Dispatches from the Episcopal Communicators List: Heretics? Who, Us???

Actually, in a weird sort of way, their statements are true.  There is no debate.  They have renounced the faith by fiat.

The one thing about being in a cult is that you never recognize you have become heretics and are teaching and believing things contrary to Christianity.  Certainly that delusion is heavily prevalent in the powers that control the Episcopal Organization.

When your own Presiding Bishop intones prayers to “Mother Jesus,” how can you possibly say your church believes in Jesus as the Son of God?

It was a good article. Thank you. But now that Bishop Duncan has been deposed, surely you don’t think the Diocese will have the incentive to follow him into the Southern Cone? Don’t you think the PB acted brilliantly in changing the canons, rules, etc., and moving against the Bishop of Pittsburgh. I’ll bet she broke the back of such a movement. Yeh, right….

I notice that Naughton ignored the ‘only way to God is through Jesus’ part.

Heretics? Who, Us???

I suggest that Heretics R Us would be more appropriate.

the snarkster™

subscribe

It’s such a relief to shift the shoe to the other foot once in a while.  Doesn’t sound like Mr. Naughton likes it so much.  Now he’s the one trying to get the MSM to unspin their spin.  Tangled webs, indeed.

You think they really mean Son of God the way the Athanasian Creed does?  OK, how ‘bout just some of the bold parts?

Furthermore, it is necessary to everlasting salvation that he also believe rightly the Incarnation of our Lord Jesus Christ.
For the right Faith is, that we believe and confess, that our Lord Jesus Christ, the Son of God, is God and Man;
God, of the Substance of the Father, begotten before the worlds; and Man, of the Substance of his Mother, born in the world;
Perfect God and perfect Man, of a reasonable soul and human flesh subsisting;
Equal to the Father, as touching his Godhead; and inferior to the Father, as touching his Manhood.
Who although he be God and Man, yet he is not two, but one Christ;
One, not by conversion of the Godhead into flesh, but by taking of the Manhood into God;
One altogether, not by confusion of Substance, but by unity of Person.
For as the reasonable soul and flesh is one man, so God and Man is one Christ;
Who suffered for our salvation, descended into hell, rose again the third day from the dead.
He ascended into heaven, he sitteth on the right hand of the Father, God Almighty, from whence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.
At whose coming all men shall rise again with their bodies and shall give account for their own works.
And they that have done good shall go into life everlasting, and they that have done evil into everlasting fire.
This is the Catholic Faith, which except a man believe faithfully, he cannot be saved.

Nahhh.  Couldn’t be.  It’s gotta be just another Clintonesque ‘depends what the meaning of is is’ moment among the ECUSA communications cognoscenti.

Peace,
-ms

I have spent way too much time in the last hour, actually trying to get Mr. Hamill’s specific e-mail address.  He is a freelance writer now from Sewickley, PA (which could make him more open to other sides of the Episcopal ‘question/s’).  BUT I was not able to find the address.  It may be better to write the editors in the NYT News Department in order to get in touch with him.  See:  <a >http://www.nytimes.com/ref/membercenter/help/infoservdirectory.html#c</a> for their e-mail addresses.

OK, Naughton &Co;.,

1. Is Jesus of Nazareth, in all actuality, the Christ and the Second Person of the Holy, Eternal, Trinity?

2. Is the Eternal God, in all historicity, the sole progenitor of Jesus Christ?

3. Was this same Jesus Christ born, in real history, physically and biologically, of a Jewish maiden named Miryam (Mary), the same who would therefore be termed “Theotokos” to affirm that event?

4. Did this same Jesus submit to suffering, death, and burial as the one sufficient, effectual, and perfect sacrifice for our sins, and for the sins of the world?

5. And did He, on the third day thereafter, rise bodily from that tomb in the manner described in the Gospels, to show “Himself to be, without a shade of a doubt, the True, Eternal, Son of God, with power,” and our perfect Prophet, King, Priest, and Sacrifice?

Twenty points for each “yes” answer.  Any score below 100% will be considered a failure to comprehend the most basic, historic, truths of Christianity, an invitation to the next Catechumens’ class, a recommendation to refrain from receiving elements beyond one’s ken, and a disqualification from further Christian Ministry until such discrepancies be resolved.

