AAC Publishes Documents Prepared for the Primates Meeting and a Cover Letter from ++Akinola to ++RW

Did TEC know this was coming?

Great report. Too bad it misspelled Resurrection as “Ressurection.”

Please pass this correction along if anyone knows who can edit it.

WOW!!!

Prediction: Rowan will do nothing, and the Anglican split will become visibly irreparable.

Perhaps it is for the best.

Just finished reading it…...
Wow.
And it even left out the Episcopal Divinity School’s 2003 participating in the Polyamory Conference.  Perhaps after SSB for LGBTs are accomplished, the B part is reflected on, and that’s the next step.  Not being facetious…..I think it stands to reason.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Wb-z8K4nNS8C&pg=PA62&lpg=PA62&dq=polyamory+Episcopal+seminary&source=web&ots=iWKw_hrOvb&sig=qddlo_aA_Q6OgeoD3bLaJ6Q1diE&hl=en&ei=isORSdC4NdKgtwfJ4JzTCw&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=3&ct=result

Am I wrong, or was the heresy thread put to very good use?

carl

I would have preferred less quotes - some of these statements are, in my opinion, literally true, though they seem to be headed off in a very dubious direction.  Rather a selection of quotes which are more clearly heterodoxical along with more context and some analysis.

So taken out of context, there are some that I easily could have said myself in some context of trying to explain something - like e.g. “Because we live in different cultural situations, not all biblical commandments or proscriptions apply simply or in the same way to any one person or situation.”

Paragraph on the Melnyks should include Asherah worship, and detail TEC’s response - not admitting that Asherah worship is wrong but citing copyright error - see Christianity Today blog on the subject

Melnyks paragraph also needs the sex liturgy penned by Oakwyse (albeit not destined for TEC use but for druid use - still by a TEC priest who supposedly used it with his druid clan)

#5, Virginia Anglican, thank you for the reference to the 2003 polyamory conference.  It’s nice to get referrals for items to add to the “heresy/fresh hell thread”, especially when they come with documentation!

Jill Woodliff probably deserves some credit for her outstanding work chronicling the rake’s progress in the TEClub.

I am not an attorney, a fact that most of you are no doubt aware of.  Having said this, and after glancing through these reports, I would say that this is dynamite, and if as hoped, they reach the right hands, they will offer a damning indictment of both the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada.  Let’s pray that the primates of GAFCON and the Global South take a good long hard look at them and act decisively.

As a ps to my WOW!!! in #3, I am none the less incredibly sad that this comes out so late in the debacle - and apparently after the Primates Meeting.

I think it is brilliant strategy to release this AFTER the Primates Meeting.  This now pushes the Alexandria Meeting With Flaccid Welshman off the radar screen as the irrelevancy that it is.  The primary reality in the Anglican “Communion” [sic] now is these reports.

Cennydd, I’m sure that the reports are in the right hands. The challenge is that it would seem to be difficult to depose a sitting PB. I’m not sure the HOB can do it, and I don’t think the other primates can do it, either. They can apply pressure for her to resign, but it’s unlikely that they would do so. Furthermore, I believe that she thinks she is doing a good job.

I’m no lawyer either, but I think her actions might set her up for personal injury and other types of civil lawsuits. Furthermore, some of the actions taken with the departing dioceses might lead to criminal fraud charges. Perhaps she could be sued and fined out of office, but it seems unlikely that the departed conservatives would file charges.

We shall see. The document is quite a bombshell, but all it really does is collect together the history of her reign of terror, so that it can be read, marked, learned, and inwardly digested.

Once someone has been allowed to assume the authority and power of a tyrannical dictator, it is very difficult to topple them.

I’m very surprised the ‘evidence’ is only 42 pages.

This is the most definitive cataloguing of innovations to date.  There were several items I was unaware of, and I had started a file years ago, because I simply couldn’t keep it all straight.

An amazing piece of work.  Great summary….and worth printing out and passing on to your friends who are “pew sitters.”  It’s easy to delete and email, but if you were to hand someone a 42 page document…. Certainly would give them something to think about!

