Total visitors right now: 93

Click here to check your private inbox.

Welcome to Stand Firm!

All Saints, Pasadena Laments Proposition 8 But Ignores Proposition 4

Monday, November 10, 2008 • 1:01 pm

Ed Bacon, rector for All Saints, Pasadena, has issued a “Pastoral Letter” decrying the failure of Proposition 8 as discriminatory and immoral. 

While we have a renewed sense of hope and resolve, we at All Saints are also deeply disturbed, angered, saddened and embarrassed by the passing of Proposition 8, an attempt to revise our State’s Constitution to be a document of discrimination against an entire class of citizens. How immoral to use the State Constitution to deprive some citizens of their human rights instead of guaranteeing human rights for all! The proponents of Proposition 8 seem to be callously unaware of the abusive impact on lesbian and gay citizens and their allies when California votes to give rights to poultry and take them away from human beings.

What is particularly shameful about Proposition 8’s victory Tuesday is that so many religious people promoted it using a distorted interpretation of Scripture. Jesus himself reversed many Biblical guidelines when they were not aligned with the central admonition of Scripture to love your neighbor as yourself. Not everything in the Bible is Godly, moral, or Constitutional (Jacob’s defining marriage as between one man and two women Genesis 29: 17-28; stoning rebellious children Deuteronomy 21: 18-21; killing those who work on the Sabbath—Exodus 31: 14-15; eating shellfish seen as an abomination Lev. 11:10). The separation of Church and State prevents religious oppression as well as writing the Bible into the Constitution particularly discriminatory interpretations of Scripture.

  Let’s ignore for the moment the grotesque misuse of Scripture here and focus instead on this passage from his letter:

How immoral to use the State Constitution to deprive some citizens of their human rights instead of guaranteeing human rights for all! The proponents of Proposition 8 seem to be callously unaware of the abusive impact on lesbian and gay citizens and their allies when California votes to give rights to poultry and take them away from human beings.

  Did Mr. Bacon remember that California also voted on Proposition 4 -  an abortion issue? 

The initiative would prohibit abortion for unemancipated minors until 48 hours after physician notifies minor’s parent, legal guardian or, if parental abuse has been reported, an alternative adult family member.

Specific provisions
The proposed initiative, if enacted as a constitutional amendment, would have:

Provides exceptions for medical emergency or parental waiver.
Permits courts to waive notice based on clear and convincing evidence of minor’s maturity or best interests.
Mandates reporting requirements, including reports from physicians regarding abortions on minors.
Authorizes monetary damages against physicians for violation.
Requires minor’s consent to abortion, with exceptions.
Permits judicial relief if minor’s consent is coerced.

California votes rights for poultry but refuses to even allow a parent to be notified before a child allows a doctor to murder a baby?  Do these people really think the state is the better parent?

It is truly astounding that a man who calls himself a priest can so passionately work for the freedom of sexual practices, no matter how deviant or contrary to Scripture, but fail to hear the screams of the babies being killed daily.  1.3 million in the U. S. alone every year.  Isn’t it a shame that the “hope” he preaches about is denied to the most innocent and vunerable amongst us?

The depravity of man grows deeper every day and the loss of Christian leaders in the Episcopal Church has become a screaming chasm filled with the bodies of babies.  Babies whose death was lobbied for by The Episcopal Church. 

29 Comments • Print-friendlyPrint-friendly w/commentsShare on Facebook

Fetuses can not contribute to the ol’ endowment. Gay couples can.

Further, gay couples are unlikely to have children, so they have no where else other than their local, inclusive church, to leave money after they die.

Call me cynical, call me over the top and an extremist, but please demonstrate that I am wrong. I very much would like to be.

I fear His Justice. I pray for His Mercy.

[1] Posted by Matthew A (formerly mousestalker) on 11-10-2008 at 02:32 PM • top

Jackie:  Neither chickens nor unborn children are an exceedingly wealthy demographic minority in the Pasadena area.

[2] Posted by jamesw on 11-10-2008 at 02:36 PM • top

note the new red-flag word he uses:

...callously unaware of the abusive impact on lesbian and gay citizens and their allies…

As soon as you label something “abusive”, then you have everyone standing and throwing their own stones..