When reporters base generalizations about what the church “allows” on the behavior of a few outliers…

In Episcospeak “allow” does not mean “authorize.”

This quote proves that while he may be wrong, he understands the stakes:

To suggest that we do not believe that Jesus is the Son of God is to call the integrity of our faith into question.

Notice the high bar that both Naughton and Fox set for what defines a “debate”.  However, I believe that there has been no “debate” in those terms simply because the levers of power do not even deem it significant enough to debate; it is not because there is overwhelming agreement!

In fact, they do not say that there is overwhelming agreement; they only document the fact that our documents say certain things.  If they were to assert overwhelming agreement on the issue, they would undermine the signature calling card of TEC: the church with no answers, but as many questions as you care to bring.

I think he should realize his Presiding Bishop is an “outlier.”

<humour>
Jim, I was thinking “out-and-outliar” but that would be unkind, unhelpful, and borderline slanderous.  So I’m not going to say it.
</humour>

Shoot, my faux “humour” tags got ignored in that last post!

I do hope our Lord will forgive me for even posting this.  But of course, Mr. Naughton, the Episcopal Church believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.  In Northern Michigan we know this, because the affirmations signed by each and every missioner in the diocese, and the standing committee, and the acting bishop say:
<blockquote>Because each and every one of us is an only begotten child of God; because we, as the church, are invited by God to see all of creation as having life only insofar as it is in God; because everything, without exception, is the living presence, or incarnation, of God;
( http://www.upepiscopal.org/daressalaam.html ) <blockquote> Since, per the diocese above (for any out there unfamiliar with me, please do understand that I am quoting and analyzing and do not believe a word of what the diocese is saying), Jesus Christ was a man, he is obviously a son of God, just as all of us humans are children of God, and he was an incarnation of God, just as all of us (and everything else) are incarnations of God.

Gad, TJ.  Hence Mr Naughton can cast his spin. There’s a name for the faith your diocese seems to hold - I can’t think what - but it doesn’t appear to be Christianity at all?

To the Editor;
Thank you for Sean D. Hamill’s, “Pittsburgh Episcopalians Weigh Division” on Oct 2, 2997. This article accurately states why the division occurred. “The dispute includes complaints that the national church allows open debate on whether Jesus is the Son of God, or that the only way to God is through Jesus — tenets of faith that conservatives find indisputable.”

As reported in Episcopal Life, our Bishop Steenson resigned from to go to the Roman Catholic Church. Steenson wrote, “My conscience is deeply troubled about where the Episcopal Church is heading. . . An effective leader cannot be so conflicted about the guiding principles of the Church he serves,” ([url=http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_90305_ENG_HTM.htm]http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_90305_ENG_HTM.htm)[/url]

For thirty-nine years, I served as an Anglican priest within the Episcopal Church and I now serve with the Anglican Church of Kenya for the same reason.

Fr. Bob Maxweli †
All Saints Dio., ACOK
214 Horner Street
Belen NM 87002
505-861-7050
.(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address), an online subscriber

Oscewicee-
Just for the record, I made a point of not officially transferring to this diocese, hence the description “your diocese” is not technically correct.  Of course, given the pantheist universalism, and open communion (endorsed by the diocese and majority of the clergy, and widely practiced, although not in the local parish) I don’t consider the diocese part of the Church Catholic.  Also, I think (although I would yield to a higher authority, say Bishop Iker or Archbishop Venables) that anyone who affirms the position of the diocese as cited in 16, has indeed abandoned the Communion of the Church, and is literally in a state of excommunication. 
  At any rate, if Mr. Naughton does not know that there are entire dioceses of TEC spouting heresy, he doesn’t get out much.
  By the way, if any of the “heavy hitter” theologians happen upon this, am I on solid ground using the term “heresy” to describe the diocesan statement quoted in 16?

Here is my message:
I am writing to thank Mr. Hamill for the accuracy with which he portrays the crisis.  That it is not just a sudden eruption of upset over Gene Robinson’s consecration as Bishop of New Hampshire in 2003, but that it includes other and complex issues as well, Robinson’s consecration in my mind being much more of a symptom than the disease itself. 

