Presiding Bishop responds to GAFCON statement

This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers. Anglicans will continue to worship God in their churches, serve the hungry and needy in their communities, and build missional relationships with others across the globe, despite the desire of a few leaders to narrow the influence of the gospel.

Believe it or not, I agree with most of the content of this statement.  However, I disagree with KJS as regards the intended audience to whom this statement should be addressed.

The statement as a whole is an interesting study in projection.

“I do not recognize you”
KJS
Shalom,
Intercessor

Methinks Kate doesn’t like being de facto ousted from her supposed bishopric by half of the Anglican Communion.

Note WRT #1 - my reference to “this statement” = KJS’s statement, not the GAFCon statement

Bye-Bye, Mizz Schori…
815 can lament all it wants. We’ve been lamenting them for long enough.

Once again, TEO blinks at reality.

Did some bovine just emit?

The Episcopal Club Welcomes You (unless you believe in the Bible etc.)

“Much of the Anglican world must be lamenting the latest emission from GAFCON.” “Emission?” what an interesting choice of word!!???!! She knows it’s not a carbon emission, maybe she thinks she was reading a lab report…

My opinion- she does not care- they have hijacked the Church- and along with it over $ 581 million dollars.  They have what they want- and I am very suspect that they are breaching fiduciary responsibilities on the funds they now control.

Emission?

Rather strange choice of word, Kate.  Has the LBGT crowd got you totally into their mindset?

I think that squids “emit”

Notice what is missing in KJS’s statement in the list of things Anglicans do - “Spread the Gospel”.  Not interesting to her?

“Emission” is an insulting term for the statement of fellow bishops and primates (whatever one thinks of it) and merely confirms GAFCON’s accusation that they have been treated in condescending, colonial fashion.  And “a few leaders”?  She may not like this, but one thing this is not: a “few” leaders.  All KJS does with this statement is expose herself as the smug, petty, and intolerant person she is.  Certainly you won’t find any of the joy in her “emissions” that shines in the (Big-G) Gospel proclamations of those she so cavalierly dismisses.  There’s nothing here, though, to get upset about.  She is, after all, rather irrelevant henceforth, is she not?

She is right… we all support motherhood, America and hot lunch for Orphans… I have never thought of scripture as “narrow” unless someone takes it that way. By her actions and words the Presiding Hiccup shows what a closed minded liberal she and her sycophats have become as the gained power.

“merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.”

Um, sorry Ms. Shori, it is YOUR beliefs that do not line with the Bible.  Seven times the Bible makes it clear that homosexual relationships are a sin.  Christ himself said “I am the way, the truth and the life; no one comes to the Father except through me”.  Yet you encourage homosexual relationships, and have gone on record that you do not believe that Christ is the only way to the Father. 

I call you to either repent of you heresy, or to resign.  You are leading others astray with YOUR beliefs that you are imposing upon the TEC.  So don’t you lecture us about who the “true believers” are.  I cannot judge your heart, but your actions have certainly shown that you do not believe that Christ is the way, the truth and the life.

At the VERY least, she didn’t name the MDG’s.  Omitting the great commission is expected.

I know that tensions are high, but it is quite unbecoming that she compares the GAFCON statement to flatulence.  Which is what she is doing.  The word “emission” in this context is quite unfortunate and distasteful.
As for “missional relationships” and “relational encounters,” I am not sure exactly what those are.  But they sound ominous.

Interesting!

One reference to God, no reference to the Scripture, Christ or the Holy Spirit.

No reference to the Great Commission.

No reference to saving souls, bringing the un-churched to Christ.

But perhaps I expect too much: a Spiritually, Scripturally based response to the Spiritually, Scripturally based Statement and Declaration.

Interesting, indeed!

of course she is breaching fiduciary responsibilities, but more importantly she was breached spiritual and Biblical responsibilities

Ahhh, RA, but if you ignore her she may just “emission-a-late” all over you.

“Emission” goes along with her Easter message of methane spewing cows.
Not Another Episcopal Church Blog

“We look forward to the opportunities of the Lambeth Conference for constructive conversation, inspired prayer, and relational encounters.”

My, she does have a absolute talent for saying absolutely nothing meaningful, yet make it sound profound. She must have been a politician in a previous life.

This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.

Yes, and this chapter is where the lunatic power-mad Loon Left get their back sides handed to them for their abuse and bigotry.

-Jim+

“No reference to the Great Commission.” Well, perhaps, but she does mention the Great Emission…sorry, my last, I promise.

Why should she care?  She doesn’t give a rip about the Anglican Communion, and GAFCON’s statement will have no effect on how courts rule on property disputes.  Remember, real estate is all that matters.

RE: “I know that tensions are high, but it is quite unbecoming that she compares the GAFCON statement to flatulence.”

Heh—I dunno, she may have been trying to use another word.  Or meaning “gas emissions from Wicked Gas Guzzling SUVS In Defiance of the MDGs” . . . ; > )

Or some little girl or boy is advising her on the Very Best Spite to serve up and they came up with that word.  ; > )

If it’s that latter than . . . there’s some angry advisors bending her ear, and she’s angry too.

Good.

Why doesn’t the Episcopal Church stop calling itself Anglican and just declare itself an international communion in its own right?  Wouldn’t that save them a lot of trouble?  Or that jeopardize their hold on the money and property?

“[The]Left get their back sides handed to them for their abuse and bigotry.” I’m finding that an interesting picture—-will they get spanked?

This statement has the smell of arrogance.  I guess when the good ship TEC hits the bottom of the ocean, Mrs. Shori will simply say, “Let’s go squid fishing.”

I’m liking the GAFCON statment more and more, as it appears to have really gotten under her skin—must be a stronger statement than I originally thought!

On second thought, perhaps we are being too harsh on the PB.

Remember, she was the recipient of a HUGE emission from Judge Bellows last week and she’s no doubt a bit down-in-the-mouth.

merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.

To dismiss the Christians at GAFCON in this way says it all. She should have slept on this outburst. Now she has placed herself clearly in one category of the GAFCON “emission(?!?)”.

Gafcon attendees have “emissions.” At Lambeth they will have “relational encounters.”

This confirms my position that Gafcon attendees should not attend Lambeth. The last thing that needs to happen during a relational encounter is an emission.

despite the desire of a few leaders to narrow the influence of the gospel

Actually it broadens the influence of the gospel…

If we pretend it doesn’t exist, maybe it will go away????  I liked the bovine emission theory!

“Much of the Anglican world must be…”

For her to have responded in any other way would have caused gnashing of teeth from those who look up to 815. My my first thought after reading was that she responded the only way she could

Clarification:  For KJS statement, not the Jerusalem statement!

DeeBee, I think you nailed it in your first post.

Oops, I mean post number 1 on this thread.

Someone, please send a thank you note to the PB for this response. It has brightened my day, and will provide fodder for months to come.

My word!  Such a huffy response to a statement declared by the TEC spokespersons as insignificant. 

If someone sees smoke coming out of 815, don’t think it has anything to do with a pope selection.

To TEC: Install primatial catalytic converters to reduce the emissions.
(C)harley (H)enry IV, a/k/a Methane Man

Come on folks even I got that reference…“emission” translates into “s***” which is exactly what she meant to say. She didn’t call the declaration flatulance…she called it the other.
Bye Bye Kate…guess what you’ve been excommunicated whether you care or not. “struggle for dominance of those who consider themselves the only true believers.” Yep, True believers we are…of Jesus Christ, Lord of Lord, King of Kings and forever. Amen.
“narrow the influence of the gospel” Hmmm like the road is narrow to Calvary and salvation and wide to….

