Kathleen LundquistA TRIAL TO FIT OUR VERDICT
George Conger observes that the recent depositions of John-David Schofield and William Cox were basically foregone conclusions:
US Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori failed to follow the procedural rules governing the trial of Bishop William Cox for “abandonment of the Communion” of the Episcopal Church an investigation by The Church of England Newspaper has found.
In a March 12 press conference, Bishop Schori stated she had not followed rules governing the requirement that the 88-year old retired bishop be granted a speedy trial, that he be informed of the charges against him in a timely fashion, and that the consent of the church’s senior bishops be solicited by the Presiding Bishop to suspend him from office pending trial. A subsequent investigation by CEN in conjunction with The Living Church magazine revealed an insufficient number of votes to convict were cast also.
The Bishop of Central Florida has called for a review of the proceedings, and the president of the church’s appellate court of review for the trial of bishops is understood to have agreed to look into the proceedings.
As has been pointed out previously, Kate was nailed and knew it.
At a March 12 press conference Bishop Schori outlined the procedural history surrounding the Cox case. She said the Title IV review committee had “certified [Bishop Cox] several years ago. … before her time.” She added, however, that “it was never brought to the House of Bishops for action.”
She then said she “did not send it to the three senior bishops” and the House of Bishops “did not consider it in September” at their meeting in New Orleans with the Archbishop of Canterbury due to the “the press of other business.”
Several minutes later, Bishop Schori said she wanted to “clarify” her earlier statements. She said she had been “unable to get the consent of the three senior bishops last spring. That’s why we didn’t bring it to the September meeting” of the House of Bishops.
Contacted after the press conference, one of the three senior bishops, who declined to be named, stated he had never been asked by Bishop Schori to consent to Bishop Cox’s supension.
Indianapolis' Catherine Waynick didn't even know what Cox was supposedly guilty of.
In defence of the proceedings against Bishop Cox, Indianapolis Bishop Catherine Waynick wrote that while the “canons may need to be clarified, what does not seem to need clarifying” was that “William Cox willfully violated the canons by functioning where he had been specifically asked not to.”
However, the charge brought against Bishop Cox was not violating diocesan boundaries. In 2006 Bishop Griswold dropped the charges proffered against Bishop Cox for the Kansas ordination, raising the question whether the bishops convicted him of a crime not before the bishops for adjudication.
The charge was “Abandonment of Communion,” Bishop Wantland said. The punishment for violation of diocesan boundaries “is a totally different charge. In my opinion, this is what he should have been charged with, and the procedure under Canon IV. 9. 2 was totally inappropriate and without any justification,” he said.
Why should what few remaining orthodox Episcopalians there are care about this? Because if Mark Harris is any indication, a lot of Episcopal liberals think a "screw the rules" purge would be a grand idea.
It is reasonably certain that nothing will satisfy the dissenters. But there are a wide range of Episcopalians who are concerned that when the struggles are over that there will continue to be a broad church base that includes people from across the spectrum of opinion on a variety of issues. This is not a time to "get rid" of troublemakers. It is a time to say to those who will not or cannot abide this Church that they are released from this community. This is a time to embrace all who are willing to continue to live in the same house with all our differences and understandings, and to the rest say goodbye. The Presiding Bishop will need the very best from staff to make sure what is done is done well. At the same time the staff will have to work with others to provide a robust defense of the sweeping.
It is a time to sweep house in the hopes that this Church might be a community unencumbered by those who believe the Episcopal Church is anti-Christ, or heretical, or unredeemable and unorthodox, or defunct. It is time to invite those who believe such things to leave. It is time to name those who have already left.
I'm done with the Episcopal Organization so the dishonesty of that Unitarian sect no longer bothers me. But any orthodox Christians left in the EO should be under no illusions. If and when they want you out, they'll find a way. Regardless of what their own canons happen to say.
