The Rt Revd Dr Pete Wilcox, Bishop of Sheffield has made a statement in relation to the Graham Tour for 2020. Sheffield is one of the eight locations on the tour, and a launch event was held in the city in October 2019.
“I’m afraid I cannot support the Graham Tour mission event at the FlyDSA Arena on 6 June next year, at which Franklin Graham is due to speak, and so will not be encouraging parishes in the Diocese of Sheffield to support it either. Mr Graham’s rhetoric is repeatedly and unnecessarily inflammatory and in my opinion represents a risk to the social cohesion of our city. I gladly took part in Billy Graham’s Mission England in 1984 as a candidate for ordained ministry, and in his LiveLink Mission in 1989 as a curate. But to my sadness I detect a tailing off of humility and generosity in the Graham organisation since those days.”
I’d like to hear examples of Graham’s rhetoric that is “repeatedly and unnecessarily inflammatory”, and that “represents a risk to the social cohesion”.
He probably says that sin is sin and that all sinners need to repent.
Bishops thinking the secular society has got it mote right than the Holy Bible, so what do you expect?
‘Mr Graham’s rhetoric is repeatedly and unnecessarily inflammatory and in my opinion represents a risk to the social cohesion of our city.’
O dear, another trouble-maker upsetting the establishment. Now where have we heard that story before?
We have to remember that this fellow was put into office to placate revisionist clergy after they objected to +Philip North. So one cannot expect him to be orthodox, or catholic or evangelical. One can expect him to tow the revisionist line.
I am no fan of Franklin Graham. But if the bishop does not want parishes attending Graham’s event, all the bishop needs to do is to present a more effective, catholic, apostolic ministry. If he cannot do that, he should keep his mouth shut.
That’s pretty well spot-on, I’d say. By the way, brother: the expression is ‘toe the line’ – no hauling involved!
Oops. you are quite correct about “toe the line.” In my own defense, perhaps a “Freudian slip” brought on by the burden that revisionist theology places upon the Church.
…which I can completely understand!
There has been an interesting debate over the last couple of weeks about evangelism between Bishop Philip North and Dr Ian Paul on Dr Paul’s website (Psephizo).
One can only hope parishes don’t look to their bishop for anything important…
I don’t know what the content is of FG’s rhetoric, but I think this is more about the Bishop seizing a chance to virtue signal, than it is about the possibility that many (if any) of the churches in his diocese will participate in this event.
I suspect it is also a signal to the one or two parishes which might have participated that they, and their clergy, are on the bishop’s radar. And not in a good way.
Franklin Graham has clearly stated traditional views on same-sex relationships and abortion. That’s the issue. His rhetoric has not been as nuanced or sensitive as it could be, but as is so often the case those who find this position to be offensive in and of itself will often characterize it as hateful regardless of the rhetoric.
That is rubbish. Another reason our Church is failing.
Rather than just berating yon bishop maybe it would be better to make a case for Mr. Graham. Unfortunately I don’t know enough about him other than he seems to weigh in on a lot of issues on the Christian Post that requires other ostensibly orthodox contributors to clarify or correct him. His latest defense of Chick-fil-a is one example. Can anyone give a good reason why we should encouage the churches in Sheffield to defy their bishop? Ad hominem attacks do no one justice. MAKE A CASE!
Franklin Graham’s “tours”, “crusades” are about bringing the Gospel to the lost. As minister’s of the Gospel we should support any effort that would share Jesus with those who do not know Him as Lord and Savior. I would be interested in hearing this Bishop’s strategy for sharing the Gospel in his diocese.
The view on this side of the Atlantic is that, whereas his father was much respected across the denominational spectrum, Franklin has turned his father’s ministry into a highly politicized and money-focused organization, little different from the multitude of less reputable televangelists. Even some evangelicals are distancing themselves from Franklin.
[…] accomplices, Percy got his wish. North did not take up the role and the second choice for the nomination, the former Dean of Liverpool, Pete Wilcox, got the […]
[…] accomplices, Percy got his wish. North did not take up the role and the second choice for the nomination, the former Dean of Liverpool, Pete Wilcox, got the job.But Percy has also criticised the culture […]