The ship of TEC is heading for the rocks and the captain is calling for more speed and to hold course.  Could it be any clearer?

“Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable.”

Does she mean like the Methodists found it uncomfortable, or the Puritans who found it very uncomfortable after the Act of Uniformity was passed…

The bored tone of KJS’s comments are intentional.  This is war.  And #18 Nasty, Brutish & Short, don’t you think some enterprising reporter like Ruth Geldhill ought to ask the simple bishop of New Hampshire, Gene Robinson what his definition of ‘relational encounters’ is?

The Presiding Bishop is not our Bishop… With her theology she is persona non grata in our household.
It’s all about power and the money trail…

Actually, I think I like the first clause the best: “Much of the Anglican world must be lamenting…”  It’s like, “Lament it NOW, PROLES!  You.  That’s right, you in the back pew.  START. LAMENTING. IT. NOW!!!!

No one ever leaves a star!!!!”

I think with some judicious editing I can make lemonade out of this:

Much of the Anglican world must be <s>lamenting</s> celebrating the latest <s>emission</s> declaration from GAFCON. AuthenticAnglicanism <s>has always been</s> is <s>broader than some find comfortable</s> part of the Church catholic and adheres to the faith once delivered. This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, <s>merely another chapter</s> but it is a wonderful broadside fired in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves <s>the only true believers</s> enlightened and prophetic while all others who actually believe the gospel are knuckle dragging Neanderthals. Anglicans will continue to worship God in their churches, serve the hungry and needy in their communities, and build missional relationships with others across the globe, despite the desire of a few leaders to <s>narrow the influence of</s> eviscerate the gospel. We look forward to the opportunities of the <s>Lambeth Conference</s> GAFCON Primates Council for constructive conversation, inspired prayer, and relational encounters.

“Much of the Anglican world” was present at GAFCON and I don’t think they are lamenting anything.

“Why doesn’t the Episcopal Church stop calling itself Anglican and just declare itself an international communion in its own right?  Wouldn’t that save them a lot of trouble?”

The point is not to move on, diezba, but to corrupt and destroy something venerable, or beautiful, or even godly. The father of lies infiltrates her methodologies and practises even more so than even she is aware.

Sad. Tragic. Soul-destroying.

We have seen regrettably numerous examples of the Presiding Pestilence’s gross crudity: the recent Easter message (now THERE was an emission), the scandalous treatment of Bishop McBurney, the oven-mitt hat, and on and on.  There isn’t any Christianity in any of those, and there is none in this
whiney diatribe, either. It’s just gauche. Disgusting.

Diezba, how about this definition?  TEC = The Episcopal Communion.  That, in effect, is what it now IS, folks!

This is a heart-felt cry of the ECUSA outcast:
Thank God we are close to being free of the evil dominance of ECUSA and its persecution of those who are faithful to Holy Scripture, the Church’s teaching and the faith of the Apostles!

Once again, reads like it was written by a lawyer—the ambiguity of “much” even though over half of practicing Anglicans were represented at GAFCON, “emission,” the absurd reference to “a few,” etc.—pretty much everything other than “relational encounters.”  But that’s in the last sentence, so perhaps 815 just added that to a draft they received.  I’m really sorry if this sounds uncharitable, but having read any number of letters discussed on this site over the last few years, I think that’s a reasonable conclusion, to think that lawyers draft what are supposed to be theological or ecclesial documents.  I hope I’m wrong.

35) GH…You’re killing me here…  Totally killing me.

Well, at least we’ve discovered KJS’s “tipping point”...or should I say “snapping point?” Meltdown, meltdown….and look what ++Rowan says: “Now, now, children, calm down! Let’s have some milk and cookies and be friends again!”  Talk about emissions!

“...merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.”

Perchance like someone who, in their self-absorbed certainty of their unique hold on the truth, denies their own mother the Orthodox funeral she had requested?

If we take satisfaction in having pissed her off, our emotional response is really no more mature than hers.  Schori may be irrelevant in some aspects but she remains a powerful player in the ongoing destruction of the Episcopal Church.  Granted, her latest emission of ink reported her is more of the same ... what did anyone expect?  Repentance?  No, she’s thrown some incense on the hearth, taken up her instrument and begun to restrenghten her spell with her chant.  If you really challenge her, she will turn into a snake ... and that is exactly what has been revealed by the departing congregations and dioceses.  An angry snake with no thought but to destroy her opponent.  Now, granted, this is personalizing evil for the sake of making a point.  We cannot prevent evil but only serve it by wishing harm of any sort on the person of Schiori and her minions.  That cannot be our goal else our stroke will go amiss and fall upon our own necks.  Offer her to come out of her self-imposed darkness, lead her if possible ... but as with any passage through Hades, we must not hearken to the voices of the dead or eat of their food.  If there is good within TEC, our Lord will preserve it somehow.

Explain please why we are suppose to accept the Holy Spirit is acting in the case of GLBTQXYZ agenda and, of course, GC but at any other time it is an emission?

Did this woman even read the Jerusalem Declaration?  Does she have any idea how many Anglicans signed on to it?  I think she considers it beneath her dignity to read it or respond to any statement therein.  Anyone could write her comment about anything anyone says.  This is not a “response”, this is a witless diatribe.

“If someone sees smoke coming out of 815, don’t think it has anything to do with a pope selection.” That’s “poop selection,” and I wouldn’t light any matches!

It would appear that like a Dr. Goebbels, she thinks that the Reich will still succeed. Long after the Battle of Britain she’s still sitting in the bunker singing Bomben Auf England. I picture her standing before the dread judgement seat beginning to melt until all that is left is a crumpled cope, with her signature, tasteless LGBT multi-colored mitre and her crozier which looks more like unto an old broom. My sympathies to Mr. Schorri, its going to be a long ride home.

She’s not too worried.  They will always be able to claim their own “communion” (don’t forget all the banners showing all the countries TEC occupied), and the historic connection to COE.  This keeps their brand name up to snuff in their mind.  The Gafconners, and all they can attract will just be interlopers on their brand name.  It will be “Believe whatever you want, come on down next Sunday to make yourself feel good about yourself. We’ve got the incense and vestements to prove we are the real show.”

I heard that after the Gafcon statement ++KJS got on the phone with the ABC and said, “Robbie, Robbie, my Church is revolting,” and that he responded, “It certainly is.”

“Much of the Anglican world must be lamenting the latest emission from GAFCON.”

??? EMISSION ??? Oh Dear!!!

Is this a joke??? Surely she did not write this statement, review it, or approve it prior to publication???!!!!

EMISSION???  I can barely type for laughing!!!

I am so glad that +KJS can fulfill my expectations so easily.  I expected nothing less from her than pladitudes about feeding the hungry etc. with little about proclaiming that Good News of God in Christ.

Yes, Anglicanism has a history of broadness of expression of the Faith.  But it also has a long history of unity in essentials.  What TECUSA is doing is redefining the essentials.  While I can, with integrity, worship with those who say “mass” or “Eucharist” or “Holy Commuion” or “The Lord’s Supper” and woship in their style and fashion.  I even understand some latitude in how the bread and wine become the Body and Blood of Jesus.  I even accept that there are those who accept double predestination and those who say it is all free will.  But I cannot worship or share commuion with someone who does not believe that Jesus is uniquely fully human and fully divine.  I can’t share Table fellowship with someone who thinks that Jesus is just a way (or even the best way) to God.  I cannot share fellowship with someone who does not believe that God is a Trinity of persons in unity of essence.  I cannot share fellowship with someone who is willing to split the Anglican Communion (let alone TECUSA) over something they claim to be adiaphora.  I cannot share fellowship with someone who redefined the essentials in the face of universal requests not to do so.