Various Episcopal leaders may like to pooh-pooh the idea that there is any other issue involved or that there is an underlying theological complexity, but that is just not true, and I’m grateful that Mr. Hamill’s article begins to point to that complexity.  He writes, ‘The dispute includes complaints that the national church allows open debate on whether Jesus is the Son of God, or that the only way to God is through Jesus — tenets of faith that conservatives find indisputable’.  This is true.  One only has to look at the statements made by Bishop Spong over the years to know that it is.  See, for example:

1) http://www.dioceseofnewark.org/jsspong/reform.html  Thesis # 2:  2. Since God can no longer be conceived in theistic terms, it becomes nonsensical to seek to understand Jesus as the incarnation of the theistic deity. So the Christology of the ages is bankrupt.

And Thesis #4:  4. The virgin birth, understood as literal biology, makes Christ’s divinity, as traditionally understood, impossible.

And then there’s Marcus Borg, an Episcopalian, his wife an Episcopal priest:  http://www.sptimes.com/2005/02/09/Neighborhoodtimes/Son_of_God_Yes__but_n.shtml

If anyone argues that this these disputes are not common in the church, it would be disingenuous.  If the disputes are not always out in the open, it is because historically heretical points have already been taken for granted by many Episcopal clergy.

“.....A Son of God?”  Jesus is the ONLY Son of God!

Bro Potter,

Sorry about that language!  The Theotokos title came from the early debate on whether Jesus really was “come in the flesh” as some were thinking He was too divine to be human.  It means “God-bearer” as Mary really did give birth to the Living Word (and not that He was “adopted” by God later in life, or hovered over the man Jesus, etc.  At this point in my life, I are a seminarian and sometimes get caught talking like one!  I’ll have to try to clean up my act! 

Blessings on ya!

Robert at Sanctifusion

Jesus is the Son of God: I have no quarrel with that, Mr. Naughton.  Even the devils know that and tremble.  Can you subscribe to the statement: “Jesus is the Christ, the ONLY (begotten Son of God, the only Name under heaven by which a man may be saved? Can you, Mr. Naughton?
Dumb Sheep.

Dear Editorial Staff,
I appreciated Sean D. Hamill’s “Pittsburgh Episcopalians Weigh Division” (Thursday, Oct 2, 2008). Religion reports often miss the key issues in church matters, but Mr. Hamill was accurate when he wrote, “The dispute includes complaints that the national church allows open debate on whether Jesus is the Son of God, or that the only way to God is through Jesus — tenets of faith that conservatives find indisputable.”

While I served as an Episcopal priest in the Diocese of Los Angeles, my bishop (J. Jon Bruno) lectured a clergy gathering on how Jesus was not the unique way to God.  Said the bishop, “My friend the Rabbi is a good man.  He goes to heaven.  My friend the Iman is a good man.  He goes to heaven.”

In my current ministry in South Dakota, I was required to attend a session on Native American culture.  It was valuable, but included editorializing by the Episcopal priest who led it.  “Jesus died for our sins?  Means nothing. Doesn’t make sense. Jesus is a Medicine Man.”

It isn’t just debate about Jesus - the Episcopal Church engages in one-way indoctrination that denies the possibility of Jesus Christ as revealed in Scripture, tradition and the reasoning of great Christian thinkers across the generations.

The Reverend Timothy Fountain
Church of the Good Shepherd
Sioux Falls, South Dakota
605-332-1474

TJ, apologies for calling it “your” diocese - and I’m glad that’s not literally the case.

BTW, an email was forwarded to me today from Neva Fox, cited above, saying that the PB’s talk in DioGA is now up on TEC’s website. The link was non-functioning for me. Don’t know if she goofed or my computer is trying to protect me from any more doses of the PB this week.

As a member of the Episcopal Communictors, it saddens me that “excerpts” of a particular thread on our listserve were posted to this site. As a communicator, I believe that you need to hear the whole story and not parts of it. When you are only reading part of the responses it is not fair to the parties involved and those of you now reading an incomplete story/conversation. - Kelly Harris

Well.

Thanks for that insight, but the question still remains- We are left with the impression that the “views and opinions expressed” at least represent the mindset of the Communicators to the point that the writer felt free to post such an opinion, and apparently without fear of contradiction.  I do hope you took the time to read the various posts that have been submitted in response.  If so, you surely noticed not only a broad spectrum of opinion but an educated answer to the blind presumption expressed in that letter.  However, if you had read them, you might have had second thoughts about venturing your own name defending such.  Very honestly, the one thing I have the hardest time understanding in Episcopal Modernity is how they call what they do “Theology.”