There’s even a thread on this growing over at Ship of Fools. It largely seems to be in agreement with the AAC document. Of course, there are exceptions.

See:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=012644

I would be very interested in supporting the full report be published in the local news papers the week of the primates’ meeting. I’ll leave it to Greg and company to decide whether to post a thread asking for donations. I for one, would contribute.  Expensive? Yes, but priceless.

Random thoughts:

Abp. Williams is going to have to bury his head way down deep in the sand now.

Somebody nail this to the door at 815.

It’d be nice to have “THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH: TEARING THE FABRIC OF COMMUNION TO SHREDS” nicely bound and handed out to all attendees at GC ‘09.

In my own little world, I’d like to hear a Windsor bishop’s reply to allowing this destructive charade (TEC leadership) continue.  I am NOT holding my breath!

#22 Athanasius Returns,
“In my own little world, I’d like to hear a Windsor bishop’s reply to allowing this destructive charade (TEC leadership) continue.  I am NOT holding my breath!”
To me, most folks are missing the obvious.  The A.C. cannot disciple TEC. It is ultimately an internal matter. TEC cannot be saved from the outside.

I am profoundly disturbed by this document after thinking for a day.

It breaks the silence regarding TEC’s Christology in the official communications of the Anglican Communion; previously, “everyone knew,” but offically: the silence was deafening.

The silence was all the more deafening, since Christology is incomparably more important than sexuality.  “Everyone who’s anyone” knew the most profound heat of passion was about the Christology and not the sexuality ... the issue of the Christology was so sad that ... it was almost unspeakably sad.  It was something we did not want new Christians or people sitting in the pews to hear.  It was a faith breaker.

Introduction of the issue of Christology deserved a more decent forray than this.  This is church council stuff.  Like Nicea, Chalcedon.  Time for the utterly huge questions.  Only it’s brought on by a lady who thinks being a Sunday School teacher makes her the dean of a school of theology, and a church which applauds this and uses this kind of wordplay in framing its theology.  What an utterly horrid circumstance.

And the Christology is lumped together in one document together with stuff about law suits.  I am aghast.

Note Hermeneut’s comment on the Ship of Fools posting:

I think it’s the manner and timing of this communication that I find extraordinary.

Imagine that you have a meeting with an estranged husband, to try to work things out, under the guidance of a respected counsellor. Despite all the grief and mutual hurt that has gone on in the past, the meeting is remarkably peaceful; you are even able to work together on issues affecting other people.

As the meeting concludes you agree - it seems - that there are still problems and hurt to work through, but that you should do this through a long term counselling programme. You understand that you are both committed to this, and the counsellor has also staked his reputation on the plan.

Then you get home and find that your husband has published a letter on the web saying that talking to you is a waste of time - and appends a dossier, prepared by your bitter step-sister, intended to establish what a terribly unfaithful slut you have been in the past.

Charming.

Indeed, I wonder if perhaps +Akinola here wasn’t a bit impatient and didn’t like the placid trust in process of +Venables and +Orombi.

Unless the issues are on the table for all to see, there is no “working things out”.

As has been stated ad nauseam, the differences are irreconcilable.

Abp. Akinola’s timing demonstrates restraint, not impatience BTW.  How much more patience would you have the orthodox demonstrate, j.m.c.?  And the logic of more patience?

Athanasius, I would have preferred this matter to have come up a long time ago indeed.  We have been complicit with TEC using LGBT as a kind of human shield to win media and public praise while denying Christ.  We criticize TEC ... with incredible passion because of the Christology ... and the LGBT community feels that the full force of the rounds is directed at them, and that they are the cause of the schism.

A few months ago I heard a closeted lesbian woman say she was profoundly uncomfortable in her church since she felt like everyone thought the schism was the fault of LGBT people.  Whatever we think of sexuality, we do not wish this.

However, when it is brought to the fore, it should not be done in this matter ... slapped together with complaints about lawsuits.