[3] Posted by GillianC on 11-10-2008 at 02:38 PM • top

I regard everyone who supports elective abortion as an accomplice to murder, and I regard every abortionist who performs such an abortion as a murderer!  Every last one of them is going to stand before God and answer for his or her crime.

[4] Posted by Cennydd on 11-10-2008 at 02:46 PM • top


You asked

Do these people really think the state is the better parent?

The answer, as Jonah Goldberg demonstrates very conclusively in his book, Liberal Fascism (which is not an inflammatory creation of his own, but rather a directly attributable to quotation of a well known early enthusiast for the progressivism) is very precisely what almost all progressives do think. I highly recommend reading the book—it will open your eyes to the nature and, more importantly, the degree, of the threat to our society.

Lest anyone thinks “it can’t happen here,” Goldberg cites historical fact in showing that it already has, little more than 90 years ago, long enough gone that no one posting here is likely to remember what actually happened.

Blessings and regards,
Martial Artist

[5] Posted by Militaris Artifex on 11-10-2008 at 02:54 PM • top

I have always wondered why so many homosexuals (like VGR, or Elizabeth Kaeton) and homosexual-enthusiasts like Ed Bacon support unrestricted abortion. 

It would seem logical to think that homosexuals would be extra sensitive to violence against the innocent (which abortion is - extreme violence against the extremely innocent), and would be sensitive to “the unwanted”.

I really don’t get it.

[6] Posted by DietofWorms on 11-10-2008 at 03:00 PM • top

Wherever did the idea come from that everyone has a “right” to do anything which he wants to do, whether or not it makes sense for him to do it.  Do blind people have the right to drive cars?  Do five year olds have the right to run for congress?  Where did this notion of gays having a “right” to marriage come from?  I’m getting quite tired of hearing people yap about it without giving some justification for the idea.

[7] Posted by Ann Castro on 11-10-2008 at 03:07 PM • top

Of course, gays and lesbians have the same rights to marry as anyone else.  And that is what they are upset about - their rights are the same as everyone else’s.  A gay man can marry anyone he chooses provided that the prospective partner is eligible under the standard definition of marriage.  What gays and lesbians want is the right to REDEFINE marriage into being something that it is not (i.e. purely an adult sexual contract).

Comparing this to the African-American civil rights struggle, it would be like Rosa Parks being offered any seat on the bus she wanted, but her refusing and saying she wanted the bus to fly, and asserting discrimination because the bus company wasn’t willing to affix wings and propellers to the bus.

[8] Posted by jamesw on 11-10-2008 at 03:16 PM • top

Thanks, Jackie, for posting this rant by the rector of one of the largest and most influential “progressive” churches in the country. 

Note the intensity of Ed Bacon’s rhetoric.  His real CORE beliefs have been impugned, if not attacked.  That’s why he is “deeply disturbed, angered, saddened, and embarrassed” by the passage of Proposition 8, and not at all by failure of Proposition 5 to pass.

This is not surprising, of course, at the parish that Susan Russell calls home and serves.  They’ve simply chosen the opposite of the Culture War to fight for.  But personally, I’d rather deal with a passionate liberal zealot like Ed Bacon than a fence-sitting I-refuse-to-take-sides-or-get-involved rector any time.

David Handy+

[9] Posted by New Reformation Advocate on 11-10-2008 at 03:24 PM • top

Abortion is the most horrible, violent, immoral murderous act. Any Christian who tries to rationalize this extreme form of wickedness needs to re-examine his/her Christianity. This mass-murdering of millions of God’s children is evil. Those who support policies and policy-makers who promote abortion are accomplices to murder. Period.

Fr. Kingsley Jon-Ubabuco
Arlington, Texas

[10] Posted by Spiro on 11-10-2008 at 03:28 PM • top

Abortion is the by-product of the sexual revolution.  It is wrapped up in the 24/7 fun without consequences campaign.  Think of abortion as the safety net.  This article really drove that thought home to me. I find the reasoning in this article to be so juvenille.  1)  The mother could not bear the thought of a third child.  Okay - since she must have gotten a good clue as to how those pregnancies occurred with the first two, she could have taken some precautions to prevent a third birth - or even a second.  2) Adoption from a married woman is just not done.  I can’t believe that a mother who has already held the precious life of a newborn baby in her arms would allow what the women at the country-club or grocery store would say to be more of a concern than killing your child.  3) This mother was faced with a decision as to whether to do what was in the best interest of her child or herself.  Abortion it had to be.  She choose herself.  No wonder the decision has haunted her for over 30 years.

