity. He clearly shows the horror the Church has for sins against nature. After condemning adultery, he exclaims:

"But all the other frenzies of passions–impious both toward the bodies and toward the sexes–beyond the laws of nature, we banish not only from the threshold, but from all shelter of the Church, because they are not sins, but monstrosities."2

3. Eusebius of Caesarea (260-341)

Eusebius Pamphili, Bishop of Cæsarea in Palestine and the "Father of Church History," writes in his book, Demonstratio Evangelica:

"[God in the Law given to Moses] having forbidden all unlawful marriage, and all unseemly practice, and the union of women with women and men with men."3

4. Saint Jerome (340-420)

Saint Jerome is both Father and Doctor of the Church. He was also a notable exegete and great polemicist. In his book Against Jovinianus, he explains how a sodomite needs repentance and penance to be saved:

"And Sodom and Gomorrah might have appeased it [God's wrath], had they been willing to repent, and through the aid of fasting gain for themselves tears of repentance."4

5. Saint John Chrysostom (347-407)

Saint John Chrysostom is considered the greatest of the Greek Fathers and was proclaimed Doctor of the Church. He was Archbishop and Patriarch of Constantinople, and his revision of the Greek liturgy is used until today. In his sermons about Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans, he dwells on the gravity of the sin of homosexuality:

"But if thou scoffest at hearing of hell and believest not that fire, remember Sodom. For we have seen, surely we have seen, even in this present life, a semblance of hell. For since many would utterly disbelieve the things to come after the resurrection, hearing now of an unquenchable fire, God brings them to a right mind by things present. For such is the burning of Sodom, and that conflagration....

"Consider how great is that sin, to have forced hell to appear even before its time.... For that rain was unwonted, for the intercourse was contrary to nature, and it deluged the land, since lust had done so with their souls. Wherefore also the rain was the opposite of the customary rain. Now not only did it fail to stir up the womb of the earth to the production of fruits, but made it even useless for the reception of seed. For such was also the intercourse of the men, making a body of this sort more worthless than the very land of Sodom. And what is there more detestable than a man who hath pandered himself, or what more execrable?5

6. Saint Augustine (354-430)

The greatest of the Fathers of the West and one of the great Doctors of the Church, Saint Augustine laid the foundations of Catholic theology. In his celebrated Confessions, he thus condemns homosexuality:

"Those offences which be contrary to nature are everywhere and at all times to be held in detestation and punished; such were those of the Sodomites, which should all nations commit, they should all be held guilty of the same crime by the divine law, which hath not so made men that they should in that way abuse one another. For even that fellowship which should be between God and us is violated, when that same nature of which He is author is polluted by the perversity of lust."6

7. Saint Gregory the Great (540-604)

Pope Saint Gregory I is called "the Great." He is both Father and Doctor of the Church. He introduced Gregorian chant into the Church. He organized England's conversion, sending Saint Augustine of Canterbury and many Benedictine monks there.

"Sacred Scripture itself confirms that sulfur evokes the stench of the flesh, as it speaks of the rain of fire and sulfur poured upon Sodom by the Lord. He had decided to punish Sodom for the crimes of the flesh, and the very type of punishment he chose emphasized the shame of that crime. For sulfur stinks, and fire burns. So it was just that Sodomites, burning with perverse desires arising from the flesh like stench, should perish by fire and sulfur so that through this just punishment they would realize the evil they had committed, led by a perverse desire."7

8. Saint Peter Damian (1007-1072)

Doctor of the Church, cardinal and a great reformer of the clergy, Saint Peter Damian wrote his famous Book of Gomorrah against the inroads made by homosexuality among the clergy. He describes not only the iniquity of homosexuality, but also its psychological and moral consequences:

"Truly, this vice is never to be compared with any other vice because it surpasses the enormity of all vices.... It defiles everything, stains everything, pollutes everything. And as for itself, it permits nothing pure, nothing clean, nothing other than filth....

"The miserable flesh burns with the heat of lust; the cold mind trembles with the rancor of suspicion; and in the heart of the miserable man chaos boils like Tartarus [Hell].... In fact, after this most poisonous serpent once sinks its fangs into the unhappy soul, sense is snatched away, memory is borne off, the sharpness of the mind is obscured. It becomes unmindful of God and even forgetful of itself. This plague undermines the foundation of faith, weakens the strength of hope, destroys the bond of charity; it takes away justice, subverts fortitude, banishes temperance, blunts the keenness of prudence.