Submitted by Allen Lewis
at 3/27/2008 6:54:46 PM| I have said it before and I will say it again, the Episcopal Church (aka Episcopal Organization) and her leaders have now entered into a lawless phase where whatever PB Katharine Jefferts Schori and her counselor David Booth Beers want to do will be done regardless of tradition, canon law or human decency. Those orthodox believers who are so foolish as to remain in TEC will have a rude awakening. The gloves are off and these people mean to get rid of any opposition by any means available. |
Submitted by Dr. Mabuse
at 3/27/2008 7:35:08 PM| I hope it's clear to all Episcopalians that they are now living through a revolution. Revolutions don't end when revolutionaries have a change of heart, because revolutions develop their own momentum, and carry individuals along with them. This revolution will follow the usual course, of purges, denunciations, crises of loyalty, instability, lawlessness and fleeing refugees. It will stop when the TEC has bled itself white of funds and human lives, and not a moment before. Revolutions can't be prayed away - they have to run their course, like a fever. |
Submitted by st. anonymous
at 3/27/2008 7:44:39 PM| Orthodox bishops from the GS engage in border crossing at conservatives' request. Revisionists: "They broke the canons! Unclean, unclean!" Schori breaks the rules in order to force the deposion of two orthodox bishops. Revisionists: "Canons? WE don't need no stinkin' canons!!" |
Submitted by Matthew
at 3/27/2008 8:00:53 PM| This is actually a good time to be a Christian connected with the Episcopal Church. The masks are coming off. And the apostasy which had hidden beneath the veneer of good manners has been shown for what it is. There are some that are still in denial, but they are growing fewer. I think everyone in the Episcopal Church may soon be confronted with the choice: Am I an Episcopalian or am I a Christian? I think General Convention 2009 will be when the Episcopal Church collectively decides to shed the scraps of its Christian heritage. I hope I'm wrong. I pray I'm wrong. But there you are. As far as Dr. Mabuse's comment about this being a Revolution, there's something that only the Old Guard counter-revolutionaries remember about revolutions. "Revolution, like Saturn, devours in turn each one of her children." Come the Revolution, I'm going to be second, possibly third up against the wall |
Submitted by Ken
at 3/27/2008 8:08:00 PM| They are just doing what cultists do. That's all. I've never thought of it, Dr. M, but I think you are correct. I've read enough church history to know that God doesn't swoop in and rescue religious groups. I have my own opinions about that, and probably most of us do, but in the present instance, it's clear those who stay in TEC do so with no reasonable hope that things will get better. Just as with women's ordination, an oath to bless sodomy will eventually become required to be a bishop, priest, deacon, and, let's face it, we've heard enough stories already about parishes where families simply aren't welcomed. |
Submitted by Truth Unites... and Divides
at 3/27/2008 8:13:35 PM| "I'm done with the Episcopal Organization so the dishonesty of that Unitarian sect no longer bothers me." Have you decided where you're going, CJ? |
Submitted by Christopher Johnson
at 3/27/2008 8:18:17 PM| TU&D,
Not yet. But if the Anglican tradition does what I expect it to do somewhere around the Lambeth Conference, I'll have a pretty good idea. |
Submitted by Truth Unites... and Divides
at 3/27/2008 8:23:04 PM| "Those orthodox believers who are so foolish as to remain in TEC will have a rude awakening." (Allen Lewis) The folks in DioSC had a major celebration in January with the installation of +Mark Lawrence. He made a public promise to not lead DioSC out of the Episcopal Organization in order to get enough consent votes. (Not to mention that the PBess cited canonical violations in denying +Lawrence's consent the first time around. heh, heh). Don't you just feel sorry and awful for the Institutionalists who compromised, accommodated, and appeased the liberal revisionist heretics and apostates? They're crying. Cry with them. Boo-hoo, sniffle, sniffle. Boo-hoo. |
Submitted by Steve L.
at 3/27/2008 8:40:05 PM| Medicine does that, finds a cure for no known disease |
Submitted by Allen Lewis
at 3/27/2008 9:42:24 PMTU..AD sez:Don't you just feel sorry and awful for the Institutionalists who compromised, accommodated, and appeased the liberal revisionist heretics and apostates? They're crying. No, they were warned several times. I have no real sympathy for them. I think they are wedded to their buildings. They will have to make up there minds. Word is that the priests of the Diocese of SC were appalled at how arrogant +KJS was. I have to wonder just what planet they have been on to not have realized this already? Some might say I am not being very charitable towards them. But these are supposed to be grown men (and women). They should have been keeping up with what is going on. It's not that difficult. The Rev. Kendall Harmon insures that the news is posted on his blog, even if he and his Elves tend to spin the comment threads. Any person of moderate intelligence should be able to draw the proper conclusions. What will the Diocese of SC do? I really do not know. I am guessing that they are too wedded to their historic buildings to do anything other than huff and puff. They will soon die from revisionist posioning. Meanwhile, the diocese will be sending money into the national coffers so 815 can continue its novel form of "waging reconciliation" with those who oppose it. I weep that my former diocese has fallen into such states. But that is where wishful thinking and timidity will get you every time. |
Submitted by Bill (not IB)
at 3/27/2008 10:47:20 PM| I am reminded of the lynch mobs in: The Ox-Bow Incident Five Card Stud (a personal favorite... Dean Martin AND Yaphet Kotto) Hang 'em High(Subtitled, "The Skipper of the Minnow Strings up Rowdy Yates") If there's one aspect to this that can be considered "positive", it's what Matthew said above - that the duplicity, hypocrisy, and obfuscating is finally being replaced by the truth - "GET THOSE PEOPLE OUT OF OUR CHURCH!!!!!" This should assist folks who have been sitting on the fence to realize that they're now targets, and they'd better get onto the right side of the fence to take shelter. |
Submitted by GB
at 3/27/2008 11:07:34 PM| The TEC with HQ at 815 is definitely heretical, unredeemable, and unorthodox. I have long since left for the Continuing Church, and will not be going back. I am not angry, ashamed, or embarrassed, and anyone who would like to name me is free to do so. I am, in fact, happy and quite proud of our accomplishments in the Continuing Church over the past few decades. |
Submitted by Truth Unites... and Divides
at 3/28/2008 12:25:42 AM| Allen Lewis notes: "They should have been keeping up with what is going on. It's not that difficult. The Rev. Kendall Harmon insures that the news is posted on his blog, even if he and his Elves tend to spin the comment threads." I may have been mistaken in thinking this, but I really thought Rev. Kendall Harmon would have provided more vigorous orthodox leadership in resisting TEc's apostasies. My reasons for thinking this are (1) He spoke against GLBT ordinations at either the 2003 or 2006 GC, (2) He initiated a simple "Jesus is Lord" resolution at 2006 GC which surprisingly couldn't even get passed, (3) He is the Canon Theologian of DioSC which bears some responsibility for protecting the DioSC flock, and (4) He runs one of the premier Anglican News Digest blogs in the Anglican blogosphere. He was first-hand witness of the heresies and apostasies that was enveloping TEc. He had the office and platform to contend vigorously for the orthodox in not only DioSC, but also as an example for other orthodox dioceses and parishes that looked to see what DioSc was doing. Therefore, it saddens me to state that Rev. Canon Theologian Kendall Harmon Ph.D could have, and should have provided more spiritual leadership to the beleaguered and embattled orthodox Anglicans in DioSC and elsewhere. As Vince Lombardi once said, "When the going gets tough, the tough get going." Kendall wasn't tough. |
Submitted by JM
at 3/28/2008 12:39:06 AM| "It is a time to sweep house in the hopes that this Church might be a community unencumbered by those who believe the Episcopal Church is anti-Christ, or heretical, or unredeemable and unorthodox, or defunct." You might want to add those who believe the Bible means what it says. You can believe all sorts of stuff and still be Episcopalian, Just not that. I believe I'll have another drink. |
Submitted by LaVallette
at 3/28/2008 1:53:46 AM| As I said before: "L'etat, c'est moi" et "Apres moi, le deluge" even if the hubris destroys me!!!!. |
Submitted by Athanasius Returns
at 3/28/2008 6:02:56 AM| Rules/canons? They say what the Presiding Bishop wants to say, when she wants to say it, and to whom she wants to say it, and don’t you ever forget it, OK. The canons aren’t rules, they’re more like guidelines, really. Or, “We wrote the rules, and we can rewrite the rules midstream if it suits our royal autonomous fancy...” And the Montanists in the background say, “Now, why can’t these nice little orthodox realize this and leave us alone to rebuild TEC in our New Thang image?” |
Submitted by Ed the Roman
at 3/28/2008 6:56:48 AM| Dr. Harmon and the Elves have an explicit policy of allowing Revisionistas greater latitude in rhetoric (c'est à dire, license in vitriol) than Reasserters in order to keep the Revisionistas engaged. It bears so much fruit, after all. |
Submitted by Ken
at 3/28/2008 7:30:26 AM| For heaven's sake, Kendall Harmon is one man and has (as TUAD lists) done yeoman's work in the battle. Running T1.9 is arguably the one thing that a concerned person could do in the present situation. The comment policy over there is certainly arguable. This comment by one of the more vile heretics (excuse me, "reappraisers") was allowed to stand, despite being complained about. The pope has been called a Nazi repeatedly, and so on. On the one hand, I can see the point in letting them have their say, since it exposes them as vicious and (generally) irrational. On the other hand, talking to them is a waste of time. The former Episcopal minister/druid priest has taken to commenting over there. He's a one man propaganda machine for 815. I don't object to it, but there's no point. We don't speak the same language, even when we use the same words. I don't know. It's also arguable that being in a "safe" diocese deludes people into believing the masters of TEC are just well-meaning Christians with some different ideas and, above all, we must be charitable to one another. Of course, should be "charitable" to one another. The problem is that Christian Charity isn't always nice, and Nice is, let's fact it, a high (the highest?) value in Anglicanism. |
Submitted by LP
at 3/28/2008 8:04:41 AMIt is a time to say to those who will not or cannot abide this Church that they are released from this community. Friends, note the progression over the past decades. It has been followed this way with all the issues - abandonment of basic Scriptural teaching, ordination of women, ordination of the homosexually active, etc. It's way too late to be surprised.
(1) Quietly abandon the aspect of the faith in question and adopt the apostasy. People, PEcUSA has been D.O.A. for 30 years now. What you're seeing coming into the open now has been there for decades. This is nothing new. Those who were insightful enough to see this situation started the Continuing Church movement. That movement has had its own set of difficulties... but those jurisdictions still uphold the Christian and Anglican faith (which PEcUSA no longer does), they have leadership which is committed to preserving that faith (which PEcUSA does not), and they are willing to make the necessary personal and financial sacrifices to preserve the faith (while PEcUSA has sacrificed the faith to pursue its own ends). Those who recognized the situation only belatedly (and, ironically, in some cases after condemning the Continuing movement for leaving PEcUSA) likewise discerned that the only way to remain Christian and Anglican (particularly if you accept the "catholic and apostolic faith" of the early Church) is to leave apostate PEcUSA... thus the movements to seek alternate jurisdictions. There is NO POINT in sitting around in PEcUSA waiting for someone to wave a magic wand and return things to the way they were. It isn't going to happen. All you're doing that way is continuing to support and fund the apostate church, and (even if you're in a solid parish) preserving the local parish & property for when the apostates move in and take it. If you do not support the heresies, apostasies, and persecution of Christians which are now the norm in PEcUSA you must leave. If you honestly believe in the "catholic and apostolic faith" to which we pledge ourselves in the Creed, you must leave. There's no longer any middle ground. And if you stay -- using whatever excuse -- you are, merely by your continued presence, tacitly supporting the apostasy and persecution. Sure, your parish may have a great youth program... you're seducing the youth into staying in an apostate, anti-Christian, soul-destroying organization. What's so great about that? Sure, your parish may do some great community service work... no need to stay in the parish to keep doing that. Sure, you may have some friends and aquaintances you like seeing there... only you've made common cause around apostasy. And so forth. The fat lady has sung; Elvis has left the building; and PEcUSA is firmly and irrevocably on the road to perdition, dragging all the souls she can into apostasy with her. If you stay... well, then you must be okay with that.
pax, |
Submitted by David
at 3/28/2008 8:30:37 AM| pax? There was a total lack of anything resembling peace in that tirade. |
Submitted by LP
at 3/28/2008 8:53:26 AM| When the heretics and apostates attack the orthodox, persecute them, sue them, insult them, and drive them from the church -- it isn't "peaceful" to pretend otherwise nor avoid accurately describing what's going on. It's merely stupid. We've had far too much of that sort of stupidity in PEcUSA over the last 30 years... much to the benefit of the apostates. Not is it stupid not to call apostasy "apostasy", it isn't be what the Early Church or Christ Himself teach us to do. You know, the Early Church which excommunicated those -- Simon Magus, the Gnostics, the Arians -- who attacked the faith and attempted to draw souls away from Christ. Or Christ, who spoke "truth" not false "peace" when he called the Scribes and Pharisees vipers, white-washed tombs, and hypocrites.
You remember the Pharisees, right? They were the ones who:
pax et veritas, |
Submitted by dwstroudmd
at 3/28/2008 8:56:14 AM| I wonder if those inviting believers in the Gospel to leave have any clue that the "invite" they extend shall also be extended to them? You know, when God says "thy will be done" because they have refused to say to Him, "Thy will be done"? Even the dullest pew potato would recognize this "invite" for what it actually is. Are the "reappraisers" so convoluted in their own propaganda that they believe psychologically and spiritually their own dissing language, meaning, and faith? Talk that reveals the delusional state in its fulness usually results in hospitalization or institutionalization. Are there none in the Anglican Communion Instruments of Unity who can recognize the patient is in DIRE need of real care? ECUSA/TEC/GCC/EO is now psychotic.... |
Submitted by Tom (St. Louis)
at 3/28/2008 9:22:39 AM| After all the events in the week before Holy Week, I told my wife that I was fed up with TE"c." My father is a friend of one of the bishops caught in the frenzy of depositions so it sort of hits home. We agreed to let our daughter finish confirmation, not that it has any meaning, and that will be it for me. I have visited an Antiochian Orthodox parish that I like very much, but I'm still not sure if my family feels the same way. |
Submitted by Ken
at 3/28/2008 9:32:10 AM| Death is very peaceful, at least to our eyes. |
Submitted by Gregg the obscure_
at 3/28/2008 9:53:50 AM| The "reappraisers" have proven time and time again that their program is the separation of EO and believing Christians. When Righter and Spong weren't enough, they went to extremes unprecedented in church history with "same sex blessings" and Vicki Gene. Can anyone legitimately expect folks who would stoop to those tactics to have any bounds to their depravity? More than that, is selective applications of EO's canons anywhere near the same level as inverting the most basic premises of morality? |
Submitted by JM
at 3/28/2008 10:10:19 AM| The current unpleasantness has shown that the Revisionist leaders of EO can not even make a colorable claim to being "nice." Even if you agreed with them politically, and were thereby immune from their attacks and purges, how could you stand to be around them? |
Submitted by LP
at 3/28/2008 10:27:23 AMWe agreed to let our daughter finish confirmation, not that it has any meaningI hope you're going to explain to her that she should expect to undergo reconfirmation (or chrismation) in any new church you go to, at least if you go to a catholic or orthodox one (i.e. one which takes such sacraments seriously). Not to mention having the flaws in whatever "education" she's getting addressed. A very good case -- theologically and historically -- can be made that all of PEcUSA's "sacramental" acts are invalid because the institution is formally apostate. Even if the confirmation is done by a validly-ordained (and male) bishop. This is no longer a case of "private" sins or doubts (which do not invalidate the sacraments - see article XXVI) but of institutional, public, and formal abandonment of the faith by PEcUSA as a whole. The patristic teaching is that, under those circumstances, a church loses all surety of sacramental efficacy and validity. The only "spiritually safe" thing to do will be for her to be reconfirmed in whatever actual Christian denomination you move to, even if it's done "conditionally." Because there is no sure validity in any of PEcUSA's eucharists, confirmations or ordinations any more.
pax, |
Submitted by Peter C.
