Extremist but not moderate

Apologies for another schism posting, but this one was too good to pass up.

The TEC, ACC and others continually emphasize how “inclusive” and “tolerant” they are. Of course, that tolerance does not mean sharing power with those who disagree with them on key social issues, such as who should be ordained to the ministry. Such dissenters are labelled “sexist”, “racist” and “homophobes.”

Canadian TV personality (and author) Michael Coren has an interesting post (in the National Post) that refers to “extremist moderation.” An excerpt:

The latest schism within the denomination has exposed the core nastiness of a bitingly exclusive institution.

The glimmering paradox of the church is that it guards its ostensible moderation with a grim determination, as so many orthodox Christian believers can testify. They have been persecuted in Canada and beyond for two decades by the liberal hierarchy, and it is only now, after so many attacks, that they are fighting back to the point of separation.

Am I the only one who thinks it odd that the wing of the TEC that denounces racism denounces black African bishops as “demonic”? Apparently Coren agrees:

Hardly surprising, in that at the last synod of this church we heard some extraordinary comments from British and North American bishops about “primitive” and “superstitious” believers from the Third World. They were described thus because they opposed the ordination of homosexuals to the ministry. Something to do with that Bible thing apparently.

None of which speaks of a middle-of-the-road organization, anxious to bend and adapt so as to please all and offend few. More like yet another liberal body vehemently intolerant of anything and anybody it sees as refusing to tolerate its extremist moderation.

Hat tip: Titus 1:9