"And what more should I say since it expels the whole host of the virtues from the chamber of the human heart and introduces every barbarous vice as if the bolts of the doors were pulled out."8

9. Saint Thomas Aquinas (1225-1274)

Commenting upon Saint Paul's Epistle to the Romans (1:26-27), Saint Thomas Aquinas, the Angelic Doctor, explains why the sin of homosexuality is so grave:

"Given the sin of impiety through which they [the Romans] sinned against the divine nature [by idolatry], the punishment that led them to sin against their own nature followed.... I say, therefore, that since they changed into lies [by idolatry] the truth about God, He brought them to ignominious passions, that is, to sins against nature; not that God led them to evil, but only that he abandoned them to evil....

"If all the sins of the flesh are worthy of condemnation because by them man allows himself to be dominated by that which he has of the animal nature, much more deserving of condemnation are the sins against nature by which man degrades his own animal nature....

"Man can sin against nature in two ways. First, when he sins against his specific rational nature, acting contrary to reason. In this sense, we can say that every sin is a sin against man's nature, because it is against man's right reason....

"Secondly, man sins against nature when he goes against his generic nature, that is to say, his animal nature. Now, it is evident that, in accord with natural order, the union of the sexes among animals is ordered towards conception. From this it follows that every sexual intercourse that cannot lead to conception is opposed to man's animal nature."9

10. Saint Catherine of Siena (1347-1380)

Saint Catherine, a great mystic and Doctor of the Church, lived in troubled times. The Papacy was in exile at Avignon, France. She was instrumental in bringing the Popes back to Rome. Her famous Dialogues are written as if dictated by God Himself:

"But they act in a contrary way, for they come full of impurity to this mystery, and not only of that impurity to which, through the fragility of your weak nature, you are all naturally inclined (although reason, when free will permits, can quiet the rebellion of nature), but these wretches not only do not bridle this fragility, but do worse, committing that accursed sin against nature, and as blind and fools, with the light of their intellect darkened, they do not know the stench and misery in which they are. It is not only that this sin stinks before me, who am the Supreme and Eternal Truth, it does indeed displease me so much and I hold it in such abomination that for it alone I buried five cities by a divine judgment, my divine justice being no longer able to endure it. This sin not only displeases me as I have said, but also the devils whom these wretches have made their masters. Not that the evil displeases them because they like anything good, but because their nature was originally angelic, and their angelic nature causes them to loathe the sight of the actual commission of this enormous sin.10

11. Saint Bernardine of Siena (1380-1444)

Saint Bernardine of Siena was a famous preacher, celebrated for his doctrine and holiness. Regarding homosexuality, he stated:

"No sin in the world grips the soul as the accursed sodomy; this sin has always been detested by all those who live according to God.... Deviant passion is close to madness; this vice disturbs the intellect, destroys elevation and generosity of soul, brings the mind down from great thoughts to the lowliest, makes the person slothful, irascible, obstinate and obdurate, servile and soft and incapable of anything; furthermore, agitated by an insatiable craving for pleasure, the person follows not reason but frenzy.... They become blind and, when their thoughts should soar to high and great things, they are broken down and reduced to vile and useless and putrid things, which could never make them happy.... Just as people participate in the glory of God in different degrees, so also in hell some suffer more than others. He who lived with this vice of sodomy suffers more than another, for this is the greatest sin."11

12. Saint Peter Canisius (1521-1597)

Saint Peter Canisius, Jesuit and Doctor of the Church, is responsible for helping one third of Germany abandon Lutheranism and return to the Church. To Scripture's condemnation of homosexuality, he added his own:

"As the Sacred Scripture says, the Sodomites were wicked and exceedingly sinful. Saint Peter and Saint Paul condemn this nefarious and depraved sin. In fact, the Scripture denounces this enormous indecency thus: 'The scandal of Sodomites and Gomorrhans has multiplied and their sins have become grave beyond measure.' So the angels said to just Lot, who totally abhorred the depravity of the Sodomites: 'Let us leave this city....' Holy Scripture does not fail to mention the causes that led the Sodomites, and can also lead others, to this most grievous sin. In fact, in Ezechiel we read: 'Behold this was the iniquity of Sodom: pride, fullness of bread, and abundance, and the idleness of her, and of her daughters: and they did not put forth their hand to the needy, and the poor. And they were lifted up, and committed abominations before me; and I took them away as thou hast seen' (Ezech. 16: 49-50). Those unashamed of violating divine and natural law are slaves of this never sufficiently execrated depravity."12

Note: These quotes are taken from Defending A Higher Law: Why We Must Resist Same-Sex "Marriage" and the Homosexual Movement.



1. Fr.. B. P. Pratten, trans., A Plea For The Christians, Chap. 34,
www.newadvent.org/fathers/0205.htm [back]
2. Fr. S. Thelwall, trans., On Modesty, Chap. 4,
www.ccel.org/fathers2/ANF-04/anf04-19.htm [back]
3. W. J. Ferrar, trans., Demonstratio Evangelica, Book 4, Chap. 10,
www.earlychristianwritings.com/fathers/eusebius_de_06_book4.htm [back]
4. Book 2, no. 15,
www.newadvent.org/fathers/30092.htm [back]
5. Homily IV Romans 1:26-27,
www.ccel.org/fathers/NPNF1-11/Chrysostom/Romans/Rom-Hom04.html [back]
6. Book III, Chap. 8, no. 15,
www.newadvent.org/fathers/110103.htm [back]
7. Morales sur Job, Part III, Vol. I, book 14, no. 23, p. 353. (Our translation.) [back]
8. St. Peter Damian, Book of Gomorrah, Pierre J. Payer, trans., (Waterloo, Ont.: Wilfrid Laurier University Press, 1982), pp. 63-64 [back]
9. St. Thomas Aquinas, Super Epistolam B. Pauli ad Romanos, Cap. 1, Lec. 8,
www.una1v.es/filosofia/alarcon/amicis/cro016.html. (Our translation.) [back]
10. St. Catherine of Sienna, The Dialogue of the Seraphic Virgin (London: Burns, Oates and Washbourne, Ltd., 1925), p. 255 [back]
11. St. Bernardine of Siena, Sermon XXXIX in Prediche volgari, pp. 896-897, 915. [back]
12. St. Peter Canisius, Summa Doctrina Christianae, III a/b, p. 455 [back]

Friday, July 20, 2012

Anglican Journalist David Virtue Rips, Blasts, Owns & Schools Bishop Gene Robinson (TEC)

A salute and hat tip to David Virtue.

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=16294

Bishop Robinson, You are reaping what you have sown
Why the Bishop of New Hampshire is wrong

NEWS ANALYSIS

By David W. Virtue in Indianapolis
www.virtueonline.org
July 110, 2012

When the openly gay bishop of New Hampshire, Gene Robinson took a private communication one of my staff sent him and made its contents public inside the House of Bishops this week, he opened a can of worms that he has only himself to blame for. No one asked him to do that; he did it on his own recognizance. He did not ask my permission.

The communication was about rumors swirling around that he and his partner, Mark Andrew, whom he had married, were having "relationship problems and were entertaining divorce." The rumor was that they had separate bedrooms here in Indianapolis. In his blast at VOL, in front of 167 bishops, he complained about the "public scrutiny" of his life, but did not deny the rumors about what was happening in his personal life. Robinson publicized his relationship during the election process for Bishop of New Hampshire by his public appearances with Andrew. When he was consecrated, he publicly embraced and kissed Mark to the roar of approval from some 4000 sympathetic observers. I know. I was there.

The obvious contradiction in this puzzling situation is that Bishop Robinson stated that he would like questions directly asked to him, yet when a professional journalist asked him a question, he complained at length about it in the House of Bishops, without answering the question.

He screamed, "I have had just about all I can take."

Really. What about all the incredible damage he has caused by his consecration nearly a decade ago? As a result of his lifestyle, the Anglican Communion has de fact split, tens of thousands of Episcopalians have left the Episcopal Church, hundreds of churches have left TEC, many have lost properties, and rectors lives have been ruined by revisionist bishops that support Robinson's position including the screwball former bishop of Newark, John Shelby Spong. One bishop, Bob Duncan, was literally thrown out of the Episcopal Church without a trial so he formed a new Anglican Church in North America...all as a result of Robinson's unequivocal need for his behavior and "marriage" to another man be accepted into and by the church.

