Breaking News: Jim Packer Suspended by his Bishop

The breaking news from Vancouver Canada is that Professor James I. Packer and David Short, rector of St John’s, Shaughnessy are facing what is being widely reported as ‘suspension’ from ministry. Please read the full article here. The article refers to several clips of Dr Packer on You Tube, which I have located and posted below. A line has been drawn in the sand tonight.

1/10

2/10

3/10

4/10

5/10

6/10

7/10

8/10

9/10

10/10

4 thoughts on “Breaking News: Jim Packer Suspended by his Bishop

  1. For decades, evangelical Anglicans worldwide have been unprotesting about those in their communion who denied the resurrection, the virgin birth and other “first order” doctrines, and who embrace Anglo-Catholicism, but now want to portray their opposition to same-sex “marriage” as biblically principled. Gimme a break! As the year go by, the counsel of Lloyd-Jones at Keele 1966 seems more and more wise.

  2. Hi Peter,

    You will have to remind me what Lloyd-Jones said in 1966. Jim Packer has always defended the first order doctrines and, as the videos make clear, this present issue is about wider issues than just homosexuality.

    Rob

  3. Gday Rob,

    Check out http://exiledpreacher.blogspot.com/2006/10/graham-harrison-on-martyn-lloyd-jones.html

    or see Iain Murray’s biography of the Doctor.

    Or just google “lloyd-jones keele 1966” (which is how I found Harrison’s article).

    Packer certainly has defended “first-order” doctrine, but like other evangelical Anglicans, he has remained in a doctrinally compromised denomination (not to mention his flirtation with Evangelicals and Catholics Together (ECT) on the one hand, and charismatics on the other).

    Keep up your good work!

    Cheers

    Peter

  4. I couldn’t help but notice a complete lack of the other side’s voice in all these videos…

    I also couldn’t help but notice how a great many things are assumed of scripture which I don’t think can be rightly assumed… For instance, it seems that it is being assumed that things Paul wrote to a certain church in a certain century and in a certain historical context should be turned into universal moral/ethical guidelines.

    Is that one of the real underlying issues? The fact that people have been universalizing scripture into a set of moral principles that apply all times to all people in all places regardless of context and finally there are large groups who are (rightly) questioning that anachronism?

    That kind of thing doesn’t seem “first order” to me. It seems, rather, that certain sections of the Anglican church are progressing and growing and the others are afraid of change and want things to remain the same… As if our understanding of “the gospel” was whole and complete and perfect already and so now any new way of looking at it must obviously be incorrect or suspect. Like a bunch of old men digging their heals into the dirt to stop the progression of history because it’s different than what they knew. So it takes the dying out of the old generation and the rising up of a new one for change to actually take place. Typical human response. 50 years from now, I bet Anglicans will look back and laugh at how foolish people were calling this a first order problem and causing so much turmoil just because they didn’t like change.

Leave a Comment

%d bloggers like this: