February 28, 2017

February 1, 2012

The Episcopal Church:  Resisting Fundamentalism Since 1784

From Powerline:

The Episcopal Church was known for decades as “the Republican Party at prayer,” but as the late Paul Seabury, a descendant of Bishop Seabury, the first Episcopal bishop in the U.S. after the Revolution, memorably put it in his famous 1978 Harper’s magazine article, “Trendier than Thou,” it would be better known today as the Marxist party at prayer—if there were any clerical Marxists left.  Instead today we get the relentless tide of multicultural political correctness from the Episcopal Church, exemplified by this poster making the rounds:







Hat tip:  Positive Phototaxis

Share this story:

Recent Related Posts



This can’t be real, can it?  I’m still trying to find a link to the actual source.

[1] Posted by Jim the Puritan on 2-1-2012 at 08:13 PM · [top]

Yes, Jim, I have seen the graphic posted by friends on facebook as a positive thing—this is why they came back to the Episcopal Church, they say (because they are so glad they are not like that poor sinner over there—that’s my take, anyway).

[2] Posted by Branford on 2-1-2012 at 08:18 PM · [top]

I also wonder if this is an actual TEC ad.  Even they couldn’t really have such an awful PR department.

[3] Posted by Katherine on 2-1-2012 at 08:23 PM · [top]

Of course not.

[4] Posted by paradoxymoron on 2-1-2012 at 08:25 PM · [top]

Katherine - I don’t know if this is an actual ad (I doubt it) but it is making the rounds as a positive thing.

[5] Posted by Branford on 2-1-2012 at 08:25 PM · [top]

So, I can see the attraction of the first two pictures to the sorts of folks inhabit TEC, but I interpret the one on a right as a “player” looking to slip a mickey into a girl’s drink at a bar in order to take advantage of her.  Amazing that anyone would think that is positive.

But then, I am a Fundamentalist . . . .

[6] Posted by Jim the Puritan on 2-1-2012 at 08:29 PM · [top]

It’s probably an inadvertent falsehood created by someone who “thinks” this is what the Episcopal Church was/is about. As well, since Our Lord customarily went to synagogue (an institution affiliated with the Pharisaic party) on Shabbat and was called up to do a reading, he was also highly respected among them. I find the use of the term Pharisee in this little missive somewhat anti-Semitic, as well.

[7] Posted by A Senior Priest on 2-1-2012 at 09:04 PM · [top]

Didn’t occur to me that martini man was interested in girls.  Neither would his target require a “mickey.” You give that demographic too much credit.

[8] Posted by paradoxymoron on 2-1-2012 at 09:08 PM · [top]

Well, at least they got honest and dumped “The Episcopal Church Welcomes You.”  TEC welcomes you unless you are conservative of any race or gender or a straight male (unless you acknowledge the superiority of womyn).

[9] Posted by Nikolaus on 2-1-2012 at 10:08 PM · [top]

I can’t find this poster on the Episcopal Church’s website in a quick search, so maybe its just a satirical fabrication, in which case, it’s actually quite clever (as satire)

[10] Posted by fyffee on 2-1-2012 at 10:37 PM · [top]

I don’t think this is an official Episcopal Church ad.  And I don’t know if it is satire.  I do know that I’ve seen a number of folks on Facebook give it a “thumbs up” while others have offered positive comments in response to it.

Piggybacking on the insights of others, I’ve offered a critical response in a blog posting entitled Episcopal Church Slogan Indulges Dismissive Parody .

[11] Posted by Creedal Christian on 2-1-2012 at 11:17 PM · [top]

A more accurate statement might be “Resisting Calvinist Enthusiasm since 1740.”  George Whitefield 1714-1770 came from a clerical family and was ordained in the Church of England in 1736. He made 7 trips to America preaching to raise money for an orphanage in Georgia. On his first trip he was initially welcomed but gradually American Church of England pulpits were closed to him, and Commissary Garden of South Carolina tried him in 1740 for preaching without authority in Presbyterian churches. New Englanders flocked to the Church of England to escape the revivalist Great Awakening preached by Whitefield and others. Whitefield died September 30, 1770 in Newburyport, Massachusetts, and is buried in the Presbyterian churchyard.

[12] Posted by TomRightmyer on 2-1-2012 at 11:49 PM · [top]

[12] TomRightmyer

“Resisting Calvinist Enthusiasm since 1740.”

Well, no wonder it’s falling apart then.

preaching without authority

Now, there is a prosecutable offense worthy of TEC.

And so on to the more generic comment…

The more I consider this ad, the more I believe it is something that some guy made up on his home computer.  It became popular because it panders to the conceit of a certain demographic (who ironically enough doesn’t realize it’s a spoof.)  But that third picture ... who is he supposed to represent?  A guy holding a martini glass stands in for what demographic that has been oppressed by ‘fundamentalists.’  The fornicating playboy drifting from bar to bar in search of one night stands?  The unmarried urban yuppie?  It just doesn’t fit. 