It is the supreme issue.

...Then you get home and find that your husband has published a letter on the web saying that talking to you is a waste of time - and appends a dossier, prepared by your bitter step-sister, intended to establish what a terribly unfaithful slut you have been in the past.

To the contrary:  I submit that it is like getting home, and your lawyer sends you a document detailing what an adulterous pig your husband has been, including messages and phonecalls to and from escorts and other women made while sitting across from you during the meeting.

“...you are even able to work together on issues affecting other people…”

From my perspective on the interwebs, this optimistic perspective seems to be a minority view.  Here is how Venables described the situation:

“...the situation has no long term resolution. It would take a miracle to keep it together…”

I am confident the substance of these documents has been discussed in multiple meetings, but I would imagine without the unavoidable particularity provided by the actual documents.

j.m.c. (#26), point well taken. 

I guess what we have then is a document and cover letter that point to the preponderance of evidence that the revisionist experiment within TEC is beyond travesty.  It does seem to put the writing on the wall, so to speak.

Indeed, the metaphor has its weaknesses, it’s the reaction of someone from SOF.
But:
<ul><li>what about how Christology is significantly brought up, for the very first time re. TEC by a primate in an official communication in the AC?</li>
<li>and as an afterthought to a Primates’ meeting?</li></ul>
It makes the grievance concerning Christology seem infinitely more petty than it is.

TEC’s Christology

The problem to me is not so much a single officially hetrodox Christology but an incoherence and a lack of interest in defending the officially orthodox Christology.

JMC, I respectfully submit that ALL of the problems in TEC, regarding sexuality (and not just homosexuality, but polyamory, pre-marital sex, and just-short-of-intercourse for youth), law-suits, and Christ’s nature and mission, ALL hinge on the authority of the Bible.  TEC totally flouts this, therefore sex, Jesus Christ, law-suits, obeying those things in authority over us (ie, canon law) and whatever else is just up for grabs—just do whatever feels good and right to TEC at the moment.  Hmmm, brings up thoughts of a Bible verse, eh?
Jane, Edwin’s wife

I find it interesting the the Primus of Scotland, Idris Jones, is cited by Abp. Akinola as having called the differences “irreconcilable.”  Scotland is pretty much pro-“new thing”, right?
Any sign that there are enough revisionist provinces willing to stop fighting and come to an amicable separation, or are TEC’s money and the ABC’s unity-in-name-only agenda dominant on the revisionist side?

Comments for this entry, and only for this entry, are running twice the width of my computer screen, making it very difficult to read them.  Can something be done to adjust the width of the comment section?  Thanks.  Frances Scott

Thanks, Frances.  My screen too.

#32 Edwin (Edwin’s wife),
“ALL hinge on the authority of the Bible”
Not quite by my reckoning. The TEC twin mantras of diversity and inclusiveness have to do with a misunderstanding of the very nature of God and the very nature of Love. God is misunderstood to be only a loving and gracious God. This is Marcionism . [KJS]“The Episcopal Church’s General Convention acted last summer out of a sense that reason and a broad reading of the Great Commandment required a different conclusion about matters of homosexuality than did strict adherence to seven passages in scripture which seem to speak against it.” “the Great Commandment” requires us (in love) to go to our brother/sister and tell them when they are caught in a sin.  When we do this we are then accused of being “judgmental”. Even when she uses the word “reason” it is not Hooker’s reason informed by God.  Part of the ongoing confusion is that we are using the same language with different meanings. Archbiship Venables spoke to this when he noted that the word “repentance” meant something very different to the revisionists than it did to him.

What continues to crop us is an understanding that the Anglican Communion must discipline TEC. This may even lead to TEC being booted out from Canterbury or it may lead to TEC walking away.  This may solve the problems for the Anglican Communion in general but in what way does this lead to reformation of TEC.  In fact it may expedite the unraveling of TEC without any external restraint. My questions are the following:  Can TEC be saved? should it be saved? and if it can be saved how can it be saved? I believe the answer actually lies in the currently much maligned and misapplied canons of TEC. The discipline must come from within however and can be accomplished via the canons IF the will is there.