All Bishop Robinson did in his rant was demonstrate a level of self-pity that was pathetic to watch, but clearly enamored his fellow bishops who rose to give him a standing ovation.

Robinson's constant whine for public acceptance of his sexual preferences, his infernal narcissism and self-absorption, his videos and movie Love Free or Die, his worldwide travels in the Anglican Communion promoting pansexuality has caused Anglican Christians to be killed in Nigeria by angry fundamentalist Islamist mobs, invited the wrath and scorn of Imams and Mullahs, truncated evangelism in the Global South, forced Global South archbishops to disassociate themselves from him and The Episcopal Church, and indirectly forced an Archbishop of Canterbury to retire early because of the stress of the job and his failure to resolve the unresolvable. On top of all this, the Roman Catholic and Orthodox churches have declared TEC anathema.

Robinson vociferously responded to the VOL e-mail saying, "It is nobody's damn business. For nine years I have borne a level of scrutiny beyond what should have been and there is a limit to what one person could bear."

Well, Bishop, it IS our "damn business" because you have made it our business by spending the last nine years pushing your behavior onto the global Anglican stage. If your life is falling apart, that is just as much a part of the Robinson story as your promotion of sodomy. You can't have it both ways. You went public and therefore your life from then on was open to public scrutiny. The old saying is true, "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen." You have been roasting orthodox Anglicans over an open fire calling them all manner of names from "fundamentalist" to "homophobic". Now when someone questions your miserable life, you get all uppity and hurt and utter, "Why don't they leave me alone and mind their own business?" Oh, my God, please spare us.

In your rip you complained, "You can question my motives for saying this. I don't know what my motives are."

Really Bishop. Well, I think everyone knows what your motives are. They are manifestly clear to everybody with half a brain: you want the Episcopal Church, in fact every church (judging by your appearance at Presbyterian Church assemblies) to accept your lifestyle as good and right in the eyes of God. You want to influence the Global South by manipulating orthodox Anglicans in Uganda and wherever else you can to fall down and worship your pansexual god, the god of mayhem and confusion. You have seduced the Anglican Communion Office and, indirectly, jump-started a ludicrously named "Listening Process" to broker pansexuality into the whole Anglican Communion.

Robinson pleaded, "Let's not talk about reconciliation. Let's attempt it." He begged again, "Can we try together? Please."

No, Bishop, we can't, that ship has sailed. You have done too much damage to this church and to the Anglican Communion for any reconciliation ever to take place. Nigerian Anglicans, the largest body of Anglicans in the world, will no more entertain having you in their churches than they would Jefferts Schori. She is tarred with the same brush. You are history. Get used to it. When you retire from TEC, you will quickly be forgotten, but your legacy will live on in Mary Glasspool and the SS TEC will continue to slowly sink beneath the ecclesiastical waves under the weight of its own bad theology and even worse morals.

The truth, as you and we know, is that all clergy and bishops in the Episcopal Church realize that spouses, partners, and children become public figures after the ordination of one person in the family. This is discussed in seminary and formally and informally at many clergy gatherings. Any relationship (dating, partnered, or marriage) becomes a public reality in congregations and dioceses.

So allow me, Bishop, to quote you some Scripture, even as you misquoted Scripture in the HOB.

St. Paul in II Cor. 12 writes that he will boast but only in his weakness (v.5) Then Paul says this: "...a thorn was given me in the flesh, a messenger of Satan, to harass me, to keep me from being too elated. 8 Three times I besought the Lord about this, that it should leave me; 9 but he said to me, 'My grace is sufficient for you, for my power is made perfect in weakness.' I will all the more gladly boast of my weaknesses, that the power of Christ may rest upon me."

So how about it, Gene? Why did you not turn your same sex attractions as a sign of your weakness over to God that the power of Christ may rest upon YOU?

St. Paul again: v.10 "For the sake of Christ, then, I am content with weaknesses, insults, hardships, persecutions, and calamities; for when I am weak, then I am strong."