Robert at Sanctifusion

As a member of the Episcopal Communictors, it saddens me that “excerpts” of a particular thread on our listserve were posted to this site. As a communicator, I believe that you need to hear the whole story and not parts of it. When you are only reading part of the responses it is not fair to the parties involved and those of you now reading an incomplete story/conversation. - Kelly Harris

Dear Kelly Harris,
I understand your point, and hope that you will post for us ‘the whole story and not parts of it’.  Were there Episcopal Communicators writing in and disagreeing with Mr. Naughton’s posts?  Were there Communicators writing in support of the NYT article?  Out of fairness to the people involved, I for one would certainly like to read the entire thread, if indeed Mr. Naughton’s posts were not indicative of the communication in general. 

I have to admit to having been a bit bemused at his stating that he’d never heard of any debate within the Church about Jesus Christ being the Son of God, given the publicity that Bishop Spong’s writings and statements received both before and since his retirement, but perhaps we’re talking about a semantic difference, between ‘debate’ and ‘disagreement’.  It’s true that I haven’t heard of any formal ‘debates’, in the sense of having teams and moderators, but there has certainly been public disagreement on the issue.  If the Communicator’s thread reflects something different from that which was posted here, may I encourage you to post it for us?  If in actuality the discussion on the thread was balanced, then it is unfair to have only one side of it posted. 

Since you state that, as a Communicator, you “believe that you need to hear the whole story and not parts of it”, I hope that you will indeed follow through on that belief and allow us to hear the whole story.

Well of course there is no debate.  It’s not permitted at GC. Every time a motion comes forward to affirm a creed it is ruled out of order by the chair.  We all understand why and perhaps the media is finally getting it also.

I too live in a heretical diocese.  Our bishop has said that it is no problem being both a Buddhist and an Episcopal priest.  And those in the Wicca fold are okay too.  He said he did not support the ordination of gays/lesbians.  But his very own dean (until the cathedral was osld for 40 pieces of silver) was/is a lesbian.  UNFORTUNATELY there is no escape.  The nearest non-TEC church (Anglican) is 50 miles away.  Not so bad in the summer but Michigan winters preclude that travel.  And we are not young anymore.  Oh, I speak of the Dio of Western Michigan.

Woo hoo!

Bob Maxwell, Libbie, and Timothy Fountain—thank you for writing the editor!!!!

Here’s my email, sent this morning:

Dear Sean,

As a conservative Anglican (and former member of the Episcopal church) I want to commend you on your very fair and accurate October 2 article regarding the realignment vote to take place today by the Diocese of Pittsburgh.

Included in your article was this statement:  “The dispute includes complaints that the national church allows open debate on whether Jesus is the Son of God, or that the only way to God is through Jesus — tenets of faith that conservatives find indisputable.”

This drift away from the historic Christian faith is exactly the reason why I left the Episcopal church almost two years ago.  If you have any question about the accuracy of this statement, let me give you just two examples.

Episcopal Presiding Bishop Schori was In San Diego earlier this year and made the following not very subtle statement about the literal reality of the resurrection (a critical teaching of the Christian church).
See:  http://ecusa.anglican.org/81803_96294_ENG_HTM.htm

“Asked about the literal story of Easter and the Resurrection, Jefferts Schori said, ‘I think Easter is most profoundly about meaning, not mechanism.’”

You should understand her statement in the context of the widely expressed views of retired Episcopal Bishop Jack Spong, who has never been disciplined for his views.  One example can be found at:  http://www.dioceseofnewark.org/jsspong/reform.html

“4. The virgin birth, understood as literal biology, makes Christ’s divinity, as traditionally understood, impossible.
5. The miracle stories of the New Testament can no longer be interpreted in a post-Newtonian world as supernatural events performed by an incarnate deity.
6. The view of the cross as the sacrifice for the sins of the world is a barbarian idea based on primitive concepts of God and must be dismissed.
7. Resurrection is an action of God. Jesus was raised into the meaning of God. It therefore cannot be a physical resuscitation occurring inside human history.”