at 3/28/2008 10:36:27 AMCongratulations, Tom (St. Louis), on stepping out on the road of recovery. Know that you're not alone as there are many of us in the Antiochian Archdiocese who are ex-TE“c”'ers who have walked the same path you're on now. If you haven't already, you might want to check out the book Anglican-Orthodox Pilgrimage to read some of their stories. |
Submitted by InNewark
at 3/28/2008 10:55:04 AM| I'm with Matthew. There are obviously many, many excellent reasons to leave TEC, and work on building a reformed Anglicanism in the US. But it's not a bad thing that some orthodox who are absolutely clearheaded about the future have chosen to remain--as missionaries, or maquis, for example. Again, while there are excellent reasons for abandoning property, choosing to fight for it is not necessarily self-serving. TEC is wasting money and energy on litigation, and increasingly shows its true face to the world. If not for the people fighting for their buildings, it would have been easy for TEC to talk about "a few right-wing cranks", while remaining media darlings. The lucre from selling off abandoned parishes would let them carry on their "mission" for a long time, and while overall numbers might go down, it would continue to be an attractive place for limousine liberals with deep pockets. |
Submitted by LP
at 3/28/2008 11:16:20 AMBut it's not a bad thing that some orthodox who are absolutely clearheaded about the future have chosen to remainI disaree completely. First, by remaining you preach to the world that things "really aren't all that important"... if they were, observers will rightly reason, you'd have left. Folks mentioned Rev. Harmon above. For all the good things he says, that good is more than outweighed by the fact that he's still in PEcUSA. Anyone listening to him will rightly conclude "Gee, all this must really not be all that important... if it were, he wouldn't still be in PEcUSA, would he? I guess it really is just people disagreeing over secondary issues like the revisionists say it is." If you can get the majority of your parish to leave, and if you can get someone pro bono to represent you to force PEcUSA to immolate its own budget in attempting to get your building (and perhaps have a chance of keeping it yourself), great; do so! A pity more people didn't do it 30 years ago when PEcUSA was already terminally apostate but before the Dennis Canon was put in place. But there's certainly no reason to put off taking this action any longer. And if you're not in such a parish, then all the time, energy and effort you're spending to make a symbolic "stand" are, ultimately, wasted. Not only will your fellow parishoners conclude "gee, it must not really be that serious, or he'd not still be in PEcUSA" -- but also you are denying that time, energy & effort to all the orthodox Anglican parishes which so desperately need such support. "Vengeance is mine, saith the LORD." Let PEcUSA immolate itself. By staying the only people you are helping are the lawyers and the apostates. By staying, the people you are hurting are yourself and your family (continuing to stay in such a spiritually toxic environment) and the orthodox parishes down the street (or in the next town over). Look back at your argument -- it's all about mammon. You say it's good to stay because you can hope to cost PEcUSA money. Is that your priorty? Sacrificing your own spiritual wellbeing in the hope to hurt their pocketbooks? Denying your support (both material and spiritual) to the orthodox parishes which need it to build a future, just to hope to spite the apostate parishes which are going to be dead in 2-3 generations anyway? Is that really the choices and priorities you want to stand for?
pax, |
Submitted by Sodbuster
at 3/28/2008 11:16:30 AM| There was a time in Israel when the bronze snake God had Moses lift up, and Gideon's ephod had to be destroyed, because they had become idols. There is a time when defending one's home at every little stone bridge is the right thing to do, and there is a time when those little stone bridges become idols, and have to be destroyed. PE-U has come to the point, has it not, where defending the little stone bridges is rank idolatry? We should pray for the frogs in the boiling water, that they might realize the water is now boiling, and jump out. |
Submitted by Truth Unites... and Divides
at 3/28/2008 11:32:12 AM| LP: "Folks mentioned Rev. Harmon above. For all the good things he says, that good is more than outweighed by the fact that he's still in PEcUSA." LP is absolutely right. Not only in this observation about Rev. Harmon, but in his other posts as well. Sodbuster: "PE-U has come to the point, has it not, where defending the little stone bridges is rank idolatry?" Agreed. Self-deceiving yourself that you are bravely defending little stone bridges in TEc is akin to saying that you are defending a coat closet on the Titanic. God is not calling folks to be political subversives. He is calling folks to carry out the Great Commission. If you're consumed with being a political subversive, then haven't you fallen prey to the Adversary? Plus, how could you invite anyone to a TEc church, knowing how corrupt, how heretical, and how apostate TEc is? GAFCON 2008 ONLY!!! |
Submitted by Tom (St. Louis)
at 3/28/2008 11:35:47 AM| I'm under no illusions that leaving TEc is easy, at least I don't think I am. I've actually been on this road for years. I am anticipating that there will still be difficult conversations with my wife, children & other family. Thanks Peter C, I've already ready A/O P, as well as books by Bishops Kallistos & Alfeyev and others. |