Why did you not turn your sexual weaknesses, insults, hardships, etc. into an evangelistic moment to demonstrate that in your weakness God's power is revealed and you are made perfect in Him?

As one commentator put it, "The strength and power of God more perfectly shines forth in our weakness and infirmity; as the more weak we are of ourselves, the more illustrious is his grace in supporting us, and giving us the victory under all trials and conflicts when I am weak. The more I suffer for Christ, the more I perceive the effects of his all-powerful grace, which sustains, enlightens, and strengthens me: the more also the glory and power of God appeareth in me."

v.11 "I have been a fool." writes St. Paul.

So why couldn't you be a fool for Christ, Bishop Robinson, rejoicing in your infirmity and allowing the God of all grace to minister to you and to work through you to heal others "in your infirmity and weakness"? The whole AA movement (of which I gather you a member) is built on people declaring their utter weakness and helplessness in the face of alcohol and asking God for help. In their weakness, they turn to a "higher power" and draw strength, not to say they are cured, but that they are being made perfect in their weakness.

But these are to be borne with submission to the will of God, for his power is more evident in supporting man under the greatest trials, than in freeing him from the attacks. --- Power is made perfect.

St. Paul concludes the chapter with these words: v. 21 "I fear that when I come again my God may humble me before you, and I may have to mourn over many of those who sinned before and have not repented of the impurity, immorality, and licentiousness which they have practiced."

Paul knew his own weaknesses, his "thorn in the flesh" whatever it was kept him humble, just as your sexual desires should keep you humble knowing how easy it is to fail. The truth is, Bishop Robinson, we are to glory in our weakness, we are to suffer "for the name". Your only "suffering" is the constant whine for acceptance, something the Great Apostle would have renounced. The list of sins mentioned here undoubtedly encompasses immorality, your own included.


The tragic truth is that you have become an enemy of the gospel. You have turned the truth of the gospel into a lie and souls are being lost. Episcopalians are being swept into a Christless eternity because of what you are pushing and pandering. One day you will have to be held accountable for that loss. May God help you.

END

Saturday, March 24, 2012

Joel Martin: Sodom and Gomorrah & Reprobation

Joel Martin writes at:  http://livingtext.wordpress.com/2012/03/24/sodom-and-gomorrah/.  We are increasingly aware of the subject of divine hardening and judicial blinding, e.g. reprobation. 

Sodom and Gomorrah

Philo says that the smoke of Sodom and Gomorrah was still rising in the first century:
And a most evident proof of this is to be found in what is seen to this day: for the smoke which is still emitted, and the sulphur which men dig up there, are a proof of the calamity which befell that country; while a most conspicuous proof of the ancient fertility of the land is left in one city, and in the land around it.
[On Abraham 141.]
Therefore on this occasion, as the holy scriptures tell us, thunderbolts fell from heaven, and burnt up those wicked men and their cities; and even to this day there are seen in Syria monuments of the unprecedented destruction that fell upon them, in the ruins, and ashes, and sulphur, and smoke, and dusky flame which still is sent up from the ground as of a fire smouldering beneath;
[Life of Moses 2.56]
Wisdom of Solomon 10.7 says the same thing:
Evidence of their wickedness still remains:
a continually smoking waste-land,
plants bearing fruit that does not ripen,
and a pillar of salt standing as a monument to an unbelieving soul.

Thursday, March 8, 2012

Sex Sells: Driscolls on "The View" with Barbara Waters Re: Mark's New Book "Real Marriage"

http://thewartburgwatch.com/2012/03/08/the-driscolls-share-their-views-on-sex-in-marriage-on-the-view/


The Driscolls Share Their Views on SEX in Marriage on “The View”


Thu, Mar 08 2012
By
"But you will receive power when the Holy Spirit comes on you; and you will be my witnesses in Jerusalem, and in all Judea and Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.” Acts 1:8 (NIV)

 


In case you haven't noticed, Mark and Grace Driscoll are taking their Sex Gospel to the ends of the earth as they wander around peddling their HOT off the press book – REAL MARRIAGE: THE TRUTH ABOUT SEX, FRIENDSHIP & LIFE TOGETHER. It is this blogger's staunch opinion that their efforts are not being inspired by the Holy Spirit. Yesterday the Driscolls pitched their provocative sex manual on The View.