When Presiding Bishop Schori was Bishop of Nevada, she welcomed Bishop Spong to lead one of her clergy conferences in September 2003.  These are views that are accepted among many Episcopal leaders—or at least not challenged.  It is this drift from the orthodox faith—and not the single issue of the consecration of an openly homosexual bishop—that is what is going on.

Thus, I thank you for your accurate article.

Best regards,
Hank Steenstra

A great collection of TEC leaders’ quotes can be found on a special sectio of resources at the Dio Pittsburgh website:

http://acl.asn.au/statements-by-the-presiding-bishop-and-other-tec-leaders-on-christian-theology/
http://www.re-align.org/files/StatementsTECFINAL.pdf

I strongly encourage everyone to bookmark these links and to use these quotes when challenged about the degree of heresy in TEC.

My question is how many hundreds of thousands must depart from The General Convention Church before “has 2.4 million members” becomes “had 2.4 million members”?

Which I follow with another. Considering the Average Sunday Attendance numbers, what does it mean that on the average less than half the “members” show up to fulfill their baptismal vow to “continue in the apostles’ teaching and the breaking of bread”?

Mr. Naughton’s very own Bp Chane said the following, in making his 2002 Easter sermon as bishop-elect:

“And yet, the Easter story of the resurrection, which defines the core of our Christian theology, is, at best, conjectural…. the concept of Jesus’ physical, bodily resurrection, was not even part of the early Christian experience…. At their very best, the stories of the resurrection of Jesus as contained in the Gospels and Acts of the Apostles are contradictory and confusing.”

“Easter Beginnings and Endings,” March 31, 2002 cited in p. 240 <u>Never Silent</u>, T. Barnum, 2008. Also available here.

Surprised?  No, this type of circular argument that there is no question regarding the essential foundations of our faith has been going on for thirty plus years.  One only has to listen to what their clergy preaches to know that the foundation of our Christian Faith are under attack throughout the EC.  Much of this has to do with what clergy are taught in Seminary regarding what is the Christian Faith and what it means to be Anglican.  They have redefined both to embrace a universalism that all are saved whether they are in a right relationship with God through Christ or not.  In other words, they stand in judgment over God and declare this is not the God they believe in!

God allows such freedom but has also been clear.  The Christian Faith is exclusive and that means not all will chose to accept God’s Truth or His Way as revealed in Christ.  It is people who will walk away from God and not God who will reject them but rather they who will reject God.  Yes, God is merciful and gracious and is seeking to woo all to Himself and we have our entire life to respond to His loving embrace and the gift He has provided for us through Christ’s sacrifice.  But it is our choice, for relationship is matter of belief confirmed by trust….and allows for the possibility of rejection….

Sadly, the Leadership of the EC has embraced universalism and rejected the exclusive role of Christ in Salvation….this has been true for years and is just getting worse.  Nothing new about this sad reality in TEC.  God have mercy on us all.

And then Naughton claims such questions haven’t even been raised-
WUH!
What Utter Hypocrisy!

To my knowledge, there is no debate in our church over whether Jesus is the Son of God

Woodenly speaking, this is true.  Schori e.g., thinks Christ’s diety is a mythic contstruction, so she takes issue with how Jesus is the Son of God.  And Spong’s contention about the “death of Theism” as an idea, takes issue with Theism before we can even get to Trinitarian doctrine.  You can’t very well have a debate about Christ being the Son of God, if you can’t get past the ‘how’ and the ‘what’ questions, first. 

I would expect such a debate to take place between Christians and Orthodox Jews, or Christians and Muslims, or Christians and agnostics.  Sadly, TEC falls short of the gamit of lies ranging from demonic to mediocre.

Libbie+ [#21]

Unfortunately, Marcus Borg is given a sympathetic reading by some of the “leaders” in the parish where I currently worship in a diocese that formerly was traditional but which is morphing into something less and less recognizable as historic Christianity.

A great response from everybody - thank you.

If you haven’t written your letter yet, please consider doing so.