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

“merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.”

And who wrote the chapter that says that those who suppose themselves true believers depose 80 year old men they disagree with?

Here’s a thought: If she confuses emissions with missives I wonder what she makes of epistles?

Ha! The knee-slapper for me is her whine, the desire of a few leaders to narrow the influence of the gospel.

Matthew 7:14
Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.

This short answer will work for a picnic with sporks. Lots of baked beans and deviled eggs to boot.

Seething….just like Linda Blair.  “The power of Christ compells you”.  Duck!  She’s about to hurl some nasty green stuff….

Your most holy oceanographer of litigation has consistently failed to understand that one can show concern and compassion without dropping one’s standards.  (This is an ongoing error of those on the Left.)

But DeeBee in #1 just about nailed what Schori’s emission is all about.

Reading this is like watching one of those “What Happened to the Child Stars?” specials on TV.

The response is, “Oh, yeah, Katharine Schori.  I wondered what ever happened to her.”

Emission?  Well, I figured that there must be a definition more expansive than the one I would use…you know, some kind of church talk or something.  But I’ll be darned if I can find one.

What an amazing and unfortunate use of the word, especially after her Easter message.  She is exhibiting a bit of an obsession with emissions.  Perhaps she is a difficult person to live with.

I am awaiting the poetry I know will soon be coming, or perhaps song lyrics.

#35 Going Home,  I decided to write YOU a thank you note for this best laugh of the day post. Best of the thread IMHO.  Grace and peace.

Emissions have been much on Mrs. Schori’s mind lately - they featured in her Easter Message, and now she uses the word to refer to the GAFCON statement. The poor woman is confused - she is the source of emissions, and never fails to pass gas at every opportunity.

Dear Mr. or Ms. Going Home
I think I love you.

GMM

“merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.”  Merely another chapter in the ongoing struggle between the Lord of this World, who would love to deceive as many as he can, and the the believers in Our Lord Jesus the Christ.  Thanks to GAFCON, the dichotomy has become a lot clearer.

Interesting that Kate signs herself so clearly as Presiding Bishop and Primate, when, by virtue of being a woman cannot be the former, and by not being an archbishop she is not the latter.

She’s delusional….like the rest of the heretics!

Maybe she’s been taking lessons in prose style from Jake? Big mistake, losing it in an undignified manner like that.

Me thinks Madam Schori doth emit too much

another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.

As if you and I believe the exact same things?  As if power is my motivation, but not (oohnooo) yours? 

Moron. 

Anglicans will continue to worship God in their churches, serve the hungry and needy in their communities, and build missional relationships with others across the globe, despite the desire of a few leaders to narrow the influence of the gospel.

Nice to know that “preaching Christ and Him crucified,” gets an honorable mention in there.  Waitaminute - come to think of it, this isn’t mentioned at all!  I’m SHOCKED - SHOCKED I TELL YOU!!

Oh well, now we can get back to business as usual.  After all, it’s preferable to sell perfume and give the profit for the welfare of the poor, rather than annointing the Lord’s feet with it.

Very well said, B.Hunter in post #16. You’ve said all that needs to be said with clarity and with dignity. Unfortunately, I tend to get a bit carried away, and was thinking of saying something like “What a crock of you-know-what!”, along the lines of Ms. Schori’s own indelicate reference to “emissions.” However, that would just bring me down to Ms. Schori’s level of dialogue.

We should make a pact that henceforth all statements made by the PB will be referred to as “emissions”.  (I almost said “pass a resolution” but that would be too easy.)

How rich - “struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.”  This from the individual leading the strike suits against faithful Christian believers who disagree with her secularist innovations; this from the individual who purported to arrogate the power to herself to dissolve the SJ Standing Committee - power she clearly does not have; this from the leader of the organization that, through its various tentacles, has moved aggressively to shut off ordinands from “those” seminaries and moves quickly to flip parishes to revisionism at the first hint of a rector retirement.  Yes, even the one that champs at the bit to send the stormtroopers in to Fort Worth to ram WO down their throats.

I shudder to see what a real “struggle for dominance” is if Schori isn’t leading one.  Thank goodness she isn’t in control of the powers of the state.

Thank goodness she isn’t in control of the powers of the state.

No, but she is in league with them.  Secularism is the only true religion of Schori and her cabal; Anglicanism is just a front for their operations.

Primate??? Since when???

The office of “Presiding Bishop” was specifically designed to NOT be the same thing as the office of an “Archbishop.” This is a simple historical fact, undisputed by any historian of the PECUSA. Need I cite chapter and verse of the deliberations that have shaped the office of Presiding Bishop since the days of Bishop Seabury?

Setting aside for a moment the issue of WO, the simple fact of the matter is that if one is NOT an “Archbishop” than one cannot, by definition, be a “Primate.” 

I am unaware of ANY Presiding Bishop EVER styling himself either “Archbishop” or “Primate.”

Can it be that the current holder of the office of Presiding Bishop is, perhaps, “seeking dominance” over those orthodox few ( and, yes, we will set aside for the moment the issue of what constitutes true orthodoxy) who consider themselves to still be members of the Gnostic “church” that she presides over?

Remarkable and highly dense statement.  I wonder if she included any emiticons in her official version.

So much to unpack:

1. “Much of the Anglican world must be lamenting the latest emission from GAFCON.”

Why the vague much and the speculative “must be?”  The tone begins as the humble reflection of a disturbed cleric, which falls into condescending bitterness in word choice.  Note the consistent reference to Anglicans as opposed to Episcopalians, as if she is speaking on the behalf of all liberal Anglicans.  Curious.

“2. Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable.”

This is a dense, multi purpose sentence for radicals.  Note that the use of the vague word “Anglicanism” hides the issues (we are not just the gay church).  Of course, she is stating that those who cannot tolerate the historic (“always” - as if Cramner supported SSBs) diversity are causing the lamentations.  Those lamentable emissions are all out of proportion to the mere discomfort of the emitters. 

“3. This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.”

Again, quite dense.  The GAFCON statement “does not represent the end of Anglicanism,” implying that this is what GAFCON desires.  She counters that we will prevent that, and continue the revolution.  This is a “centuries-old struggle” (again – as if Seabury embraced liberation theology) against those who want to dominate us, which she bitterly describes as “those who consider themselves the only true believers.”  Wow. And this is an official statement of a head cleric.

4.  “Anglicans will continue to worship God in their churches, serve the hungry and needy in their communities, and build missional relationships with others across the globe, despite the desire of a few leaders to narrow the influence of the gospel.”

Here she shifts gears to reassure the base that nothing will change.  She also shifts characterization of GAFCON to “a few leaders” who desire to “narrow the influence of the gospel,” as if a small clique were campaigning against evangelism.  But the gospel to her is her notions of inclusiveness: code words.  “Missional relationships” mean spreading liberal ideology with one hand, while passing out MDGs with the other.

5. “We look forward to the opportunities of the Lambeth Conference for constructive conversation, inspired prayer, and relational encounters.”

This statement reminds the base that they are still going to Lambeth.  We (your caring leaders) support the ABC’s wonderful, constructive, and timely (and, of course, independent) idea of a conference lacking any deliberation or motions, whatsoever.  (Yes, it is merely a coincidence that Lambeth will have indaba and TEC ubuntu.)