[11] Posted by JackieB on 11-10-2008 at 03:34 PM • top

Finding a “middle way” between what has been Christian teaching for centuries and what Fr. Bacon is professing is like trying to find a “middle way” between Islam and Christianity!  There isn’t one!  Each would have to relinquish what they have pre-determined are “trenches to die in”... salavation issues for the traditional Christian, and core beliefs for the “progressive”.  What I don’t understand is why those espousing Fr. Bacon’s beliefs even WANT to be called Episcopalians or Anglicans, when their whole faith foundation is so diametrically opposed?  Why do they WANT to be so “unequally yoked”?  The only thing I have been able to imagine is they KNOW they are off base, but want an institution rooted in legitimacy to cloak their “other gospel”.

[12] Posted by Goughdonna on 11-10-2008 at 03:45 PM • top

For Diet of Worms
I think the answer to your question is quite evident.  If God says it, they are against it.  It is the anti-God agenda of secular humanists that has been embraced by “liberal” Christians and Jews.  Please read a wonderful book by David Lapin called America’s Real War in which he very meticulously lays out the anti-God agenda of the “left.”  Abortion?  Murderers deserve respect.  They blame society for criminals’ anti-social actions but innocent babies who deserve protection are undifferentiated cells with no existence apart from their mothers.  Pick an issue.  If God’s Word informs your response to that issue, they have a different perspective.  Same sex marriage.  Prayer in public life.  Teach kids about Ramadan and Kwanza but heaven forbid they should learn about the Bible.  Teach secular humanist values but hide the fact that most of our laws derive from Judeo Christian ethics.  Respect for personal property that God enjoins?  So what when there is wealth to be redistributed.  No Ten Commandments can be displayed but they fight tooth and nail for the right to display, at public expense, a Crucifix immersed in urine.  They do their master’s bidding at every turn and we should never lose sight of it.

[13] Posted by DaveG on 11-10-2008 at 04:32 PM • top

You can bet that if Proposition 4 had allowed large curettes into gay households to scrape them out because they are an inconvenience to others and paid no regard to the state of development of the lumps of tissue thereby removed, the outcry would be loud.

[14] Posted by dwstroudmd+ on 11-10-2008 at 04:53 PM • top

All Saints also opposed Proposition 4—per our Proposition Guide:

[15] Posted by Susan Russell on 11-10-2008 at 05:00 PM • top

#12 That’s always been one of the enemys strategies. Just consider the parable of the wheat and the tares, the Nicolaitans and the followers of the prophet Jezebel, and the false apostles attempting to subvert the church at Corinth. Satan delights in transforming himself into an angel of light, and putting forth his ministers as ministers of righteousness.

[16] Posted by GSP98 on 11-10-2008 at 05:15 PM • top

SR, you opposed a waiting period and parental notification for minors seeking an abortion, if I read your form correctly.  YOU DID NOT OPPOSE ABORTION.  Feel free to correct me if I am wrong.

[17] Posted by dwstroudmd+ on 11-10-2008 at 05:25 PM • top

#15, of course you did. Because parents shouldn’t have any rights over their offspring, only responsibilities. The intellectual, moral and spiritual bankruptcy of the Piskie left never ceases to amaze and astonish.

Liturgy is more than a script. A church is not a theatre.

[18] Posted by Matthew A (formerly mousestalker) on 11-10-2008 at 05:25 PM • top

#6 DietofWorms - I think if the homosexuals do what they can to get abortion legalized and make it an everyday common occurence then the abomination that they have chosen to participate in doesn’t seem quite so bad. Right Mzzzz. Russell???  smile

[19] Posted by Gordy on 11-10-2008 at 05:29 PM • top

Hate to say this but, if it hadn’t been for the huge turn out of African-American voters here in Ca. Prop 8 might not have passed! We have alot of voters here in Calif. that vote based on what they hear in the media. The focus was so high on Prop 8 that there wasn’t that much on Prop 4 in the media if any! If those who go into the polling booths read very little of the Prop then they do the e-knee-minee-miny-moe type of voting. I cannot tell you how many times since the election I have heard some people say, “Oh! I wasn’t sure about that Prop, so I just guessed and chose one so I’m not real sure how I voted on it!”  GASP!!!!!!!

