Hilary White

,

Liberal ‘Christians’ like Steve Chalke leading homosexuals into hell: Christian counselor

Hilary White
Hilary White
Image

LONDON, January 31, 2013 (LifeSiteNews.com) – The office of Rev. Steve Chalke, the UK pastor who recently gained notoriety by his support for “gay marriage,” has reportedly been “swamped” with phone calls. A self-defined evangelical Christian pastor calling for Christians to accept homosexuality or same-sex attraction itself is such a novelty that the mainstream media has flooded the internet with the story.

Chalke had said that the real problem of the gay community is not their self-identification, but with the rampant promiscuity that harms them physically and spiritually. The solution, he said, is for Christians to “consider nurturing positive models for permanent and monogamous homosexual relationships.”

But one Christian counselor in the UK who famously lost her license for offering therapy to clients with unwanted same-sex attraction, has responded to Chalke saying that people suffering from unwanted same-sex attraction know full well that the “orientation” is itself the problem. Lesley Pilkington wrote a rebuttal to Chalke’s article for LifeSiteNews.com in which she says that Christians accepting homosexuality, and ultimately promoting the homosexualist ideology, are doing more harm than they know to vulnerable people who need help living chaste and moral lives.

People with same-sex attraction who want to live genuinely Christian or sexually moral lives, whether believers or not, have told her that “they feel they are not listened to when they express those thoughts to most professionals and some within the evangelical churches,” she said. 

“My work then with helping those who desire to change their attractions for the same sex is made increasingly difficult by those in the church, who call themselves the ‘New Evangelicals,’ and who back same sex marriage. 

“Steve Chalke is the most recent example of a high profile ‘evangelical’ who has now joined this group.”

In an interview with LSN, Pilkington cited serious problems with Chalke’s Christian theology. She and others in the evangelical and reform community in Britain have said by having denied fundamental Christian doctrine, notably the atonement for sin by Christ on the cross, Chalke has placed himself outside the Christian fold entirely. Having rejected the notion of sin, Pilkington argues, Chalke cannot offer people with same-sex attraction anything other than their old sinful lives dressed up in more respectable clothes.

Chalke, she said, is one of a growing cadre of people who reject Christian ideals in favor of the world’s new secularist ideologies and are offering gay people what the world offers: “the fog of deception, misinformation, hubris, good intentions and just plain lies.” 

Those who do adhere to orthodox Christian beliefs about sin and redemption, she said, are able to show people a way of life that will bring them peace and ultimately eternal happiness.

Click "like" if you want to defend true marriage.

“I am very aware,” she said, “of the painful and genuine struggles of those who are caught up in this life and we the church have been negligent in our duties of love and compassion to those who are same sex attracted,” she said.

“But we must understand love as the Cross, as a Person, the Lord Jesus Christ, and all love flows from that, within His word. Love is not defined as man’s feelings however strong and well intentioned but according to His loving boundaries who has made us.”

Christians, she said, have fallen into the habit of using the media’s terminology and referring to people like Steve Chalke in political terms as “liberals.” But in reality, and however politically incorrect it might sound, a person who denies the basic doctrines of Christianity is properly called an “apostate,” one who has abandoned his religion. In the case of Chalke, he has replaced Christianity with the relativistic, secularist dogmas pushed by the media.

And because he repeats the friendly-sounding platitudes of the modern secular left, he comes across as “plausible and indeed likable”. Pilkington said that perhaps “his motives are ‘good’” in that they are well-intentioned out of ignorance, but that this is a “deception” and she fears that “many, many will be taken in by him and others like him”. 

“That is the perilous state we are in here in the UK in large measure and probably America. It’s people like Steve Chalke who are in fact dangerous.” 

She relates an example of one client, a man struggling with homosexual impulses who wanted to live a genuine Christian life. This man listened to one of Chalke’s sermons “and was very moved”. In the sermon, Chalke spoke of the Christian church being “inclusive” to those who feel marginalized and excluded.

“Now we would all agree with that and that draws people in,” she said. “But if you listen to all that he says, he then denies the ‘sin’ aspect, and there is the strong suggestion that homosexuality is not sin.

“It totally confused my client and I had to spend a long time with him talking again about the whole gospel, the forgiveness of sin, and how central all that is.

“Liberals, or more correctly those who are apostate, actually hate their people and the LGBT community for which they profess so much love, because they tell lies and lead their people into deception, and if there is no repentance, into hell.”

She added, “Its those who tell the truth and the whole gospel no matter how difficult who actually love their people.”

Support hard-hitting pro-life and pro-family journalism.

Donate to LifeSite's fall campaign today


Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
President Obama speaks at Planned Parenthood's national conference in 2013.
Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin

Obama remakes the nation’s courts in his image

Dustin Siggins Dustin Siggins Follow Dustin
By Dustin Siggins
Image

It has often been said that the Affordable Care Act (ACA) is President Obama's greatest achievement as president. However, that claim may soon take second place to his judicial nominees, and especially their effect on marriage in the United States.