Submitted by Matthew
at 3/28/2008 11:51:24 AM| Jesus associated with tax collectors and prostitutes in order that they might repent, know him and find salvation. For the near future, I can continue to associate with apostates, heretics, heathens and pagans so that they might know Jesus, repent and find salvation. My own personal view of the Episcopal Church is much as Gen. William Booth viewed the slums of London. |
Submitted by Minuteman
at 3/28/2008 12:12:18 PM| Tom and others looking to make a choice. Having just faced these options and made my choice, may I recommend a few things. Others have gone before you and their testimonies and guidance are on the web. The Antiochan Orthodox website either has, or links to a page with many testimonies from converts that you can listen to. Their site and other Orthodox sites have a rich lode of infomation. Roman Catholics offer the cable tv network EWTN (Eternal Word Television Network) which you can also watch as a video on ewtn.com. Monday nights at 8pm eastern is the show "The Journey Home". Each week a guest talks about their process of converting. They come from a wide range of (mostly) Protestant experiences and the issues are similar. Ten or more years of programs are archived and can be accessed for audio listening. It is easy to pick out those who were Episcopalians if that is helpful. And you dont have to be a Catholic to listen on Sunday nights to Fr. Corapi on the Cathechism. It's for all Christians. Happy searching and may The Lord draw you where He will. |
Submitted by Truth Unites... and Divides
at 3/28/2008 12:19:55 PM| "For the near future, I can continue to associate with apostates, heretics, heathens and pagans so that they might know Jesus, repent and find salvation." I see where you're coming from Matthew. You're obeying the Great Commission by doing it within TEc. Admirable. But didn't Jesus also say that there might be a time to shake the dust off your sandals? Anyways, good luck. |
Submitted by LP
at 3/28/2008 12:34:24 PMMy own personal view of the Episcopal Church is much as Gen. William Booth viewed the slums of London.My view is more akin to that of the apostle John encountering the Gnostic heretic Cerinthus -- a heritic, I might add, whose teaching was markedly closer to Scripture and orthodoxy than much of what is spouted off (without censure) by many bishops and leaders in today's PEcUSA.
John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, ‘Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.’
Tom and others looking to make a choice...Of course, there's the additional option of not abandoning Anglicanism merely because of the apostasy of the formerly-Anglican-jurisdiction of PEcUSA. The various parishes of the Continuing Church movement represent (I believe) substantially more locations and people than either Western Rite Orthodoxy or Anglican Use catholics. http://www.anglicanpck.org http://www.acahome.org http://www.anglicancatholic.org http://united-episcopal.org/
pax, |
Submitted by InNewark
at 3/28/2008 12:42:44 PM| TUAD & LP--I agree with a lot of what you've said..but not everyone's circumstances are the same. (For obvious reasons, I'm not going to discuss my own on a public forum). I have, in my own small way, tried to do what Matthew is doing. For a long time, it seemed the Lord told me to stay; eventually, He told me it was time to move on. My work bore only a small fruit, but in the arid soil that is my diocese , I feel blessed to have accomplished that much. For the moment, there's something else useful for me to do within TEC, but I do expect that there will be other instructions further down the road. :) You say that God doesn't call us to be political subversives, but sometimes proclaiming Jesus out loud, or alerting others to false teachings is also an act of political subversion. Finally, re: Mammon--I never meant to suggest that it was a good idea to fight for property solely to cost TEC money--that is short-sighted from every angle--it's just an added benefit. |
Submitted by Matthew
at 3/28/2008 12:44:26 PM| Truth Unites... and Divides , that time may come. It likely will. There are two things that likely will happen that also likely will drive me from the Episcopal Church. There is the possibility of something happening that would result in me leaving the Episcopal Church, but not as a fugitive in flight. If 815 mistreats Bishop Duncan (or any other bishop) as it appears likely to, then the burden of being associated with an unjust church would be too great. Chris has said he's looking at Lambeth 2008. I'm looking at GC 2009. From what I've been reading on the HoBD mailing list that will be when the big push will be made to jettison all the worn out patriarchal remnants of Christianity and embrace the Episcopal Church's destiny as Unitarians in gaudy robes. If a truly viable, united alternative Anglican entity arose, then I'd pretty much have to join it. One scenario for such an entity would be for the dioceses of San Joaquin, Pittsburgh and Fort Worth to join together and be joined by the other major players in alternative Anglicanism. That's the fantasy solution. At present, that seems to be the least likely though. |
Submitted by smurf breath
at 3/28/2008 12:46:00 PM| The Bishop of Central Florida has called for a review of the proceedings. Howe had better watch his step. They might pass a "double-secret probation" canon just to depose him. |
Submitted by Christopher Hathaway
at 3/28/2008 1:23:25 PM| by remaining you preach to the world that things "really aren't all that important"... if they were, observers will rightly reason, you'd have left.