If TEC had made this poster, the third person would have been either Black or Hispanic.  That would have been the correct trio.  The woman priest would mean “We’re not misogynistic ... like them.”  A gay couple with kids would mean “We’re not homophobic ... like them.”  A non-WASP would mean “We’re not racist ... like them.”  A perfect trifecta.  But a guy with a martini glass and a s**t-eating grin on his face?  Every father of a daughter would have shot him on sight for that image alone.


[13] Posted by carl on 2-2-2012 at 12:51 AM · [top]

The best response to that poster is still this poster.

[14] Posted by Derek Smith on 2-2-2012 at 03:14 AM · [top]


I have no idea how you managed to drag George Whitefield into this, but full marks for random spontaneity.

Rather less marks for accuracy. Whitefield at times faced opposition, particularly early in his preaching career, but this became less as the years went on, not more. He was held in general high regard across all denominations and indeed all beliefs.

“New Englanders flocked to the Church of England to escape the revivalist Great Awakening preached by Whitefield and others.”

No, New Englanders along with the rest of America and Britain flocked to hear Whitefield - his last sermon on the 1740 tour was delivered to 23,000 people in Boston Massachusetts, and this was reflective of all his tours.

However, you are right about one thing - his listeners did indeed return to their churches, AFTER his tours were over, and they did so with renewed enthusiasm and spiritual life. This is the main reason he was held in such high regard in the Church of England - the benefits it received from his preaching could not be denied.

[15] Posted by MichaelA on 2-2-2012 at 03:21 AM · [top]

I recommend MichaelA do a little more careful study of the effect of the Great Awakening on the Church of England in America. Whitefield was quick to vilify those who did not agree with him.

[16] Posted by TomRightmyer on 2-2-2012 at 06:49 AM · [top]

The more I consider this ad, the more I believe it is something that some guy made up on his home computer.

My own theory is that one of the EC members got to playing with the new TEC-issued iPad while the “you’re not the boss of me!!!” argument ensued between 2 of the notable members.  Trying to be really hi tech, the member then “tweeted” the completed poster to other EC members and put it up on the EC Facebook page, knowing that no one else could see because both Twitter and Facebook have privacy policies.

[17] Posted by tjmcmahon on 2-2-2012 at 07:40 AM · [top]

Is it live or is it Memorex? The sad thing is that the poster could be the real deal but probably isn’t. Thus it portrays the reality of TEC itself.

[18] Posted by Fr. Dale on 2-2-2012 at 08:06 AM · [top]

It seems that fundametalism did not appear until the early 20th century. In my diocese, TEC exists for the thinking folks who are turned off by Baptists. This is not much of a gospel and the numbers prove it.

[19] Posted by Pb on 2-2-2012 at 09:51 AM · [top]

An Episcopal priest acquaintance of mine PROUDLY posted this, as well as a cartoon making fun of “fundamentalists” on Facebook!

[20] Posted by Goughdonna on 2-2-2012 at 09:55 AM · [top]

I suppose I’ve come to believe this poster is not official, but was intended to be serious.  I’m not a teetotaler, and am old enough to recall when many parishes served sherry at the coffee hour, but the image on the right only seems to confirm the problem of alcoholism among the laity and clergy (VGR being a notable functioning alcoholic who checked into rehab; don’t know his current state) to the average viewer.  This is not the ‘60s any more, and advertising that episcopalians aspire to be “happy” like the Dudley Moore character in “Arthur” (wedding scenes filmed at St. Bart’s next to the Waldorf, by the way) is not likely to be quite as attractive and clever as the person who created this may think.

[21] Posted by pendennis88 on 2-2-2012 at 09:55 AM · [top]

Having been labelled by some as one who is to be resisted, and having witnessed first hand the attitude reflected by the poster, I believe the only problem with the poster (beside the definition of fundamentalism) is the time line. Let’s see maybe they should try…

“Wresisting those wrascally fundies since 2003, or was it 1982, or maybe 1979, or maybe 1977, or was it…???

[22] Posted by Undergroundpewster on 2-2-2012 at 10:14 AM · [top]

Because of the ravages of alcoholism on the Reservations, the Diocese of South Dakota has very strict policies about serving alcohol at church events (actually a good practice by which to interperet last week’s Epistle about the “meat” controversy). 

I wonder who thought up the grinning fellow with the martini glass for this tacky triptych? Usually, TEC insiders pride themselves on being intellectually superior, “spiritually deeper,” not like lesser Christians.  Yet the leering tippler is certainly “insensitive” to a significant part of church and society, on and off the Reservation. 

Maybe they should have read that Epistle last weekend, understanding that a freedom should not be paraded if it might be harmful to a brother or sister in Christ.  But then maybe those of us who are “fundamentalists” are already downgraded from sibling status.