I fear this happens more times than I care to think about!

[20] Posted by TLDillon on 11-10-2008 at 06:05 PM • top

Susan Russell- All Saints might want to ask its CPA and tax counsel (again) about the prohibition against political involvement by non-profits. Thought you’d had enough of the IRS on that issue before. I’m sure they’ll be interested in your “Proposition Guide”.

[21] Posted by Doubting Thomas on 11-10-2008 at 06:17 PM • top

Doubting Thomas,
Susan probably gives her “Proposition Guide” to TEc Washington Lobby Office they have in Washington, D.C. so they can handle it for her! Oh Yeah! They got one….been learning all about it on HOB/D!

[22] Posted by TLDillon on 11-10-2008 at 07:05 PM • top

They complain about the orthodox saying hateful things about them ... Well, let’s see. +Bruno says you are “ignorant”,+Andrus says you are “afraid” and the Rev Bacon says you are a"bigot” if you voted “yes” on Prop 8. Not to mention the vandalism and the protesting of churches that supported the it. Plus, I read a story that says that since Prop 8 was approved, their children are bastards. Did I leave anything out? Yes, I did. Do the gays have civil rights in California ... Yes they do, so stop picking on the blacks and saying this is a civil rights issue. It is not.

[23] Posted by martin5 on 11-10-2008 at 09:26 PM • top

Be quiet .... and now that I am Satan.

[24] Posted by Rich on 11-10-2008 at 09:42 PM • top

Wouldn’t it be nice to return to a nice simple Church which has no special commissions, lobbies, paid lobbyists, ancillary organizations, women’s issues commissions, special interest groups or groupies, etc, to interfere with the spread of Christ’s Gospel?  That leaves TEC out of the picture, doesn’t it?

[25] Posted by Cennydd on 11-10-2008 at 09:42 PM • top

All Saints also couldn’t be bothered to care about a bond to fund the Children’s hospital, can’t have the pesky little buggers that escaped abortion be allowed to have access to much needed health care, if they need it.

[26] Posted by mari on 11-10-2008 at 09:53 PM • top

DietofWorms, the consistent principle running through “progressive” circles is that sexual satisfaction is the highest good, and sexual activity must not be prohibited without regard to the circumstances.  The only restriction still standing in their eyes is sex with children, but there are people working on that one (“inter-generational love”).

Abortion on demand is a rational corollary of unlimited sexual activity between men and women.  “Freedom” requires eliminating pregnancy.  Same-sex activists can’t demand freedom for themselves while calling for others to suffer the “punishment” of pregnancy and parenthood.  Killing babies is just the price of freedom for those who survive to adulthood.  It’s logical; very sick, but logical.

[27] Posted by Katherine on 11-11-2008 at 12:33 AM • top

I think its funny that comment #15 by Susan Russell was to let us know, contrary to Jackie’s claim when posting this article, that they did indeed take note of prop 4…and were opposed to it.
I hate to tell Ms Russell but I don’t think Jackie’s anger was out of the fact that All Saints’ Church ignored the issue, but rather out of the fact that they opposed a proposition limiting abortion and then turned around and fought for gay marriage rights, both of which are contrary to common Christian norms.
The anger is not becuase you ignored a political issue.  Its that All Saints has used its pastoral and spritual role to lead others into anti-christian positions.

[28] Posted by Tony Romo on 11-12-2008 at 12:27 PM • top

“15, of course you did. Because parents shouldn’t have any rights over their offspring”

Of course, because minors can decide for themselves what they want to do with their own bodies, and because people should be allowed to legally practice their sexualities no matter what their orientation is, and because we should not deny sacraments such as marriage and ordination to the baptized, and btw TEC does infant baptism…

Am I the only one seeing the foundation unwittingly being built for the day when the Susan Russells of this world will become the new reactionary bigots in the eyes of the next minority group that wants to assert their rights?

[29] Posted by AndrewA on 11-12-2008 at 12:42 PM • top

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

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