Can anybody give me the email address of the Archbishop of Canterbury?

It is a sad day indeed when we are told that Sin is righteousness and righteousness is sin. I pray for the PB that one day ahe will meet and know the Lord Jesus Christ.

Can anybody give me the email address of the Archbishop of Canterbury?

It’s (JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

My husband just pointed out that we should exschoriate TEC.

It is a sad day indeed when we are told that Sin is righteousness and righteousness is sin. I pray for the PB that one day ahe will meet and know the Lord Jesus Christ.
[94] Posted by Jake on 06-30-2008 at 04:30 PM
————————————
Isaiah 64:6 Ever hear of it ?
Your justifications for excluding people are based on being something repugnant to the Lord.

Hypocrisy reigns supreme here.

If your request was not in jest regarding email address for ABC—- for email information go to: http://www.archbishopofcanterbury.org

I’m stunned by the dismissive and self-lauding tone of this.  May this serve to remind us all to walk in lowliness and genuine humility.

She uses ‘emission’ because she daren’t use any other word without threatening her base. As for the rest of it, The Episcopal Church has more or less jettisoned turning the other cheek with the rest of the inconvenient bits of the Bible.

The Episcopal Church: We blink at reality more than fifteen times a minute.

Please—there are still a number in TEC who utterly repudiate these remarks and the direction of the denomination.

[91]

Primate??? Since when???

CANON I.2.2-4(a) The Presiding Bishop shall be the Chief Pastor and Primate of the Church….

Another post-modern analysis from a TEC leader: objective right and wrong can’t be the issue since they doesn’t exist. It’s about the struggle for power. No wonder she doesn’t get it. And also why she’s chosen lawsuits to settle things.

Please—there are still a number in TEC who utterly repudiate these remarks and the direction of the denomination.

Then we’ll be looking forward to you all sending the Presiding Plaintiff back to pester seafood at the first possible juncture.

#69, Phil Snyder: “Preach it, brother!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
desertpadre

Do you think Bishop Kate would sign the CAFCON statement? Her response is very degrading and an insult to a major section of the body of Christ.

Thee Archbishop of Canterbury’s email is known only to Bp. Howe and maybe Ephriam Radner, and I am reasonably sure they are sworn to secrecy and both are men of their word.  If you go to the ABoC’s website, you can navigate to a page to leave a message for Lambeth palace.
Personally, I recommend a real letter.  My own, some while back, received a very cordial reply from Canon Norman (the Secretary for Anglican Communion Affairs).  It was substantially boilerplate, but had enough reference to my own letter to make me believe someone had actually read the letter and was responding to what I had to say.  They also sent along a pile of information.  It will cost you one overseas airmail stamp, which I think is still under a buck.  Mail to the ABoC:
Lambeth Palace
London
SE1 7JU
United Kingdom

Unfortunately, the poor fellow gets so much mail that he has his own postal code.

Perhaps more important for those of us still in TEC would be to write letters of apology to the Gafcon primates for the insulting way in which they have been addressed.  And to offer our support to their efforts to straighten out this mess.

Re:  Shori

You know, I don’t care what she thinks - she is about as relevant to the Christian Faith as the Easter Bunny is to the reality of Easter. 

She does lay some mighty fine eggs though, I have admit that.

She still doesn’t get it.

Is she getting just a little CRANKY?

#91 Blue Narrative and #102 Bill Cool, please explain about the presiding bishop not being an archbishop or primate.  I just assumed that the title of presiding bishop was just an American variation on the same title and position as an archbishop which is a primate.

Greetings Fellow Anglicans,
Just one point to make here. 
1.  The Bishop Jefferts-Schori is now called upon to resign her post immediately for the following:
“High Crimes and Felonies” that has been committed against The Body of Christ and His true believers.  Therefore the conservative bishops in the house should form a commission to move forward to investigate the wrongdoings that the presiding bishop is being accused of.  The orthodox bishops do not need to worry about dithering bout they do not have the authority.  They do have the authority given to them by God for this purpose.  They have to uphold their oath of office according to God in 1 & 2 St. Timothy and St. Titus.  They must stand as guardians of the faith and do something about it.
Pax,
+Stonewall

Greetings Fellow Anglicans,
Another point to make here that I will now address to Mr. Gene Robinson, what is your definition of RELATIONAL ENCOUNTERS?
+Stonewall

(Thoroughly OT) Stonewall—could you please explain why for a long time you were signing your posts, “Pax Romana”?

Would Schori sign the GAFCON statement? You bet she would. She will sign anything, as we have seen her do. Now, do you mean would she support the GAFCON statement—that’s a whole different story. But sign a pledge,take an oath, recite a Creed—no problem there. Her word or signature mean nothing.
And as to her success in ruining ECUSA and taking the million$—exactly so. She has that to pull to her bosom on a cold winter’s night—plus the everlasting blather of the current ABC

Mystic,
When the Episcopal Church broke off from the CoE in the 1780s there was considerable time spent determining its structure. As with the CoE, there were high and low church congregations, and variations of ecclesiology suggested from catholic hierarchy to congregationalist.
The compromise that was reached determined that there would indeed be bishops and dioceses, but no title “archbishop” and no bishop, arch or otherwise, with metropolitan powers.  The Presiding Bishop was literally that- the bishop who presided at meetings of the House of Bishops. Until the 1920s (I believe, working from memory) the presiding bishop was the active diocesan with the earliest consecration date. As time went on, a variety of administrative duties were added, and the job took on a life of its own.
The PB began to take on primatial duties with the formation of the AC in the 1880s and the expansion of ecumenism in the 20th century.  It was only fairly recently that the canons were changed to include the title “primate” in the PB’s signature.  To date, as witnessed at Dar, the PB does not have the level of authority enjoyed by most of the primates of the Communion.

There is no mention of Christ in her statement. There is no mention of spreading the Gospel. I don’t think she and her followers get it. We are here ro serve Christ not LGBT.

The ability to laugh at all of this suggests that things may be getting better!  ACI—listening? Try throwing some jokes into your forthcoming response to Gafcon. Lighten up!

I hope no one hurls invectives at Schori.  I am convinced she doesn’t know better, unlike, perhaps, some of the former “Windsor Bishops” that knew the Truth but in the end just weren’t unable to stand for it.  Schori is playing a role here that in the end may work to God’s glory.

Note that the word Gospel is not capitalized in the statement.  So that would be the one-size-fits-all, generic, many ways to the divine (also not capitalized), delivered to TEC in the latter 20th Century gospel, as opposed to the one and only, proper noun, Divine Word of God, Gospel of Jesus Christ, Our Lord and Savior.

‘Anglicans will continue to worship God in their churches, serve the hungry and needy in their communities, and build missional relationships with others across the globe’

This much is true.  Further, Anglicans will continue to spread the gospel of Jesus Christ to a world in desperate need.  The point KJS misses is that TEC will, in its current state of heterodoxy, not be invited to move forth in the world by the majority of Anglicans.  The majority is orthodox, it is on the move, and TEC is drifting off in the dust.

Please guys, pick yourself up, dust yourself off and rejoin the orthodox Anglicans.  Time is running out.

Thank you tjmcmahon.  I didn’t know any of that.  Lack of specifically Anglican history is one of the downfalls of attending a non-denominational seminary.  So, what are the main differences between the duties and authority of a presiding bishop and the kind of archbishop/primate the other provinces have?  After that, I’ll stop distracting from the topic.

