Wolves in Sheep's Clothing

I recently was pointed towards a blog written by an Episcopalian "bishop." This man is a life-long friend of someone with whom I work and in reading over the contents of the blog I can truly see why it is that the Episcopalian church is having so many issues nowadays. Considering that a man who professes faith in Christ can write some of what I've read is truly sad. That such a man would be elevated to the position of bishop is appalling.

I want to interact with something this man wrote considering the death and resurrection of our Savior, but since it's late and I need to get to bed I will just share the following:

"We have a special mission on the Reservation. There are practioners of tradtional Native Spirtuality, and there are Protestants who insist that the Native traditions are pagan evils to be deplored by Chrstians. We are the place where First Nations people can stay true to their culture and the ways of their ancestors and follow the gospel of Christ. The gospel is not about European culture. It is a flower that can grow in different soils. Seeing the gospel in these different contexts reaveals its essence and keeps us from confusing it with the social norms of our own backgrounds."

Hmm...so the Episcopalians are emergent? You can be Muslim AND Christian? You can be Buddhist AND Christian? I think not. Therefore you cannot cling to a spiritualist religion AND profess Christ. And any man who claims to be Christian and yet embraces such people as fellow Believers has absolutely no understanding of his professed religion. First of all, it is foolishness to utter a statement such as "The gospel is not about European culture." Okay. Who says it is?
The gospel came first to the Jews, then the Greeks, the Africans, etc...it took some time to get to central and northern Europe. This statement is nothing but a red herring intended to distract the reader from thinking through the implications of what this "bishop" has just written. The gospel, dear brethren, is radical. It calls us to repentance and to submission to Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior of our lives. There is no repentance without the knowledge of our sin...and there is no repentance without the realization that we need a Savior to save us from the just penalty for our sin.

So let others try and hide this uncomfortable truth behind poetic language about the gospel being some kind of flower that will grow in all kinds of soil. Maybe this "bishop" needs to read the words of Jesus in Matthew 13:1-23 instead of trying to create some new kind of gospel. As for "confusing it with the social norms of our own background," it seems to me this is exactly what that writer is trying to do...confuse the gospel with the social norms of his own background. He obviously comes from a religious tradition that has rejected the Bible as the authoritative Word of God. He rejects the doctrine of substitutionary atonement (more on that in a different post), and so he must make things fit into the worldview of what he has accepted as normal. Out of this is produced a clergyman who does not call a people to repentance but to embrace his idea of Christ and mesh him with what they already have. This, you see, is nonjudgmental and accepting.

Who cares that it leads them straight to the pit of hell.