Ain't the Internet wonderful - we can pull pix of stuff from thousands of miles away!
Anyway, I found out this morning that one of my comments about Z Allen was not exactly correct, so I'd like to send the correction I received on to you. I don't believe that it changes much as either way one ends up in the same place.I wrote "Z is being hammered on this but he's said that it's an issue he'll die for." with the issue being W & A. However, I find that the issue Z said he would die for is the autonomy of the local church. The context of the conversation was the ordination and acceptance of homosexuals so it really ends up in the same place. If the Executive Minister won't take a stand against the ordination and acceptance of homosexuals, he's taking a stand for it. He won't use his authority as Executive Minister to prevent something which the majority of us call sin. In fact, he said, at a meeting I was present at, that if we (being a group of evangelical pastors) "force" him to deal with our side of the issue, that he'll have to spend time with the other side as he is "the Executive Minister of All." I find that interesting because at present we don't have any W&A churches.Z Allen has demonstrated that he will allow polity to trump theology. I think that Biblical Authority is at the core of this issue and that the W&A component is merely a symptom. So while, I want to clarify what was said, I don't think it changes a thing.