Barbara Walters begins the interview with this introduction:

"It is a gospel you probably never thought you'd hear from a man of the church, but the Lord wants married couples to have great sex to have it often and even experiment in the bedroom, and that's what the pastor of Seattle's Mars Hill megachurch Mark Driscoll and his wife Grace claim in a book that's being called the most provocative work ever written by an evangelical. It is called Real Marriage: The Truth about Sex, Friends and so forth, and you may, if you have young kids, you may want them to go into the other room now, we'll give you a second or two. Bye kids!"

Barbara, your opening statement is exactly right, and we call it the Sex Gospel, not to be confused with the "Gender Gospel". Tragically, both are twisted views of Scripture.

By divine providence my younger daughter (who turns 20 this summer) is on Spring Break, and we watched The View together. I am so honored that she wants to spend her free time chillin' at home this week with her mom and dad. After the short interview concluded, we had an interesting conversation about the Driscolls. My daughter was NOT impressed! While I plan to keep the details of our discussion private, I will tell you that her take away from the interview was this – there is just ONE REASON why guys would be motivated to get hitched. If she's right that this is the message guys in her generation are getting from Real Marriage, then expect tremendous problems down the road with some of these young couples who are buying the Driscoll phony boloney hook, line, and sinker.



Now let's take a closer look at the interview…

Barbara Walters shares with the audience (both in the studio and on television) that the Driscolls have been married for twenty years and that according to their book they had sexual problems and learned how to correct them. She inquires about those problems and how the Driscolls fixed them.


Grace Driscoll explains: "Well, we started out with a lot of things wrong in our marriage, and so we needed to discuss more honestly the things from our past, and I had suffered from sexual assault and various issues in my past and because we weren't aware of those in our marriage it made it very difficult to have an honest marriage."


Did you catch what Grace said? "We weren't aware of those in our marriage…" Who wasn't aware of those issues? Who is "we"? Does anyone else find that statement extremely odd?


Barbara then asks: "Did you agree about sex?"


Mark jumps in and quickly answers her question by saying: "Yeah, we did when we got married, and I think we started as close friends and then as the work and the duties of life come in, the friendship started to wane and I think that affects all levels of intimacy."


Barbara then responds: "But I read the book and one of the things you say is that you thought of sex as god, and Grace you thought of sex as gross."


Mark deflects from Barbara's analysis by stating: "Yeah, we talk in the book that some people see sex as god – it's way too important to them, almost obsessive. For those that are overly religious or perhaps come from an abusive background, they tend to see it as very gross. Our view is that it's a gift. It's a gift that God gives us to enjoy and to steward well, and so it took some time for us to come to mutual agreement on that and to work that out."
Here's my question. Why does Mark believe he's qualified to coach others about sexual obsessions? Talk about someone being sex-obsessed!


When Joy Behar chimes in and asks what Mark has against homosexuals having fun, he retorts: 


"Yeah, well we are Bible-believing Christians and so we do hold to the teaching of scripture and that is that sex is reserved for a married couple, a heterosexual married couple, so even when we were dating and we were sexually active, we were wrong. And so we don't want to say that we're better or holier than anyone, but we were wrong as well and had to make some changes." 

 

What a feeble attempt at sharing the Gospel message with those who were watching. That's why I don't believe the Holy Spirit is empowering Mark Driscoll. As a pastor, he should have used the opportunity to talk about salvation, not sex – marital or not!


Next, Raven-Simone, who was filling in for Elisabeth Hasselbeck, timidly asks: "What does the Bible say about sex?"


Mark answers: "Yeah, the first half of the book is really about friendship, and we think that friendship is the foundation to marriage, and then the second half of the book is about sex in the context of a loving friendship. And the Bible does have quite a bit to say about sex, especially a whole book called the Song of Songs, and so I'm a Bible teacher, but it's in there. Most people haven't read it or they missed that part."


Now Mark Driscoll is onto the Bible topic that inspires him the most. David Kupelian of World Net Daily just wrote an article – The Church of Sex – that includes an excerpt from Driscoll's 2007 sermon called Sex, a Study of the Good Bits from Song of Solomon which drew the ire of John MacArthur and others. The way Driscoll suggested that a wife win her husband to Christ is so graphic that we decided not to include it here; however, Kupelian reveals Driscoll's suggested technique.