[23] Posted by Timothy Fountain on 2-2-2012 at 10:21 AM · [top]

There aren’t as many as there used to be, but I can recall any number of episcopalians whose attitude would certainly be that they would not want to associate with anyone who did not think getting blotto on a regular basis was perfectly ordinary.  I think some of those cases were captured in the old Kittredge book, “The Power of Their Glory”.  I can easily and sadly imagine some of those same folks thinking the picture on the right said just want they wanted to say (but for the unfortunate casual clothing).

[25] Posted by pendennis88 on 2-2-2012 at 01:19 PM · [top]

I grew up in the Sixties and Seventies going to an Episcopal church and Congregational schools (prep school and college).  I went to church on Sundays, as well as required chapel in school at least once a week up through high school.  And yet, when I think of how many of the people I grew up with as kids and teenagers in my church and in school have fallen in life through drugs, alcohol, AIDS, divorce, etc., it paints a very sad picture of how institutional religion totally failed in America.  I would count those who ended up as believers at maybe 5%, and none of that happened through either TEC or UCC, but rather generally through having a huge crash in life and then getting saved in a charismatic or non-denominational church.

Basically, everything went to Hell (literally) in the mainline denominations in the Sixties, and it has been that way every since.

[26] Posted by Jim the Puritan on 2-2-2012 at 01:33 PM · [top]

While one cannot be certain regarding the veracity of the poster, it does succinctly demonstrate both our province’s present difficulties and the likely path of our demise. There are no examples of a nuclear family composed of a mother, a father and children given within this poster. Beyond not promoting what traditional Christian doctrine and practice assert are the desired patterns of living set out for members of the Church, it also portends to our numeric decline and disappearance. However loving and caring a nontraditional family arrangement may be for children to grow up in and surrounded by, the basic biological fact is that if a family cannot reproduce itself, it is doomed to extinction. Given our province’s current reproduction rate (1.7 children per ECUSA parent vs. the national average per of 2.2) and given our collective efforts to erode or other wise underwise the traditional teachings necessary for belonging to the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church, one can see how we Anglicans in America will go the way of the Shakers with our numerous grand parish churches and cathedrals rather than their fine tradition of sensible furniture being the lasting material remnant.

[27] Posted by ILAnglican on 2-2-2012 at 02:36 PM · [top]

21 and 23—I love an occasional beer or glass of wine. However, on more than one occasion, I have had alcoholics tell me they did not feel comfortable at church social functions because they were always seemed to be accompanied by alcohol.  You would think drinking at church sponsored social events would be a liberty that most of us would give up readily if it was a stumbling block to others, yet we refuse to do it.  This isnt limited to “liberal” Episcopal churches. I am as guilty as others. Its just not a sin we like to talk about.

[28] Posted by Going Home on 2-2-2012 at 02:56 PM · [top]

I am so confused.  I grew up believing there is a Bible verse (which, of course, I have never actually read) that says “Where ever 3 or 4 Episcopalians are gathered, there is a 5th”.  Also everyone knows Mark Twain said that “It takes three Episcopalians to change a light build.  One to hold the ladder, one to change the bulb and one to make Martinis.” tongue rolleye

[29] Posted by David Keller on 2-2-2012 at 03:14 PM · [top]

We even have a saint day for St. Martini (Nov. 11).

[30] Posted by Jim the Puritan on 2-2-2012 at 03:21 PM · [top]

#14, I think the best response to this poster is the ” Episcopal Church SUES you” that was up on the Curmudgeon’s blog awhile ago. That one was indeed created by one person on their own computer. I asked and all he requires is a link to the site where he sells them as bumper stickers and other items.

[31] Posted by SC blu cat lady on 2-2-2012 at 05:54 PM · [top]

Actually this is something probably taught in the mainstream semnaries.  Not long after I first started attending my parrish in the late 80’s and we were involved in youth ministry, the Curate at the time made a comment ” I would rather preach to a bunch of atheiests than a room full of fundamentalists”.  My carreer as an “apoogist’ began right then.  He backed off at least around us.  It was obvious this was a sentiment he brought forth from seminary, and I don’t think he meant anything sinister by it because I don’t think he thought it through.  But I remember this so clearly because I have always thought how odd this sentiment was.  As if those who might be militant for their faith were more dangerous than those who knowingly don’t believe.  I still don’t get it.

[32] Posted by aacswfl1 on 2-2-2012 at 07:17 PM · [top]

Fundamentally I’m against this ad…

Live free or die…

[33] Posted by Amazed&Graced; on 2-3-2012 at 08:22 AM · [top]

Compared with some elements of contemporary Anglicanism, I would classify Bishop Ryle, Dean Henry Alford and William Henry Griffith Thomas as fundamentalists.  I’m on board with them.

[34] Posted by Old Hop on 2-4-2012 at 11:44 AM · [top]

It’s a wonder that my former TEC parish doesn’t have this poster on the corner or their property for all to see.

[35] Posted by cennydd13 on 2-4-2012 at 12:36 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.