It Is Time, NOW, To Take A Look At The Proposed TEC Canon Changes - Comments Needed!

The problem that TEC has now - if viewed from the moderate viewpoint -  is that the extreme progressives own the GC for all intents and purposes. There does not seem to be a coherent orthodox voice within TEC able to politically challenge the revision agenda, and the moderate middle are completely unrepresented by their delegates, who have co-opted representation for support of the progressive agenda. If the moderate middle cannot be bestirred to require accountability of their representatives, or to represent themselves, then the results are a foregone conclusion. Sad but again those who will not learn from history and remain vigilant, are doomed to repeat it.

We saw this at the diocesan level in our own adventures at our DioCon last year. The progressives have declared “no quarter given” in support of their agenda, to the point where even the most benign issues are scrutinized if your stance is suspect, and any action compromised by them - just to ensure the party line is enforced.

Now to perform the pirating of phrase that is a hallmark of the progressive agenda I am relieved to be “Out (of TEC) and Proud!”

And on a lighter (sic) note, a non-denom friend of mine who has been watching the whole Anglican debacle, commented recently on the insistence of the ABC to dither and dally on the whole NA orthodoxy issue - “does that make you and your orthodox friends ‘Danglicans?” I snorted my tea right out my nose - not as bad as soda but still…

Blessings,

-Patrick

Do we need anything more to tell us that TEC is beyond hope.  It is hard for me to get excited about this as FW will be offically out of TEC in a few months, but if not, I will be.  This is the Canon to allow the PB to dismiss the San Joaquin Standing Committee, a power she doesn’t have now.  It is time for those of us who worship Jesus Christ as our living Lord, and not a metaphor, to move on and follow His commandments.  My wife and I pray for TEC and truth, to bring unity, in the church every night.  I think our prayers has been answered, just not in the way we expected, as we have been guided to put (my anger) and our frustrations behind us and do what we can to bring people to Christ. The trials we have been through since 2003 have brought us closer together and closer in our relationship with Jesus.  Now it is time to share His love and His demands on His followers as Scripture tells us.  It is time to move away from TEC idolatry, a good quote from Bishop Iker.

Well, I just made a comment and received an immediate email that informed me that the comments are being moderated.  In other words, they do not automatically go to the committee.  They are being screened…and probably, if not found acceptable or appropriate, they are discarded.  Now, how good is that!

OK - not a lawyer, but have to fisk this one. I can’t submit changes to the task force since I left TEO in Summer 2006.

Sec. 8. Any person accepting any office 1 in this Church shall well and faithfully perform
2 the duties of that office in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of this Church
3 and of the Diocese in which the office is being exercised.

The official ones - or the “double secret probation” canons? How about retroactive application? That would knock out the consecrators of the Philly 11 as well as VGR. Heck, it would depopulate the whole HOB and HOD. What about when the Canons of the TEO and Diocese are misaligned?

A lay person who holds an
4 office in this Church for which no compensation is received may be removed from that
5 office as follows:
6 (a) If the office is elective, removal may be without cause by vote of the electing body
7 duly noticed and held;

...secret ballot or roll-call not required. Audited quorum optional. I can see it now - instead of flying bishops we’ll have Via Media or Integrity tiger teams to pack the meetings.

or with cause for material disregard of the preceding sentence, or
8 for a stated intention to disregard it in the future,

Can you say “thoughtcrime”? I knew you could… This is the most odious clause in the whole canon, since one person’s “disregard” is another’s “defense of the faith”. Of course, “prophetic” actions approved by Schori, Spong, Borg, and Beers (the law firm from Hell) are exempt from this requirement.

...19 (d) Removal under this section creates a vacancy in the office to be filled in the same
20 manner as a vacancy created by death or resignation.

“You’ve been terminated” (to quote Arnold).

In short, the canon is an attempt to “lock in” the gains of revisionists. To quote Orwell,
“There will be no curiosity, no enjoyment of the process of life. All competing pleasures will be destroyed. But always — do not forget this, Winston — always there will be the intoxication of power, constantly increasing and constantly growing subtler. Always, at every moment, there will be the thrill of victory, the sensation of trampling on an enemy who is helpless. If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face . . . for ever”.
Anyway, that’s TEO’s schtick. Ours will have to be Romans 12:19-21 where it says:
Do not take revenge, my friends, but leave room for God’s wrath, for it is written: “It is mine to avenge; I will repay,” says the Lord. On the contrary:
“If your enemy is hungry, feed him; if he is thirsty, give him something to drink.
In doing this, you will heap burning coals on his head.”

Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good.

I think those called to remain in TEO for a season will be called to feed (force-feed?) TEO with the Word and sound exegesis in season and out of season.

Trimble’s blog is not working right at the moment. Jackie, do you have the e-mail address to send comments to? I’ll do it this week, but need that. Also, is there a snail mail address? I have contacts in my diocese who would sooner send a letter that way than e-mail. Thanks.

DavidSH: 
This post has all the links.  Here is a copy of the paragraph from that post that describes the commenting process and why you need to go to the first post to pick up all the links:

Time for commenting is very limited. We only have until June. The instructions for commenting are included at the beginning of each section but basically asks that you send an email message to (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address) with the actual Canon or Section number in the subject line. The Title IV has a feature that allows you to click on the header and an email box will appear. Guess the non-computer oriented among us will be the first to receive some of that ECUSA justice.

  I think one of our comments should address the terrible injustice to those who do not use the computer as their primary (or at all) means of communication. 
I also found a list of constitution and committee members here.

I hope that helps.  We would love it if you would share your thoughts and those of your friends with us.  I have come to think of actions in TEC sort of like crime in the neighborhood.  The more informed the residents, the better they are prepared to deal with or prevent the consequences.

I am sorry but you all seem to have misunderstood. TEC has not used the “Canons,” as you suggest, but have brought out the big “Cannons.” You have misread and misheard TEC.

LOL, Fr. Van.

I wonder if there is anything in the proposed canons that would make it easier for TEC to sue individual vestry members.  My impression is that in the suits in Va the vestry members were named, but dropped by the judge.

Thank you Jackie—I’ll be sending something out soon.

Seems to me that worrying about these issues now is rather like a victim arguing with their to-be murderer about whether or not the murder gets to sharpen the knife before slitting the victim’s throat.

Attention to - and action on - such canonical issues might have made a difference 30 or 40 years ago. It’s too late now. Especially since the apostates will continue to persecute the traditionalists and (now) moderate revisionists regardless of what the canons say… at this point, these changes are simply making formal and explicit what has already been happening in many dioceses for years.

Far too little; far too late.

pax,
LP

For those of us still within TEC, these canonical issues do matter.

Thank you Oscewicee.
LP - It is never too late for good men and women to do the right thing.  If you feel you are not called to this battle by all means follow your call but please do not stand on the sidelines throwing stones and yelling jeers at those who do feel called to the battle.

Thanks for those encouraging words LP, I’ll stick with what oscewicee said. Dave

Do we need anything more to tell us that TEC is beyond hope?

Submitted for consideration:  TEC (and these proposed changes in the canons prove it to virtually no doubt) as a continuing part of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church IS beyond hope.  I quadruple-dog dare any “Windsor” bishop to prove otherwise.  Publicly.  Now.  Right Now!

[lengthy off-topic comment about why people in TEC should leave deleted]

LP, it gets really tiresome to be told again and again that those of us who have not left TEC are “wrong.” We might equally charge that those who have left were “wrong” to abandon the fight. But we don’t. So maybe you could step down from your claim to know what is right for every soul in the church.

LP, it gets really tiresome to be told again and again that those of us who have not left TEC are “wrong.” We might equally charge that those who have left were “wrong” to abandon the fight. But we don’t. So maybe you could step down from your claim to know what is right for every soul in the church.

It’s even more tiresome—because it’s been going on for 30 years now—for those who haven’t fought to save an apostate institution in order that they might turn all their energy into more effectively fighting for the faith and the Anglican tradition (which was all that gave the institution any value in the first place) to continually be told that they are “wrong” and accused of “abandon[ing] the fight.”

I’m not claiming to know what is “right for every soul in the church”—certainly not any more (indeed, not even as much) as those who accuse non-PEcUSA Anglicans of “abandoning the fight” and being “wrong” or traitors… who accuse them of “jeering” or “throwing stones” when they urge folks to put the faith before the institution.

So, no, I don’t constantly and continually, on every possible thread, bang the drum of “leave PEcUSA or else.” Certainly nowhere near as much as those—like you—who bang the constant assumption that any “solution” which doesn’t involve sacrificing everything to the institionalist mindset of “in PEcUSA or nothing” is a wrong solution… and attacking anyone who, out of their charitable concern, suggests that such an assumption may be both false and dangerous.

——

If nothing else, grant that it’s worth considering the possibility that trying to tweak this or that canon in an institution which, obviously, will attack the “traditionalists” and even “moderate revisionists” regardless of what those canons say might just be a less effective witness to the Gospel than supporting or starting a non-PEcUSA Anglican church, unshackled by all that apostate baggage, would be.

It was to raise that possibility for consideration that my initial post was intended.

pax,
LP

LP - Your comments are in clear violation of commenting policy.   I will leave it up to the Commenatrix as to whether or not it gets deleted but you may consider yourself warned.
There was no slander simply a clear statement of fact.  Jesus Christ is the head of the church to which I belong.  I engage the battle to remind one and all that removing Him from that place removes one from the ranks of Christianity.  Those who answer this call - do it as a call. 

Whether you agree with this battle or not is frankly of no concern to me.  The fact that the battle has caused more than one to slow down as they approach the cliff’s edge has been encouragement to more than a few. 

In answer to your analogy above - any soldier who walks away from a battle before the commanding officer calls them from the field - regardless of the state of the battle in the mind of the soldier - is guilty of desertion.

And as a reminder - if God calls you to it, He will see you through it.  Don’t make the mistake that those of us in this battle are doing it thinking that reform is on the way.  The outcome is not our concern.  Ours is to simply do as called.

Clarification - I said we “might” accuse those who have left of abandonment. I don’t. I understand. Similar comprehension on your part would be appreciated.

Certainly nowhere near as much as those—like you—who bang the constant assumption that any “solution” which doesn’t involve sacrificing everything to the institionalist mindset of “in PEcUSA or nothing” is a wrong solution

You won’t find that I have done that.

Please consider that we *have* considered the other options, that we continue to consider the other options, but, in the meantime, here we are, here is where we are called to be, and within that context, we are going to be concerned about what positive actions we can take.

My apology for being grumpy about this, but we don’t need a wakeup call. We are wide awake.

Agree with oscewicee and Jackie, and LP isn’t the only one guilty of it.

Please consider that we *have* considered the other options, that we continue to consider the other options, but, in the meantime, here we are, here is where we are called to be, and within that context, we are going to be concerned about what positive actions we can take.

Oscewicee—fair enough… and I didn’t mean to suggest that this or that person was acting against their conscience nor against what they felt God wants them to do. Presumably, most people who follow the news here are committed to trying faithfully to follow the LORD. I didn’t mean to suggest otherwise… and apologies if it seemed that way.

Now, I do think—after much reflection and study—that rescuing PEcUSA is a lost cause and that staying in it is spiritually dangerous (as have many others—such as Fr. Matt), however I recognize that other folks have, after their own prayerful reflection, concluded otherwise. I think they are objectively mistaken in that conclusion… but I don’t, thereby, believe them to be insincere or impious; merely dangerously mistaken. An intellectual/theological disagreement, not a personal attack or condemnation.

[remainder of comment deleted as off topic; this thread is about the proposed canonical changes in TEC—not about whether people should be leaving TEC]

LP, I’m not going to spend time replying to most of you wrote—sorry!—other than to say, for myself, please don’t assume that the thought has never crossed my mind of leaving TEC. To be honest, it’s on my mind every day. It’s just that I haven’t come to the point you’re obviously at. You may certainly pray for me and my situation though, so that I have further clarification. Please, do it often. Dave

You may certainly pray

Prayers for faithful Anglicans—in whatever jurisdiction—and for their ultimate unity in a jurisdiction & communion which is faithful to God’s will—to Scripture, Tradition and the Church—are among my most regular.