Father,
Our times are in Your hands.  We entrust to You the ecclesial crisis and fragmentation.  We entrust to You the economic crisis.
Your Son is waiting for His bride.  By the work of the Holy Spirit, may she awaken and turn to Him.  Guide her through these times.  Fill her lamp with oil, and show her the path to walk in.  Amen.

Just a couple of quick comments -
#6 is right. Not all of the statements by the ‘liberal’ side quoted in these useful documents (the American and Canadian ones) are equally damning or heretical. The documents are very helpful since they amass a lot of evidence in one place, but they occassionally come across as theologically naive - a couple of the folks quoted protest that ultimately Jesus is the Word of God. A simple citing of these quotations in a section of the document that is attempting to demonstrate that liberals do not believe the Bible to be the word of God is misleading and makes it look as if conservatives don’t believe that Jesus is the Word of God. This is the problem I suppose with this genre of document - no room for nuance.
More importantly perhaps - quite a number of posters are saying that there are obviously irreconcilable differences so why don’t the liberals just give up or let us go. It seems to me that there is a fundamental issue here for TEC and the ACoC. It is not simply a matter of wanting global standing and recognition, although that may be a factor. The issue is one of mission. Given that many (most?) on the revisionist side do not see that there is much importance or necessity in preaching the good news of Jesus to a fallen world in need of grace, what is the mission of TEC and ACoC? Surely it has something to do with their particular understanding of ‘justice.’ (And I want to make clear that I am very much in favour of justice and that, sadly, many conservatives seem to talk as if they are against it…) The TEC/ACoC self-understanding seems to be to bring this understanding of justice-as-radical-inclusion to an ignorant world. For them to be asked to leave the Communion, or even to share the North American Anglican franchise, would deprive them of their mission to educate the Anglican Communion. They want to be in communion with Africa, Asia and Latin America so that they can spread this version of the ‘gospel’ to the unenlightened. They will not give up easily.

It’s almost as if some ultra-right-wing Fundie got placed in The Episcopal Church by the Family Association of America in a super-secret undercover long-term mole operation.  Objective: we don’t like lefty TEC, it’s too liberal, let’s make it look bad.  TEC target weaknesses: lay people and clergy rather weak on theology and biblical studies.  Means of operation: mole enters TEC, climbs as high as possible in heirarchy, teaching vile rubbish with obvious flaws which the poor TEC folk won’t notice, stays under the radar and away from serious criticism by making sure his stuff is so bad it’s never published in peer-review journals and fellow theologians avoid mentioning even his name; mole subject makes as much of an ass of himself as mole possibly can without getting inhibited, and in doing so makes clear to as many as possible that TEC is a very silly institution.  Exit strategy: mole finally is inhibited, mole bows to audience, declares colours, hope you liked the show, I’m outta here, let this be a lesson to you all - read some books, don’t go for rubbish or the rubbish will get worse.

Unbeknownst to the Family Association of America, theological education amongst laypeople and clergy in TEC is even more impoverished than imagined, or perhaps even, imaginable.  Mole subject is also more clever and adept at crafting vitriolic prose intermingled with patent lies than had been thought.  Writing becomes progressively more hateful, stupid, and arrogant in claims of own reasonability.  Mole writer flies high in ranks to post of Bishop, ascends to the Theology Committee of House of Bishops.  Mole gets a lot of gigs on TV because it’s so funny to see a bishop telling the world his own church is totally nuts.  Finally decides to do his best to get inhibited but General Convention refuses.  TEC laypeople and clergy suck up the delicious vitriolic prose with unexpected alacrity, or rather, glee.  TEC laypeople taught that all who believe in the resurrection are complete fundamentalist nutters secretly wishing they were slave owners who should be yelled at or avoided, and to avoid the art of interpretation completely by calling Christians “literalists.”  No good reason for the outside world to do so - thus taught a few uncompelling one-liners which make sense only to TEC True Believers. Presiding Bishop elected who is a fan of mole subject.  TEC members who start suspecting Real Identity of subject switch curricula over to similar stuff which is a bit more subtle, like Crossan and Borg.  Church begins to take on cult-like proportions in suing departing congregations and dioceses, since General Convention delegates have been spoon-fed the vitriolic stuff for decades.  Whole Anglican Communion shudders at possible impending schism.