Sherri Shepard keeps Mark Driscoll on topic with her remark: "Well, let's get to the sex O.K. because I just got married." She brings up the most controversial chapter in the Real Marriage book, which is "Can We _______?" By this point, Mark is salivating as he addresses whether certain sex practices are biblical or not.


"We talk about the things that couples may do but not things they must do," Mark says. He likens this part of Real Marriage to a menu from which you can decide what suits your taste. I wouldn't be surprised if Mark has devised his own sex menu. Maybe he has a __ beside each items so he can check his preference(s). Since Mark "sees things", I can see him placing his instructions on Grace's pillow so she will know what he has ordered for their next romp in the sack. If Mark's list is alphabetized, we all know what tops the list, followed by a "job" that rhymes with snow. I'm sorry – but this is all just too much! My husband would appropriately label it TMI (too much information)!


As the interview comes to a close, Barbara Walters says: "O.K. pornography, which you also deal with. You say that pornography is sometimes in women's romance novels, even mainstream women's magazines, and they're sinful." Whoopi Goldberg adds: "Does that go for television as well?"
Grace responds: "Any form of lust that is not toward your affection toward your married marital spouse is a sin."


In the Brierley interview (which lasted the better part of an hour), Grace was only "allowed" to speak ONCE. On The View, she actually got to speak TWICE over the course of five minutes, so things are definitely improving…


For another review of the Driscolls' interview, we recommend The Christian Post.


After appearing on The View, Mark Driscoll posted this comment on his Facebook account:


"Grace and I really enjoyed being on The View and sharing God’s truth about sex & relationships and how God forgives and helps us in this area that we all deal with every day. If you want to learn more, we will be live in these cities talking more about marriage and relationships: Ft. Lauderdale, FL, Anderson, SC (sold out), Lynchburg, VA and St. Louis, MO. Sign up now…"

As you might imagine, the affirming responses poured in from Driscoll sycophants. However one negative response got through on Facebook which received these prompt responses:
Abraham Robledo "Hey Amber, chill out!!"
Justin Mohney ‎@Amber Womack-Kitavi, "if your statment above is implying that you in fact do know "about" God's love (or more than Mark and Grace) – you have a very ironic and oxymoronic way of stating such…interesting 'comment'…"
Jake Lynch "Hey how about instead of tearing into Amber for her remarks, we just allow her to have an opinion & pray for her?"

Here's the dilemma – I can't find Amber's comment
ANYWHERE! It was obviously deleted. I saved the three comments listed above, and just before publishing this post, I have scrolled through the comments one more time, and the three cited above are GONE! Isn't it incredible that someone is scrubbing Mark Driscoll's Facebook account? Why in the world would you trust someone who deletes any and all negative reactions?


Driscoll obviously believes his own press because only affirming commentary gets through; however, Driscoll and his Fan Boys have no control over the reviews posted on the Amazon website. In an effort to provide a public service announcement regarding what Mark Driscoll advocates, here is an important One Star comment left under the Driscoll's book Real Marriage.


Anal Sex, Cancer and You. A Guide for the Hipster Christian Community, January 26, 2012
"According to Mayo Clinic (and hundreds of other medical sites), anal sex dramatically increases the risk for anal cancer. Just because the bible doesn't spell out for the reader "Hey McFly, don't do that" doesn't mean the behavior is wise or permissible. No, you will not go to hell just because you have anal sex with your spouse. But you might get cancer. Oh, but wait! Silly me….I failed to take into account the porn-saturated culture we live in. And since that is the case, I guess I should just let the porn industry dictate my sex practices, right? Because after all, I reaalllyyz wanna be a cool christian. Never mind the fact that we're talking about a practice that might involve poo."
travel lover added a comment under this one-star review which states: ( Feb 2, 2012 4:31:16 PM PST)
"In addition to expressing my whole hearted agreement to your comments I would only like to add that there is apparently growing concerns that oral sex can contribute to a type of throat cancer. As for anal sex, what part of the verses condemning those who have abandoned the "natural" use of the woman does Driscoll and the MHC leadership not get?! Are we to believe that God only applies this standard to homosexual sex? I think not! Such practices are not only unnatural and questionably safe and sanitary but they are demonstratably demeaning to women. God help the young wives out there who now hope that their husbands also get Driscoll's admonition that such things are permissible if consensual and when they say "no" it is the end of discussion!"