Dear Editors,

Please thank Sean Hamill for writing an accurate description of what is going on in the Episcopal Church in his article “Pittsburgh Episcopalians Weigh Division” dated Thursday, Oct. 2, 2008. In it he writes, “The dispute includes complaints that the national church allows open debate on whether Jesus is the Son of God, or that the only way to God is through Jesus — tenets of faith that conservatives find indisputable.” This quote points to the heart of the crisis in our church. The consecration of V. Gene Robinson as a bishop is only a symptom of a larger malignancy in TEC. Many Episcopal leaders have made heretical statements at odds with the basic, orthodox tenets of Christianity, including our own Presiding Bishop:

In its narrow construction, it tends to eliminate other possibilities. In its broader construction, yes, human beings come to relationship with God largely through their experience of holiness in other human beings. Through seeing God at work in other people’s lives. In that sense, yes, I will affirm that statement. But not in the narrow sense, that people can only come to relationship with God through consciously believing in Jesus.
(Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori, Arkansas Democrat Gazette, January 2007).

Rather, I see the grand statements about Jesus — that he is the son of God, the Light of the World and so forth — as the testimony of the early Christian movement. These are neither objectively true statements about Jesus nor, for example in this season, about his conception and birth. To speak of him as the son of God does not mean that he was conceived by God and had no biological human father. Rather, this is the post-Easter conviction of his followers.
(Dr. Marcus Borg, Co-Director of Center for Spiritual Development at Trinity Episcopal Cathedral Portland, and former President of the Anglican Association of Biblical Scholars, Washington Post, December 30, 2006)

Many leaders in the Anglican Communion also believe this crisis is rooted in TEC’s departure from the foundational tenets of Christianity. Archbishop Mouneer Anis, Presiding Bishop, Jerusalem & the Middle East & Bishop of Cyprus and the Gulf, articulated this well:

My friends, you may believe you have discovered a very different truth from that of the majority in the Anglican Communion. It is not just about sexuality, but about your views of Christ, the Gospel, and the authority of the Bible. Please forgive me when I relay that some say you are a different church, others even think that you are a different religion.
(excerpt from his address to the Episcopal Church House of Bishops, September 2007, http://babybluecafe.blogspot.com/2007/09/from-bishop-of-egypts-address-to-house.html)

Again, please thank Mr. Hamill for writing this well-rounded, accurate article.

I offer my contribution:

Thank you for your recent article concerning the real reason for the split in the Episcopal Church.  There are many examples one could use to highlight the departure from traditional and orthodox Christianity but one that most succinctly sets forth the road its leadership now travels is summed up in the theology of John Shelby Spong.  Bishop Spong has openly rejected virtually every tenet of the Christian faith yet he continues to be embraced by the leadership of The Episcopal Church.  He is one of the most sought after speakers at Episcopal events.  The current Presiding Bishop invited Bishop Spong to speak at a clergy conference when she was bishop of the Diocese of Nevada.  If one is curious as to Bishop Spong’s beliefs they are easily attained.  He posted them on the internet and be found at http://www.dioceseofnewark.org/jsspong/reform.html. 

Article 2 of Spong’s theses states:  Since God can no longer be conceived in theistic terms, it becomes nonsensical to seek to understand Jesus as the incarnation of the theistic deity. So the Christology of the ages is bankrupt.

How can a church claim to be a member of the Christian faith yet depose without right of trial a man who proclaims Jesus Christ as Savior but embrace without censure the words and actions of John Shelby Spong?  Sadly, this is but one example.  The internet runneth over with more examples.

The Episcopal Church needs to recognize that the world has judged them by their actions – and their silence.  The verdict is in and they have been found guilty of abandoning the Christian faith. 

To those of you looking for fodder for your letters, this comment by KarenB makes for some good information to peruse:
http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/t19/article/16708/#285551

OK, here’s my version. Keeping it at 150 words was tough.

Dear Mr. Hamill:

In your article, “Pittsburgh Episcopalians Weigh Division,” you do well to point out that, for orthodox Episcopalians, “the issue is not simply about homosexuality.”  The consecration of our Church’s first openly gay bishop in 2003 was merely symptomatic of a much deeper theological crisis.

In recent years, many Episcopal leaders have questioned or denied fundamental beliefs about God’s revelation of Himself in His Son Jesus Christ, to the extent that former president of the Episcopal Divinity School, Rev. William Rankin, could state: “Heresy implies orthodoxy, and we have no such thing in the Episcopal Church.”
http://www.re-align.org/files/StatementsTECFINAL.pdf

As far as faithful Episcopalians are concerned, this is blatantly false.  Our faith remains that of historic Christianity, grounded in the Bible and the creeds of the early undivided Church.  The defense of this faith has made our current stand against ongoing heresy in the Episcopal Church unavoidably necessary, and we are not giving up.