Mrs. Schori does not believe that Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and the life.  How can she make statements about the christian faith and not be a christian.  It does not make sense.  You know! I still cannot comprehend what in the world she is saying.  She says, Gafcon attendees have emissions! What? You mean Gafcon attendees are full of Gas?  Does this make sense to anyone breathing or relatively sane on this planet. Wait! May-be she is an alien from Mars.

I worry and am sad for the many members of TEO who are thoroughly Christian in their beliefs and commitment to the Lord and know Him as their saviour.  It’s easy enough for us to say that they ought to recognize the apostasy in TEC but the leadership and extreme revisionists may not be in the scope of their vision.  After all not every TEC member is a Schori or Chane or Bruno or Beisner. After all we can be just as guilty as that in our own walk.  It is folk like Deacon Phil Sarah and many other reasserters who remain within TEC as a witness to them.  But we should be careful not to forget those folk in the muddy middle, wrong perhaps, not understanding perhaps, yet still believers.

The PB is way, way, way beyond the parameters of Anglicanisms conception of ‘broad’.  She and the leadership are off the page. 

“Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable”

Right now, there is a protocol officer at Buckingham Palace who is in a frenzy as he consults with ministers and Lambeth Palace over whether one can, indeed, present to the Queen the sort of person who references a pronouncement of Archbishops of the Church as an “emission.”  The wine steward is moving the good sherry back down to the cellar, lest some be accidentally served to Mrs. Schiori.
Lambeth Palace is willing to countenance many things from gay weddings to depositions, but bad manners and insulting public statements are beyond the Pale.

All I can say in response to her statement is God Bless GAFCON!

#123(Bill C.) I agree with your statements and I know many people who are devoted to Jesus Christ are still in TEC, but they need to look at the “whole picture” of what’s going on at TEC. The presiding bishop of their church is not a christian but a new age, pantheist. She believes that homosexuals can be ordained priests and bishops.  She also believes in same sex blessings and marriages.  As human beings, we have the right to choose what is right and wrong.  These people who are in orthodox parishes but their diocese is liberal better be aware of what might be lurking around the corner.  I belonged to a parish in northern california who is faced with this deliema of being the only orthodox parish in a liberal diocese AND a liberal bishop.

Mrs. Schori refers to Jesus as a woman. I think she has emission issues and she better take something for it before she goes to the Lambeth Conference.

This statement deserves a thorough fisking.

Much of the Anglican world must be lamenting the latest emission from GAFCON.

Note “much” rather than “most”. This is an implicit acknowledgement that GAFCON represents the majority. “[M]ust be lamenting”: hopeful speculation. Where are the lamenting masses? The use of “emission” has been noted above. Still, it is fun to see how “emission” is normally used.

Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable.

We certainly don’t want any non-inclusive bigots narrowing the definition of Christianity. And I was not aware that “comfort” was a goal. Aren’t we supposed to pick up our crosses to follow Him?

This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers.

Is the PB saying that the participants of GAFCON are “true believers”, just not the “only” ones? But this collapses from internal inconsistency. How can a group of people believe themselves to be the “only true believers”, and be “true believers”, yet not be “only”? They must believe at least one that is not true: their “only-ness”.

Anglicans will continue to worship God in their churches

And here I thought it was His church.

serve the hungry and needy in their communities

An irrelevant observation. Lots of groups serve the hungry and needy without being Christian.

and build missional relationships with others across the globe

The use of the word “missional” may be more revealing than the earlier use of “emission”.
From answers.com:
Missional believers are more inclusive than exclusive, refusing to identify boundaries that could be perceived as an “us vs. them” mentality. Within this atmosphere so-called missional believers seek to enhance the lives of all postmoderns regardless of their belief system or lifestyle. See here for more on “missional living”, which appears to be the origin of current usage of “missional”.

despite the desire of a few leaders to narrow the influence of the gospel.

Who was it again that spoke of the Narrow Door?

We look forward to the opportunities of the Lambeth Conference for constructive conversation, inspired prayer, and relational encounters.

What with all that conversing, praying and encountering going on, perhaps action can be completely avoided. This appeal to apparently worthy activities, in order to avoid the task at hand, was once called “acedia” by the desert monks, who counted it among the eight “bad thoughts” which could lead a monk or nun away from his (or her) calling.

Please do not smite the most noble and esteemed K.J. Schori. In her world wide effort to fund and staff the worthy goal to to make Electronic Mail available to every man,woman,and child The Episcopal Church’s EMission has brought countless souls out of the Stone Age.
Shalom,
Intercessor

127:  Kat, thanks but it’s those who perhaps who are in perhaps slightly dodgy parishes, who don’t listen to what their bishop or don’t hear and understand what is coming from his mouth, and there must be many of those .... not with deliberate blindness; who have not understood the implications of then PB’s words; words that are so awfully clear to us. Those are the folk I was talking about ....

... which is, of course, why North America truly is a major missionary field -as so many have said.  That perspective is best understood perhaps by those who see us with 20/20 vision from the outside.

Perchance like someone who, in their self-absorbed certainty of their unique hold on the truth, denies their own mother the Orthodox funeral she had requested?

Post 60, R. Scott Purdy, Can you please explain this? I must have missed something.

Dan Martins+ has done quite an amazing job fisking +KJS’ statement.  Wow.  If such a normally mild-mannered blogger committed to staying in TEC responds like this… Incredible.  And thank you Fr. Dan for shooting from the hip on this one.  Your words are a needed wake up call for many.  I hope and pray your voice will be heard on this one.

http://cariocaconfessions.blogspot.com/2008/06/spin-meter-in-red-zone.html

Sounds like the PB is upset.  Well, stay that way.  And good by!

I was going to make a remark about “missional relationships” in connection with SSB’s, but another poster made a better one.  So, I’ll content myself with being so glad that Mrs. Shori’s the PB of a heterodoxual church.  If it were homodoxual, I’d be soooo dissappointed.  On a serious note: I’m insulted that she feels that I am the proponent of a"narrow Gospel”.  The True Gospel embraces all who repent and believe, and that inclueds us at SF, the GAFCON Primates, and the major chunk of ther Anglican world.  I see a communion with Canterbury-shaped and TEC-shaped holes in it.  I do hope there are no embarrasing emissions (or is that omissions) at the Queen’s tea party.  It just cannot be done.
Dumb Sheep.  (Last but not least on this thresd.)

Kalee,

I am currently on a handheld with limited access. Perhaps some helpful soul can provide a link to this rather widely reported story.

KJS’s mother converted to Eastern Orthodoxy. I do not recall which church, perhaps Antioch.

She had asked that her funeral be in the Orthodox church. After her death, KJS overruled her mother’s wishes and performed the service herself in an Episcopal parish.

This speaks for itself - requiring no characterization.

Squid Ink emission from KJS, at her best.
God Bless, RL Harrell

Kalee,

Click here.  Third comment down.

Karen B.- Thanks for the link to the usually mild mannered Fr. Martins.  I posted this over at his site, but seems an appropriate point to make here as well:

Would it be appropriate to point out to the PB that more people attended GAFCON than attended TEC churches of this diocese (N. Michigan) last Sunday?

And that does not count the 35 million plus Anglicans represented by the people attending Gafcon.

This PB or whoever wrote this for her emits a constant cloud of deception.
http://northernplainsanglicans.blogspot.com/2008/06/mainstream-media-colludes-with.html

For what it’s worth, you can count me among progressives who wishes she had not used the word “emissions.” Wrote about it over here.