Driscoll is escalating, and incredibly his buddies are just sitting by tight-lipped watching it happen… What will Mark Driscoll do for an encore? We cringe at the thought…


In the meantime, we believe countless young people (who are around the ages of our own children) are being hurt by Driscoll's cavalier attitude toward sex. Please, for the sake of your own health, listen to us! We have nothing to gain because we're not selling anything. The same cannot be said of the Driscolls. They know sex sells, and they are laughing all the way to the bank!

Cranmer's Curate: Bp. of London Must Over-rule Dean of St. Paul's, London

BISHOP OF LONDON MUST OVER-RULE DEAN OF ST PAUL'S
The Bishop of London, Dr Richard Chartres, has a canonical responsibility to rule that the declared intention of the new Dean of St Paul's to conduct services of same-sex blessing runs contrary to the doctrine of the Church of England.

In a national press interview this week, Dr David Ison also declared that he conducted services of prayer and affirmation for couples in civil partnerships whilst he was Dean of Bradford.

The definitive liturgical expression of the doctrine of the Church of England, the Book of Common Prayer, is clear that sexual love is to be reserved exclusively for the God-created institution of heterosexual marriage, as blessed by the Lord Jesus Christ.

For more from Cranmer's Curate, see: 
http://cranmercurate.blogspot.com/2012/03/bishop-of-london-must-over-rule-dean-of.html

Thank God for the codified, registered and legal benchmark--that old, godly Prayer Book--"in writing"--that serves to illustrate the apostasy, heterodoxy, sin, wickedness and disorderliness of some modern clerics, e.g. Dr. Ison.

Church Campanologist: Review of Driscoll's "Real Marriage"

Church Campanologist offers a compelling review of Mark Driscoll's latest book, Real Marriage.  See http://churchmousec.wordpress.com/2012/03/07/mark-driscolls-real-marriage-wheres-the-sanctity/  Here's CC's post.

This post is for adults only.

Mark Driscoll‘s latest book, Real Marriage, is a frank exploration of human sexuality.

Written from a complementarian — male headship over women and children — perspective, it won’t please Christians who find this type of thinking unbiblical. It also won’t please those who are concerned about women being exploited in marriage.

Driscoll’s church members and admirers around the world will no doubt find it of value. What follows are a few excerpts of reviews from conservative and mainline pastors alike.

- Denny Burk, an Associate Professor of Biblical Studies at Boyce College, the undergraduate arm of the Southern Baptist Theological Seminary in Louisville, KY, gives a good summary of the book’s contents and purpose. He points out that the Driscolls’ account of their own marriage is written from a Christian perspective. Chapter 10 of the book concerns sodomy, which Driscoll considers acceptable in the context of the sanctity of marriage. Please note that the book discusses Mrs Driscoll’s unfortunate sexual experiences earlier in life. Burk notes (emphases in bold are mine):

The bulk of the chapter gives an ethical assessment of a variety of sexual activities. The Driscolls invoke 1 Corinthians 6:12 as the basis for the evaluation, “All things are lawful for me, but not all things are profitable. All things are lawful for me, but I will not be mastered by anything.” From this text, the Driscolls propose a “taxonomy” of questions to assess the different activities: (1) Is it lawful? (2) Is it helpful? (3) Is it enslaving? If one judges a given behavior to be biblically lawful, relationally helpful, and non-addictive, then it is permissible for Christians to participate in that activity. Among the activities that the authors deem permissible within this taxonomy are masturbation, fel[l]atio/cunnilingus, sodomy (on both spouses), menstrual sex, role-playing, sex toys, birth control, cosmetic surgery, cybersex, and sexual medication. The Driscolls are careful to stipulate that these are activities spouses may participate in by mutual agreement, but not that they must participate in (p. 180). No spouse should be manipulated into doing anything that violates his or her conscience (p. 178). The only item in the list deemed impermissible in every circumstance is sexual assault.