At the end of an otherwise interesting post, James Gibson at Sanctus makes the following parting shot:
If he was fishing for understanding, he needs to switch bait.
Back at the first of the year I put up a post entitled Why I Don’t Like the Manhattan Declaration. I would be the first to admit that it was informed by a generally Evangelical view of things. But does that make it born of bigotry, or even ignorance?
I am reluctant to call anyone a bigot, even when it’s obvious. These days it’s just too easy to throw the term around to demonise your opponents. The worst offenders in that regard are the LGBT community advocates, but there are others.
As I see it, the Manhattan Declaration is primarily a political statement, and should be evaluated as such. Political alliances don’t have the same standard of theological commonality as church unifications or even ecumenical efforts. Evangelicals or anyone else who apply such a theological standard are silly, and hopefully will see daylight when they’re rotting in prison with their Roman Catholic counterparts.
My ultimate take on the Declaration, as I stated earlier, is as follows:
The Manhattan Declaration contains many fine sentiments. Unfortunately one gets the feeling that it will lead to the leadership of American Christianity making the same mistakes they have in the past, and at this point we have neither the time nor the luxury to indulge ourselves in doing the same things over again we’ve done before.