In response to Bishop Schori; it is not about the end of Anglicanism nor dominance by true believers. True beleivers are neither Anglican, Catholic, or Baptist. True believers are Christians, followers of our Lord and Saviour, and they change their lives to meet scripture rather than changing scripture to meet their lives. The only dominant factor in Christianity is God and sorry to say, there are no true worthy believers, not one amongst us. God’s peace to you Bishop Schori.

142- Scott, we may not often agree with you, but I think most of us regard you as a gentleman.  And no gentleman would support the use of “emissions” regarding a document issued by representatives of 60% of the Communion.

tjmcmahon, thanks. One more thing: you mention the 60% of the Communion. I won’t dispute that, but I do think this “numbers game” is dangerous. For example, if the correctness our faith is determined by numbers, then we should all go become Roman Catholics, yes?

Even if the GAFCON statement had represented 1% of the Communion, it would have merited a careful response.

But numbers are important. That’s why TEC lists the small number of “churches” that have walked away rather than the more imposing number of PEOPLE; that’s why TEC WON’T disclose the numbers of dollars pumped into litigation (and won’t even acknowledge the volume of lawsuit activity taking up the church’s time); that’s why a PB photo op in South Dakota was billed as having thousands in attendance when in fact only an unspecified “hundreds” (per ENS) showed up.
A diocesan staffer here in SD said, “Growth isn’t the only measure of faithfulness.”  True.  But then why does the diocese always boast of its “89 churches” instead of its puny 2,100 ASA (which would be an average of less than 25 per church)?
This PB is a symptom, not the problem - but the problem is real and numbers help express it.

For those of you who subscribe to the “numbers are important” category- please join us or have your laity join us at http:/www.remainfaithful.org/ so that once and for all the laity of our Church can be “counted” for what we really believe.  Thank you.

sorry- missed one thing.  http://www.remainfaithful.org/

Scott:

Let me congratulate you for your honesty in perceiving the tone deafness of the PBs response. I think that the concept of “copy editor” is generally correct- but what she really needs is someone with a balanced perspective on events- it wouldn’t take a lot to spot this gaffe. Doubtless she is surrounded by sycophants.

Sadly I see from reading your blog that the loon left cannot appreciate the error….

Dear Ones:

Does anyone think Jesus would have anything to do with this crowd of Pharisess.  Jesus was not a meek, mild, bureaucrat. 
Jesus believed in the truth, the absolute truth.  TEC is on a kick to be so accepting and pluralistic (all driven by “join our club and give us money and free labor” as we have a lot of empty bricks and mortar and administrative salries to maintain) that everything, most importantly the truth, is now relative.  Hey, I am OK so you are OK, give me money!

TEC is so far from spreading the Gospel, it is amazing.

In Christ’s Love

I am still smiling and cheerful over KJS’s response to the JD.  It gives me renewed hope and appreciation for the work of so many of the faithful that she was only able to muster such a terse, tense, and snippy response—-

As for me and my friends, the JD, from the first reading to the present, seemed so very fresh, joyful and full of life—- I know it must be a terrible blow to the revisionist side.  It just speaks for itself, and seems to have been written by the hand of God.

Truly we should be in constant prayer for KJS and the forces that threaten to overwhelm her, and not rejoice at all over how obviously the enemy has her in his hand.  It’s so hard because she has done so much damage, but we have to be in prayer for that poor poor soul.  If every one of us could see what the end will look like for her if she doesn’t repent, I think we’d all be in tears and on our knees for her.

Scott,
I do not think that numbers per se indicate that one is correct.  I am merely indicating that the “few leaders” that the PB talks about are not the only people who are in agreement on the principles of the faith (theologically, even the ABoC endorses their basic principles, it is the admittedly sketchy ecclesiology that he challenges).
The pretense as “emitted” by Episcopal Life and by any number of TEC bishops and officials in recent weeks would have had us believe that Gafcon was a tiny breakaway portion of the church, led by a few disgruntled ex-piskie priests which was going to try to force a schism.  That is just an out and out fabrication.  In truth, it is a world wide movement to reclaim the Church. Nigeria’s church is 10 times the size of TEC, and growing.  It has several times the ASA of the Church of England.  It is about time we stopped telling them what is good for them, and instead listen to them.  They are much better at spreading the gospel than we are.
As I have pointed out on a couple threads- there were more Gafcon attendees in church in Jerusalem on Sunday than in all the churches of the diocese I reside in combined.  Which is to say, the conference had a higher ASA than at least one TEC diocese.

#152, your point in the first paragraph is taken. If growth is the measure, again I urge caution. Otherwise, we’d all better become Mormons or Muslims.

You are right, in my view, to remind anyone who forgets that GAFCON represents a massive number of Anglicans. But I think I’d be careful about the bigger-is-better line of reasoning.

#146, I do think numbers are important, but they have to be used carefully. I for one am gravely concerned about declining attendance in ECUSA. I monitor weekly (increasing, at the moment) attendance in the parish I serve diligently.

Numbers are important, but they’re not the most important thing.

The main thing about numbers, I think, is to be honest about them. Unrealistically small numbers have been used for some time now to claim that the problem within TEC is caused by just a few hotheads, for instance. That is a dishonesty that does no one any good.

Scott,
As you might say, if I had valued numbers over “the faith as I have received it” I would have crossed the Tiber long ago.  There is an RC lifeboat waiting to take me on should I choose to abandon ship (although there are several other boats in the vicinity, I seem to be drawing a lot of attention lately from potential rescuers). 
On the other side of things, I keep looking for this supposed “vast majority” of “loyal Episcopalians” who are “behind the policies of the PB 100%” and favor “full inclusion”, etc.  Can’t find them.  Even in this diocese.

So if numbers are i

Hmmm, somehow that got lost in transition…

If numbers are important, then…
Number of primates at GAFCON vs. Number of primates in the WWAC?
Number of provinces represented by their primate or a person designated by their primate vs. Number of provinces in the WWAC?

Just wondering…

I must say that Scott Gunn has dealt with an attempted trip to the woodshed from E. Kaeton over his gentle suggestion that “emission” was not the PB’s best word-choice of the day.
http://www.sevenwholedays.org/2008/06/30/help-wanted-copy-editor/#more-251
Kaeton’s kool-aid support of everything the PB wrote is way revelatory. Anaheim is going to be rough.

numbers important -
Number of Christians represented at Gafcon vs number of Christians represented in TEC. Then of course, there is the number of Christians attending church in TEC on an average Sunday service against to those in Gafcon nations . How many churches have been planted in the last 5 years in TEC? How many in the Gafcon nations? How many churches are empty in the TEC? How many in the Gafcon nations? How many congregations have left or split in the last 5 years In TEC? How many in Gafcon?

They made their pact with Satan let them enjoy it while they may. From my own experience and observation this “heretical someone” includes the PB, most of the House of Bishops, and my own Bishop. Roll on GAFCON!
Quote: “.... But I cannot worship or share commuion with someone who does not believe that Jesus is uniquely fully human and fully divine.  I can’t share Table fellowship with someone who thinks that Jesus is just a way (or even the best way) to God.  I cannot share fellowship with someone who does not believe that God is a Trinity of persons in unity of essence.  I cannot share fellowship with someone who is willing to split the Anglican Communion (let alone TECUSA) over something they claim to be adiaphora.  I cannot share fellowship with someone who redefined the essentials in the face of universal requests not to do so.”

Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable.