This statement of LP really is the central point. The church is the fellowship of the faithful, where we proclaim that "there is one Lord, one Faith and one baptism". By being in the same church with heretics you proclaim that what they believe is actually part of that "one faith", or at the very least that it is not in substantial conflict with it. If, however, if it is not the same faith being preached, that reality must be publicly admitted by the orthodox in the church so that the true faith can be manifest to all believers, and to all unbelievers. This last part relates to the church's charge to be a light to the world. Now, there is already a time tested means for Christians to behave consistent with an admission that others calling their faith Christian when it really isn't. That means is called disfellowship, excommunication, separation. The process of disfellowshipping may take some time. But it has to happen eventually. The problem I find is the reluctance to admit this truth among so many conservative Episcopalian leaders. One might be justified in supposing that this truth is implicitly denied by many clergy and bishops, as if it was a central doctrine that you don't leave. If that is a doctrine in their concept of being churchmen then they have excluded from their idea of the church one of the central historical idenifiers of Christ's church. The best that they can hope to be, then, is unchurched missionaries to heretical institutions. They have abandoned as impossible a true expression of catholicity and have contented themselves to living as exhiles in a ruin of a church. Since when was that the calling Christ gave to us? It wasn't good enough for Reno. It shouldn't be good enough for anybody who aspires to the riches of Christ. |
Submitted by Christopher Hathaway
at 3/28/2008 1:32:49 PM| Smurf breath. you've got it! That's how they were able to depose Schofield and Cox. They were already on Double Secret Inhibition. Prepare the Death Mobile!! |
Submitted by ann r
at 3/28/2008 3:26:43 PM| I suspect for some folks turning their backs on TE"c" is like giving up on Mother or Father. After all, for many of us this is where we learned about God; this is where our faith was nurtured. Now that the institution has collective Alzheimer's and progressive dementia, what do you do about it? You don't want to encourage it, or follow it. But it is hard to totally forget and/or disrespect what it used to be. |
Submitted by Sodbuster
at 3/28/2008 6:18:04 PM| I can see that Matthew means to be doing good. I am not sure about his understanding of the circumstances, though they might well be clearer than mine.
It seems to me that when the organization is not merely corrupt, not merely allowing false doctrine to exist - the situation with Rome in the 15th century, but officially teaches the false doctrine and officially condemns and opposes true doctrine, then maintaining a membership in, particularly as a minister in, such an organization would possibly violate the rule against even greeting such heretics, or letting them under your roof. One might very well be perceived as giving approval to the doctrinal stance of that organization by remaining with it in any position. I think the situation with the PE-U is much worse than that of the UMC or ELCA at this point, because of the now official opposition to orthodoxy by that body. The UMC and even the ELCA have within it believers, and they have not yet officially moved to drive them out. Even so it would be very difficult to be in either organization. One could perhaps be a member of Hitler Youth hoping to share the gospel, but would that be the right thing to do, for it openly opposed the gospel. That is where I think that the PE-U has now gone. To open organizational official opposition to the gospel. Rome was never in that place, yet many of us are not Roman Catholics. How much more ought we not be in the PE-U, for it has gone inconcievably further from the truth than even the worst teaching of the least-educated village priest in the electorate of Saxony in say 1510. If there could be any legitimacy in a Christian remaining in the PE-U, then there could be no legitimacy for not being in the RCC (or one of the other churches founded by an apostle). So, remaining in -at this point- seems to be to be without any moral possibility. Someone sitting in a pew with an orthodox pastor is in a different place than that pastor is in. But that pastor, and even more any bishop, cannot have a moral leg to stand on at this point. I understand the desire to minister, but has it not come to the point where remaining associated is in and of itself a testimony against the Gospel? I understand the desire to keep the building and the churchyard, but if doing so means proclaiming an anti-gospel and an anti-Christ, is it not better to move on, and leave the remains of the blest in the hands of God? |
Submitted by Matthew
at 3/29/2008 5:01:41 AM| Sodbuster, I could invoke Godwin's Law. ;) The difference between being a member of Hitler Jugend and the Episcopal Church is that the Hitler Jugend openly required belief in non-Christian doctrines. The Episcopal Church does not, yet. That was my point about GC 2009. If the Episcopal Church ever formally abandons Christian doctrine (i.e. requires the communion of the unbaptized or some other odious dogma), then it would be impossible t |