In a new graphic, The Daily Signal notes that while President George W. Bush was able to get 50 nominees approved by this time in his second term, Obama has gotten more than 100 approved. According to The Houston Chronicle, "Democratic appointees who hear cases full time now hold a majority of seats on nine of the 13 U.S. Courts of Appeals. When Obama took office, only one of those courts had more full-time judges nominated by a Democrat."

Three of the five judges who struck down state marriage laws between February 2014 and the Supreme Court's Windsor decision in 2013 were Obama appointees, according to a CBS affiliate in the Washington, D.C. area. Likewise, the Windsor majority that overturned the Defense of Marriage Act included two Obama appointees, Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan. Obama has nominated 11 homosexual judges, the most of any president by far, says the National Law Journal.

Only one federal judge has opposed same-sex "marriage" since the Supreme Court's Windsor decision. He was appointed under the Reagan administration.

This accomplishment, aided by the elimination of Senate filibusters on judicial nominees, could affect how laws and regulations are interpreted by various courts, especially as marriage heads to a probable Supreme Court hearing on the constitutionality of state laws.

Democrats eliminated the filibuster for all judicial nominees except for Supreme Court candidates last year, saying Republicans were blocking qualified candidates for the bench. However, the filibuster was part of the reason Democrats were able to keep the number of approved Bush appointees so low.

The Supreme Court may hear multiple marriage questions in its 2015 cycle. 

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Shutterstock.com
Lisa Bourne

, ,

Cardinal Dolan: Debate on denying Communion to pro-abortion pols ‘in the past’

Lisa Bourne
By Lisa Bourne

As America heads into its 2014 midterm elections, a leading U.S. prelate says the nation’s bishops believe debate over whether to deny Communion to pro-abortion Catholic politicians is “in the past.”

The Church’s Code of Canon Law states in Canon 915 that those “obstinately persevering in manifest grave sin are not to be admitted to Holy Communion.” Leading Vatican officials, including Pope Benedict XVI himself, have said this canon ought to be applied in the case of pro-abortion Catholic politicians. However, prelates in the West have widely ignored it, and some have openly disagreed.

John Allen, Jr. of the new website Crux, launched as a Catholic initiative under the auspices of the Boston Globe, asked New York Cardinal Timothy Dolan about the issue earlier this month.

“In a way, I like to think it’s an issue that served us well in forcing us to do a serious examination of conscience about how we can best teach our people about their political responsibilities,” the cardinal responded, “but by now that inflammatory issue is in the past.”

“I don’t hear too many bishops saying it’s something that we need to debate nationally, or that we have to decide collegially,” he continued. “I think most bishops have said, ‘We trust individual bishops in individual cases.’ Most don’t think it’s something for which we have to go to the mat.”

Cardinal Dolan expressed personal disinterest in upholding Canon 915 publicly in 2010 when he told an Albany TV station he was not in favor of denying Communion to pro-abortion politicians. He said at the time that he preferred “to follow the lead of Popes John Paul II and Benedict XVI, who said it was better to try to persuade them than to impose sanctions.”

However, in 2004 Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger, who became Pope Benedict XVI the following year, wrote the U.S. Bishops a letter stating that a Catholic politician who would vote for "permissive abortion and euthanasia laws" after being duly instructed and warned, "must" be denied Communion. 

Cardinal Ratzinger sent the document to the U.S. Bishops in 2004 to help inform their debate on the issue. However, Cardinal Theodore McCarrick, then-chair of the USCCB Task Force on Catholic Bishops and Catholic Politicians, who received the letter, withheld the full text from the bishops, and used it instead to suggest ambiguity on the issue from the Vatican.

A couple of weeks after Cardinal McCarrick’s June 2004 address to the USCCB, the letter from Cardinal Ratzinger was leaked to well-known Vatican reporter Sandro Magister, who published the full document. Cardinal Ratzinger’s office later confirmed the leaked document as authentic.

Since the debate in 2004, numerous U.S. prelates have openly opposed denying Communion to pro-abortion Catholic politicians.

In 2008, Boston Cardinal Sean O’Malley suggested the Church had yet to formally pronounce on the issue, and that until it does, “I don’t think we’re going to be denying Communion to the people.”

In 2009, Cardinal Donald Wuerl of Washington D.C. in 2009 said that upholding of Canon 915 would turn the Eucharist into a political “weapon,” refusing to employ the law in the case of abortion supporter Rep. Nancy Pelosi.

Cardinal Roger Mahoney, archbishop emeritus of Los Angeles, said in a 2009 newspaper interview that pro-abortion politicians should be granted communion because Jesus Christ gave Holy Communion to Judas Iscariot.

Click "like" to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!

