I, for one, am really glad that the “orthodox Anglicans” have finally come out of their Papist closets and told us that, not only do they think some people (women, gays and lesbians) are not full members of the Body of Christ, but that the Bible commands Christians to have lots of babies.
Stand Firm in Faith, the website of all things kooky in North American Anglicanism, features an interesting take on evangelism from Fr. Matt Kennedy, a self-proclaimed “orthodox Anglican” priest. Fr. Matt tells us that the traditionalists will eventually win out over progressives when they adopt his “longer term (potential) strategic advantage that orthodox Anglicans should enjoy over our Worthy Opponents: babies.”
That’s it, conservatives: be fruitful and multiply those little orthodox babies. Because everybody knows that progressives abort all their pregnancies, the result of their drug-crazed orgies. It’s after all, what Jesus was talking about in Matthew 28:18-20 when he said: “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
What, you missed it in that explicit command to have lots of children? Then you just have failed to see that “evangelism and reproduction are two prongs of the same mission, establishing God’s dominion, his kingdom authority, over the earth.” And those traditionalists who practice coitus interruptus or any other wicked, non-reproductive sexual act? They are, in Fr. Matt’s word, “selfish.” Why do you think that hair is growing on your palm? And that you can’t read this without your bi-focals?
And this is not optional. “In the long term, obedience to God in this regard is key to restoring orthodox Christianity in the west.” Yep, Fr. Matt’s fatwa is about obedience to God.
Unfortunately, for Fr. Matt’s neo-Augustinian sexual ethic, he can’t cite a single New Testament text as a basis for his argument. That’s because there isn’t one. To assert that the story of Adam and Eve and the divine imperative to “fill the earth” has anything to do with a Christian worldview only shows what lousy theologians these people are.
It’s just another attempt to roll back Anglicanism to those glorious days when the Bishop of Rome was the Head of the Church, the Vicar of Christ on Earth. Too bad we had a Reformation. Too bad we learned about salvation by grace. Too bad we had a Savior who didn’t produce any children (Dan Brown notwithstanding). Too bad we have a goofy Church dominated by goofy, self-absorbed wind-bags.
Why should I fret, since my wife and I have five wonderful children? I fret because dominionist theology now permeates what remains of Anglican theology. Can a celibate priesthood be far behind?