This statement always rings of a bit of a lie to me, as it was not true 50 years ago.  If she had said that Anglicans have suffered from self-justification since Henry VIII I might agree with that.

WOW! I’m shocked that KJS was able to put together a 108 word paragraph in repsonse to the Jerusalem Declaration and Statement! And that was including teh one letter word “a”! So I am giving her more than she deserves!

But she must have bleched emissions to get it all out to be read! Good one Kate!

Exactly the sort of meaningless rubbish you would expect her to say.

Once again, Squid-Woman has demonstrated her natural Gift of Condescending Arrogance so typical of a profound narcissist.  At least she is consistant and has once again, reinforced the legitimate necessity of GAFCon.

As empress, she is quite justly annoyed when her subjects wish to remove themselves from her rule.  It is also quite reasonable for her to view those who have the crass termerity to disagree with her on anything, as dangerous and personal enemies to be destroyed by any means.  Has she not consistantly demonstrated this with the Godly and Orthodox in her pastoral care?

Her actions and statements are entirely reasonable and to be expected from a narcissist.  That her deeds may cause pain and destruction to vast numbers of others is of simply no import, at all - they exist soley as expendable supporting cast members in her ongoing dramatic spectacle.

This response of hers has justified GAFCon.  The merits, or lack thereof, of Rowan’s response aside, he has demonstrated aplomb, style, class, thoughtfullness and polity in it.  None of these were extant in Squid-Woman’s brief blast - the errors and omissions contained in it notwithstanding.  The only positive thing one might perhaps say about her missive is that it is remarkably crude and inelegant - hardly becoming a member of the clergy.  It must be painful to be her. 

This writer has an impossible time imagining that she might be Christian..!..  With that creature as the spiritual leader of TEC, one has to wonder what the TEC really is, anymore (aside from property holders).

Yes, my friends, we ARE to judge.

What a stark contrast she is to those Godly, fine and most excellent people at GAFCon!

1 Timothy 3:2 1: This is a true saying, If a man[not woman] desire the office of a bishop, he[not her] desireth a good work.
2: A bishop then must be blameless, the husband[not wife] of one wife[not one husband], vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

For the last time, stop calling her a bishop, she can’t be recognized as such. Her position is false. She can’t even be blameless.

Why is it that when Scripture such as 1 Timothy 3:2 is quoted with such certainty as to the correct interpretation, other passages are neglected?  I answer 1 Timothy 3:2 with Galatians 3:28 and Joel 2:28-29, and the examples of Junia, Phoebe, Priscilla, and the elect lady of 2 John.  This is not an open and shut issue.  Don’t make your opposition out to be morons or heretics.  I don’t like how KJS has been handling things either, but it is not because she is a woman.  Bruno isn’t a woman.  Griswold isn’t a woman.  The ABC isn’t a woman.  You are right, we need to remain biblical.  So, let’s remain biblical in its entirety not just the parts we like.

I never did refer to her as a bishop - and it still doesn’t occur to me so to do.  I did refer to her as “spiritual leader”.  I did not mention what sort of spirits, but you may be quite sure they are not from above…

1 Timothy 3:2 1: This is a true saying, If a man[not woman] desire the office of a bishop, he[not her] desireth a good work.

It really will not do to quote an older version in this connection: the Greek uses only the indefinite pronoun ‘someone’ as subject, and the verbs are in the third person singular, which has no mark of gender.

2: A bishop then must be blameless, the husband[not wife] of one wife[not one husband], vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

What is the opposite of a ‘one-woman man’ (Yes, the words ARE literal here)? A polyandrous woman?  The question itself shows that to lay stress in one’s reading on the sex, as opposed to the sex-life, of the bishop/overseer is a wrong emphasis entirely.

When this individual was chosen as your PB I stated publicly that I believed she had been chosen, not for herself as a person, but so that all opposition to the doctrine and direction of the denomination could be rationalised as opposition to her sex. It would be good if my brethren (the noun is masculine for common gender!) more astutely avoided falling kerplonk into the trap which was thus set for them.

So…. the Episcopal Church is e-missional?

That would actually explain a lot you know.

{G, D & R}

The Episcopal Church: Our reality will outweird your surreality any day of the week.

Somewhat against my better judgement, I had a look at the link #158 gave discussing the use of the word ‘emission’.  I was really stunned at the bullying tone of certain comments which 158 referred to.

Galatians 3:28 and Joel 2:28-29:
What a moron. Galatians 3:28 speaks of having one faith.
Joel 2:28-29 speaks of telling dreams, and visions. There is a difference in preaching and teaching scripture[word] as opposed to telling a dream or vision.

Jeremiah 23:28 28: The prophet that hath a dream, let him [tell] a dream; and he that hath my [word], let him speak my word faithfully. What is the chaff to the wheat? saith the LORD.

It really will not do to quote an older version in this connection: the Greek uses only the indefinite pronoun ‘someone’ as subject, and the verbs are in the third person singular, which has no mark of gender.

Thank God there were no Doctors of Spin when the King James version was translated.
I think the neutral gender Bible has already been released.

I can’t believe you actually called me a moron.  And, you missed my point.

I do my own “fisking” here.

Why yes, I’m a little slanted

YBIC,
Phil snyder

The Archbishop of Canterbury was obviously distressed by the Jerusalem statements but managed a polite response.  The fact that the Presiding Bishop couldn’t even manage to be polite says something about how badly this has stung her.  Combined with the Virginia judicial loss, this has been a bad time at 815.  You reap what you sow.

Might one suggest the we refer to the Author of the work cited as Ms. (or Mrs.) Schori, or Ms. Jefferts-Schori, or, if you recognize her orders, Bishop Schori or the PB.
The various references to sea creatures merely lower our discourse to the level of “emissions,” or perhaps even below.
We need to remember that victories that are won are victories of our Lord, and not ours to claim.  Likewise, we are called to love our enemies.  And in the current case, I think we are dealing with a group of people who are not our enemies, but misguided, those who have fallen into the trap laid by our real Enemy. I have fallen into others of his traps myself. So let’s at least maintain our own dignity, and extend such charity as we can.

I am defending no one, but I am defending the word. The word emmission means “to put into circulation”, aka “to publish”. To the content of HER emmission….she is wagging her finger at those poor, ignorant, misled grunts that obviously don’t understand the nuanced complexity of the AC. This is one of those trends in modern society that makes me nuts. If, as she says, the AC stands for “everything and everyone” then it stands for “nothing and no one”. But I am sure she thinks I am just ignorant too. Oh well.

Sorry, the quotation marks were meant for seperation and emphasis, not as a true quote. This is my phrasing, not hers.

#176, I agree that the “squid” references are over the top.  Enough.  She has issued a disrespectful statement; we disagree, but we need not reciprocate in the verbal disrespect.

As to her name, I have read that she uses both her maiden and married names, without a hyphen.  Therefore, she should be referred to as “Jefferts Schori” when one chooses that form.

I thought the EPA, not Shori, set emmission standards.

Referring to Jefferts Schori’s statement, such bald anger and venom is unbecoming the office of a bishop of Christ’s Church.  Aside from the vituperation, nothing of any worthwhile substance in what the PB wrote.  Onward confessing Anglican fellowship.

Her words and attitude are consistant with her actions. “snitty” comes to mind for anyone old enough to remember the word and not usually applicable to women in her position today.  Tisk, Tisk.

Conoscenzo, “publication” is an archaic usage of “emission,” not the common one today.