Respectfully,

XXXXXXXXXXXX

This isn’t the only case of some unusually “fair and balanced” reporting coming out of the NYT these days.

TJ, you are spot on in your #16 in calling the diocese’s statement heresy.  No theological heavy-hitters needed; I think the precise heresy in panentheism.

Maybe Kelly Harris has access to information about Ann Redding, who thinks she can be both Muslim and Anglican Christian.  More to the point, not merely that she can be a clergyman and believe this, but if by some miracle her bishop deposed her, how one can be a *layman* and believe it.  Ms Harris might also explain how James Pike, having denied every bit of the Christian faith died as a bishop in good standing in it.  Further, how John Spong does the same. 
While you’re at it, once you get to any of the important things Christians have done to become Christians over 2000 years, explain how you have a Bishop of Utah who isn’t baptized.  Communicate some answers to these (actually very simple) questions, and you will be ahead of most who try to communicate in the Anglican world, including Katherine Schori & Rowan Williams.

OK, folks.  One more on the desk.

A word of warmest thanks and admiration for the fine work done by Sean Hammil on the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Pittsburgh.  I am aware that several very well documented and deeply reflected letters have reached this desk expressing similar thanks, but it is refreshing and gratifying to read a news story in which the writer has taken the time to get a scope on things rather than merely report the most readily apparent.

The Christian Faith is a historic phenomenon with real, historic, bases.  While the current trend is to presume a long development of oral tradition from a fairly ordinary Jew who died in a fairly ordinary execution (with no sufficient reason for such a development) into a new kind of deity, history tells us that Christ was recognised as divine as early as His resurrection and “Doubting” Thomas’ confession to the beginnings of the New Testament writings within fifteen to twenty years after that fact.  The leaders of the present Episcopal organisation consistently avoid these facts upon which the Faith is based, castigate, inhibit, and/or depose those who insist on agreeing with the Believers of the past two millennia and today, worldwide rather than sign on to their outdated “innovations.”  (The “scholarship” on which they base their revised theology has been broadly disproven by both archeology and literary criticism over the past hundred years!)  The recent decision to choose a man active in a homosexual lifestyle as a bishop is no more significant in itself as a spoiled child stomping her foot.  She refuses to consider the opinions of her elders, she refuses to respect those who love her, and she insists on having her own way in every little thing, from the most petty to the most dangerous.  (To arbitrarily brand Anglican Christians in African and Arab lands with a “gay rights” insignia as they are engaging militant Muslims and tribal traditionalists is to just as arbitrarily sign orders for persecution and murder of any number of innocent people, all for the sake of “making a point.”)

Again, thank you Mr. Hammil, and thank you NYT, for a significantly fair and well-written story.

Most sincerely,
[url=“http://santifusion.blogspot.com”]Robert Easter
Wesley Biblical Seminary
Jackson, MS[/url]

Note that Mr. Naughton only focuses his ire on one of the issues about TEC raised in the story - that the national church allows open debate on whether Jesus is the Son of God, and utterly ignores the other - (that the national church allows open debate on whether) the only way to God is through Jesus.

Because the latter criticism is beyond dispute.

My Lord and Saviour:  Jesus Christ.  My vehicle to the divine: 427 Shelby Cobra.  In blue.

October 6, 2008

I am writing in response to Mr. Sean Hamill’s article of October 2, 2008 titled Pittsburgh Episcopalians Weigh Division. 

Mr. Hamill’s article is very accurate regarding the current situation in The Episcopal Church (TEC), and in particular regarding the plight of the diocese of Pittsburgh.

There are many heresies that the leaders of the TEC believe and teach that are causing entire dioceses to change their constitutions and affiliate with other orthodox entities.  Two in particular stand out:
1.  The authority of scripture – many in the TEC leadership believe that the Bible was written 2000 years ago for the problems of 2000 years ago and is not relevant today.  Orthodox Christians believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God for all time.
2.  Jesus is the Son of God – many in the TEC leadership have proclaimed that Jesus is “a way” to heaven, not “the way” as Jesus himself stated and as the orthodox believe.
3.  Please see http://www.re-align.org/files/StatementsTECFINAL.pdf for more statements by the TEC leadership that are at odds with what orthodox Christians believe.