However, one of the Church’s leading proponents of the practice, U.S. Cardinal Raymond Burke, who is prefect of the Vatican’s Apostolic Signatura, insists that denying Communion is not a punishment.

“The Church’s discipline from the time of Saint Paul has admonished those who obstinately persevere in manifest grave sin not to present themselves for Holy Communion,” he said at LifeSiteNews’ first annual Rome Life Forum in Vatican City in early May. "The discipline is not a punishment but the recognition of the objective condition of the soul of the person involved in such sin."  

Only days earlier, Cardinal Francis Arinze, former prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, told LifeSiteNews that he has no patience for politicians who say that they are “personally” opposed to abortion, but are unwilling to “impose” their views on others.

On the question of Communion, he said, “Do you really need a cardinal from the Vatican to answer that?”

Cardinal Christian Tumi, archbishop emeritus of Douala, told LifeSiteNews around the same time that ministers of Holy Communion are “bound not to” give the Eucharist to Catholic politicians who support abortion.

Pro-life organizations across the world have said they share the pastoral concern for pro-abortion politicians. Fifty-two pro-life leaders from 16 nations at the recent Rome Life Forum called on the bishops of the Catholic Church to honor Canon 915 and withhold Communion from pro-abortion politicians as an act of love and mercy.

Share this article

Advertisement
Featured Image
Cardinal Raymond Burke, prefect of the Vatican's Apostolic Signatura Steve Jalsevac / LifeSiteNews
John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry

Sources confirm Cardinal Burke will be removed. But will he attend the Synod?

John-Henry Westen John-Henry Westen Follow John-Henry
By John-Henry Westen

Sources in Rome have confirmed to LifeSiteNews that Cardinal Raymond Burke, the head of the Vatican’s highest court, known as the Apostolic Signatura, is to be removed from his post as head of the Vatican dicastery and given a non-curial assignment as patron of the Order of Malta.

The timing of the move is key since Cardinal Burke is currently on the list to attend October’s Extraordinary Synod on the Family. He is attending in his capacity as head of one of the dicasteries of the Roman Curia, so if he is removed prior to the Synod it could mean he would not be able to attend.

Burke has been one of the key defenders in the lead-up to the Synod of the Church's traditional practice of withholding Communion from Catholics who are divorced and civilly remarried.

Most of the Catholic world first learned of the shocking development through Vatican reporter Sandro Magister, whose post ‘Exile to Malta for Cardinal Burke’ went out late last night.

If Burke’s removal from the Signatura is confirmed, said Magister, the cardinal “would not be promoted - as some are fantasizing in the blogosphere - to the difficult but prestigious see of Chicago, but rather demoted to the pompous - but ecclesiastically very modest - title of ‘cardinal patron’ of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, replacing the current head, Paolo Sardi, who recently turned 80.”

At 66, Cardinal Burke is still in his Episcopal prime.

The prominent traditional Catholic blog Rorate Caeli goes as far as to say, “It would be the greatest humiliation of a Curial Cardinal in living memory, truly unprecedented in modern times: considering the reasonably young age of the Cardinal, such a move would be, in terms of the modern Church, nothing short than a complete degradation and a clear punishment.”

On Tuesday, American traditionalist priest-blogger Fr. John Zuhlsdorf also hinted he had heard the move was underway. “I’ve been biting the inside of my mouth for a while now,” he wrote. “The optimist in me was saying that the official announcement would not be made until after the Synod of Bishops, or at least the beginning of the Synod. Or at all.”

“It’s not good news,” he added.

Both Magister and Zuhlsdorf predicted that the controversial move would unleash a wave of simultaneous jubilation from dissident Catholics and criticism from faithful Catholics. The decision to remove Cardinal Burke from his position on the Congregation for Bishops last December caused a public outpouring of concern and dismay from Catholic and pro-life leaders across the globe.

Click "like" to support Catholics Restoring the Culture!

Both men speculated on the reasons for the ouster. 

Magister pointed out that Burke is the latest in a line of ‘Ratzingerian’ prelates to undergo the axe.

“In his first months as bishop of Rome, pope Bergoglio immediately provided for the transfer to lower-ranking positions of three prominent curial figures: Cardinal Mauro Piacenza, Archbishop Guido Pozzo, and Bishop Giuseppe Sciacca, considered for their theological and liturgical sensibilities among the most ‘Ratzingerian’ of the Roman curia,” said Magister.

He added: “Another whose fate appears to be sealed is the Spanish archbishop of Opus Dei Celso Morga Iruzubieta.”

Fr. Zuhlsdorf observed that Pope Francis may also be shrinking the Curial offices and thus reducing the number of Cardinals needed to fill those posts. He adds however, “It would be naïve in the extreme to think that there are lacking near Francis’s elbows those who have been sharpening their knives for Card. Burke and for anyone else associated closely with Pope Benedict.” 

“This is millennial, clerical blood sport.”

Share this article

Advertisement

Customize your experience.

Login with Facebook