The collect for the church (1928 BCP version) is a wonderful prayer for this intention, and appropriate among the collects for Morning and Evening prayer on any day:

O GRACIOUS Father, we humbly beseech thee for thy holy Catholic Church; that thou wouldest be pleased
to fill it with all truth, in all peace. Where it is corrupt, purify it; where it is in error, direct it; where in any thing it is amiss, reform it. Where it is right, establish it; where it is in want, provide for it; where it is divided, reunite it; for the sake of him who died and rose again, and ever liveth to make intercession for us, Jesus Christ, thy Son, our Lord. Amen.

pax,
LP

So, bottom line, who’s going to communicate with their diocesan and their standing committee that they need to stand in front of the freight train of the canonical onslaught that is about to be unleashed?

AR - I think we all should.  Even if you have left TEC, I think you should take pen to paper or finger to keyboard and let your current or former diocesan know your thoughts and how these canon changes will further erode the membership.
LP - I did not accuse you of abandoning the fight.  If you were called to leave, thank you for following God’s call.  However, that being said - any time, any place where God’s Word can be defended is a wonderful opportunity.  If every person who has silently walked out the door had taken a shift on the Little Stone Bridge we might not be here today.
As to the future of ECUSA?  There is no doubt in my mind that God will redeem this church.  The fact that He may use fire and brimstone and leave ashes in His wake notwithstanding, I know He will act.

God in heaven!  These proposed “laws” are not the work of any church of Jesus Christ!  These would be hard news in a police state, or a secret underground organization!  Their very existence ACKNOWLEDGES they have consciences like up AGAINST them!  Like Masternav I’m glad I’m out, but I still have friends IN TEC.  I can and will pray for them.  And I still pray for the bishops.  My prayer is that Jesus will be with them each day in a way that they KNOW it is Him.  That He will strengthen and bless those who are leading rightly, bring to repentance those who are not, and for those who will not repent, get them OUT of authority over PEOPLE!

In answer to your analogy above - any soldier who walks away from a battle before the commanding officer calls them from the field - regardless of the state of the battle in the mind of the soldier - is guilty of desertion.

I am not holding my breath waiting for you to report to the commander’s local deputy for orders.

There is much written here as if the Episcopal Church is The Church, period dot, from which departure is just wrong no matter where it goes or what it starts teaching.  I invite those who hold this to consider why the Supremacy and the Assumption are so much worse than what is becoming the teaching of TEC now, when the Supremacy was upheld by Becket and the Assumption by Luther.

Yes, I know you object to other things.  I just picked a couple that you object to, that some of your heroes did not scruple at.

Every Orthodox and faithful Christian is on the “right” side at this moment in the history of Christ’s visible presence on earth (His BODY, the Church.) 
Those on the inside of TEC, AND those on the outside, those in the Global Anglican communion, and even those just to the side watching, seem to be all moving toward this amazing moment, soon to occur, when God allows apostates in leadersip to clearly demonstrate just who they are and whom they serve, for all the world to see. Christ’s Holy Spirit does not dwell with them, and their foolishness and hard-heartedness is plain to see.

At this time, the response of the faithful will be simple and easy , and it appears that our prayers for renewal and clarity have been powerfully answered as GC ‘09 embraces changes such as these. (Oh, and you know there will be others, even bolder than these.)

LORD, Your will be done!
Faithful brethren - Be ready
Carrie in MD

Acquiring the power to discipline church laity, especially vestry members, is intended to take away local control of parishes and vest it in the general convention, and make it even harder for a departing parish to keep its property.

Mark Brown
San Angelo, Texas
June 8, 2008

So long as we entrust the management of the Church to a mega-vestry, the greater portion of which has no concept of the Faith, and which is commandered by a majority of equally ignorant and power-mad bishops, we’re sure to see ever-increasing control of the orthodox presbytery and laity. The first convention in Baltimore may have had only a few bishops meeting around a table at Old St Paul’s rcctory, sharing a bottle of “amber-coloured” fluid, but they knew the Faith of the Church!

By and large, the Continuum doesn’t offer a great deal of hope. They’re up to their eyeballs in episcopacy, and too many unlettered presbyters who have deluded themselves that they’ve returned to the good old days, and my experience has been that all too many of their churches are comprised of congregants who, as we used to joke, are Episcopalians because “being one doesn’t interfere with one’s politics or religion.

I just wish that more of us would recall the old gospel song, “Dare to be a Daniel”!

Sauve qui peut!