Much of the Anglican world must be lamenting the latest pronunciamento from 815. Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable. Especially the revionists who would like the orthodox to just leave.  This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers. Like the rulers of TEC who think themselves oh, so much smarter than the idiots in the rest of the world.  Anglicans will continue to worship God in their churches, serve the hungry and needy in their communities, and build missional relationships with others across the globe, despite the desire of a few leaders to narrow the influence of the gospel. For instance leaving out the parts they don’t like. We look forward to the opportunities of the Lambeth Conference for constructive conversation, inspired prayer, and relational encounters. Where the orthodox can gather and re-assert their beliefs.

Once again Schori’s words betray her and her merry band of mindless minions.
Broader?! Is that why there have been these illegal depositions? Is that why priests are being inhibited and dpeosed all over the place? For a broader Anglicanism? I s that why there are disciplinary canons designed to rid themselves of ANY dissenting voice to their heresies?
Common Kathy! You speak of Broader Anglicanism but then illegally purge that same broader Anglicanism at every turn.  Is Broader Anglicanism why you have clearly stated that you you’d rather sell church property to a pub rather than another Anglican body?
Again you are your own worst enemy. The smart thing would have been to keep your mouth shut and not say anything. You are in way over your head. Nice thing is, you are making my job to recruit new members for Remain Faithful much easier. When you say one thing and then act in direct opposition to what you just said, well, you have no credibility at all.

Thanks Again Kathy! Keep em Coming!

Crusader44

Here’s what I posted on Rowan’s website:
TEC PB Shori:  “Much of the Anglican world must be lamenting the latest emission from GAFCON. Anglicanism has always been broader than some find comfortable. This statement does not represent the end of Anglicanism, merely another chapter in a centuries-old struggle for dominance by those who consider themselves the only true believers. Anglicans will continue to worship God in their churches, serve the hungry and needy in their communities, and build missional relationships with others across the globe, despite the desire of a few leaders to narrow the influence of the gospel. We look forward to the opportunities of the Lambeth Conference for constructive conversation, inspired prayer, and relational encounters.”

My problem - PB Shori seems to think that feeding the poor is the primary duty of the church - not spreading the gospel of Jesus Christ.  She does not believe that “...no one comes to the Father but through Me”.  And yet, as far as I can tell, you are silent on this issue…aren’t you supposed to be LEADING the Anglican Communion?  GAFCON would not have been necessary had you thrown TEC out on their ear for heresy, as you should have in 2003.  So the property suits continue, good priests are deposed, and you continue to do nothing.  At a minimum, anyone who voted for VGR’s ordination should not have been invited to Lambeth.  That would be SOMETHING.  So GAFCON will grow in power and authority, and Lambeth will become nothing…as will your office.  It’s too bad, but you made the choice to let the evil in TEC go forward with nary a wimper.  YOU HAVE A CHOICE.  Nonetheless, I pray that Jesus will give you supernatural wisdom in this crisis, protect you and keep you and your family safe.  Amen.

B. Hunter,
Great post to the ABofC! I hope he reads it, but don’t hold your breath as I think he gets alot of these e-mail posts daily and may have someone pre-readingthem for him and deciding which ones he gets to read or not. But, I loved it!

#188, rwgaskill, which comments in particular do you find impolite and uncharitable, or was this just a drive-by?

Piskie sez: Have you taken your loyalty oath today?

St Paul to the Galatians 1.1-9 (last paragraph)
I’m astonished that you are turning away so quickly from the one who called you by grace, and going after another gospel-not that it is another gospel, it’s just that there are some people(TEC) stirring up trouble for you and wanting to pervert the gospel of the Messiah. But even if we- or angel from heaven(PB KJS) should announce a gospel other than the one we announced to you, let such a person be accursed.  I said it before and I say it again: if anyone offers you a gospel other than the one you received, let that person be accursed.

I just scrolled through this thread after reading a comment on another site, that General Clark’s disparaging of Sen. McCain “has done something McCain couldn’t do: get me to vote for him”.  Although I have previously expressed disgust on this thread (and others)with Ms. Shori’s utter lack of grace, intellect, and Christian charity, she has accomplised something important: really opened up the smarmy corner of liberal nastiness for all to see.

”Somewhat against my better judgement, I had a look at the link #158 gave discussing the use of the word ‘emission’.  I was really stunned at the bullying tone of certain comments which 158 referred to.”

Congratulations.  You have now experienced the wondrous wit and wisdom of The Swan of Newark.  When she feels the right has been demeaning and mean-spirited, she rides forth to skewer the offensing conservatives with her deadly wit and rapier-like tongue. 
When conservatives take offense at her (alleged) mean-spiritedness, we’re “over-reacting” and “need to get over it.” 
Feel the love.

Can anyone explain the PB’s use of “missional”? What does this term mean?

#193, In this context with this PB, I would say missional means, “We are the Episcopal Church, we have lots of money, and we are here to help you.  You are ignorant third worlders and we need to have a ‘dialogue’ that consists of you listening to me until you agree to agree with what I say.”

Why “missional” and not “mission”?

#195, oscewicee, because then it wouldn’t be a trendy emergent church buzzword. Everyone knows what missions are, but missional gives the PB a chance to say a lot, do nothing and sound as though she is doing something.

In Piskie speak she can “embrace new missional approaches to modifying our gaia friendly lifestyle while still living into the tension of a vibrant and growing social justice enriched faith”.

In normal speak, she can jog to work, pester other people about jogging to work and feel smug about the whole process. She would be ‘missional’.

The Episcopal Church: Where vox populi is always received as Vox Dei.

Before she accused representatives of two thirds of international Anglicanism of releasing “emissions”, Ms. Schori would have been well advised to have remembered the immortal words of Alexander Pope: “To air is human, to forgive divine.”

mousestalker (#196) - OK, I think I get the picture. I had wondered if it was just a funny new way to say “mission”.

Apparently some find the term “squid ink” when referring to Schori’s tactics, stemming from the squid’s ability to cloud the water while making its getaway, to be disrespectful.  I’m willing to switch to “octopus ink”, if that will help.  God Bless, RL Harrell

I just love how KJS refers to the Orthodox and those who think that they are the true believers!!!
Tom of San Joaquin

I don’t think this will get her to change. Why would she check here anyway? We must pray for her. Also, should she be invulnerable to love then she’ll get more angry, hopefully doing even more obviously stupid things and allow us to pray in peace.
I wish that the bishop would get some spines and show that she is using powers that she doesn’t have…. Maybe if people payed attention…. Of course, she is also joining up with politics to milk this cow to its fullist.
GAFCon might help, but it won’t protect all these people from hell. All I can think of to put Schori in a good spot is that she has shown us that most Americans don’t take Anglicanism seriously.

Not much has changed in 1900 years since this was written:

From “Iranaeus on Tradition and Succession: Adv. Haereses, III”, from Bettenson, Documents of the Christian Church:

“When they [sc. the heretics] are refuted out of the Scriptures they betake them to accusing the Scriptures themselves as if there were something amiss with them and they carried not authority, because the Scriptures, they say, contain diverse utterances, and because the truth cannot be found in them…Thus it comes about that they neither agree with Scripture or tradition…Such, beloved, are our adversaries in this conflict, men after the fashion of slippery snakes, seeking to escape every way…”

The slippery way is to redefine without informing. When we say “the resurrection”, they agree they believe in it, but it means something else entirely different from the received understanding. TEC embodies polytheism, and it would take a bold courageous TEC clergy to simply state it clearly. They would have my respect and even admiration. But if they do, they lose a lot of money.