Family Association of America tells mole in a last, tearful secret message, “sorry Mole, this op just got way outta hand - ya know, you were too talented for your own good, and they were a lot more vulnerable ... total mess, situation way too volatile, we can’t pull ya out, yer gonna have to stay undercover.”  Burns all records of true identity of mole subject.

Mole must live out last days fated to remain Bishop John Shelby Spong.

I am simply waiting on TEC to implode. GC 2009 or shortly afterward looks like a prophetic date to circle. The biggest question is what will the AC wheels of authority do when the GC church formally flips its middle finger at them all ( with sugar coating of course)? Will there be more conversation & whatever the dialogue is they call it happen? Dialogue to TEC means as soon as you bow to the new master.

Dcn Dale, #37,

Is the will there?  Doesn’t appear to be any in my view.

The biggest question is what will the AC wheels of authority do…

You already know what they will do.  Nothing.

Looks like RW has another document to use as another basis for forming “listening groups”...and I would be suprised if he even did that.  RW is obviously from the “Wimpdonite” tribe of Israel (for those of you who enjoy the old “Far Side” cartoons).

The document is excellent - suitable framing. 

At least these reports have put the revisionists’ heresies and dictatorial attitudes out there for all of the Christian world to see.  Of course, now that the shameless heretics now running things have had their dirty tricks exposed to the light of day, they’ll put their usual shameful attempt at spin on it, and they’ll claim that it is US who have caused all of the problems….as they usually do.

In response to 37,38, and 39 (a three-fer!)...

38 - Thanks, Jill for the offering of a prayer we can all agree with. It’s by our Lord’s sacrifice and intercession that we have any healing and any hope.

37 - Dcn Dale, TEC the institution can’t be saved. It could die and be reborn - person by person. Whether the org charts and buildings remain the same is uninteresting and immaterial. The Church (Bride of Christ) is real; the organization is an ephemeral epiphenomenon. It’s only because we inhabit time and space that we give much credence to the physical organization.

39 - Grant, you state accurately that:

They want to be in communion with Africa, Asia and Latin
America so that they can spread this version of
the ‘gospel’ to the unenlightened. They will not give up
easily.

Here’s where the AC runs a risk of suffering corruption and transgressing the express commands of Scripture - for does it not say (2 Corinthians 10:3-5):

For though we live in the world, we do not wage war as
the world does. The weapons we fight with are not the
weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine
power to demolish strongholds. We demolish arguments
and every pretension that sets itself up against the
knowledge of God, and we take captive every thought to
make it obedient to Christ.

I hate to sound unloving, but the Christian Church should consign the promulgators of this false Gospel to Hell and focus on the guerrilla work of bringing the Good News to the lost. To be clear, KJS and her minions in GC are not the Enemy - their ideas are.
As for the orthodox, broken fellowship can be the breaking of chains and manacles when you’re tied to TEC.

Finally, here is a relevant study in how and why to separate and prepare for a coming renewal - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uNrTbM8DOwk - it comes from a Star Trek TNG episode called “Sins of the Father”. Perhaps we can think of Worf/Kurn as the outside/inside strategy

With respect, the AAC has been publishing these broad concerns for quite some time.  On a 2001 archive, I found Les Fairfield’s piece: Modernist Decline and Biblical Renewal: The Episcopal Church from 1870-2000. 

This broad range was included in the AAC’s stated mission:

“Historic Faith, Ecumenical Vision. We affirm the Faith of the Church as it is set forth in the Nicene and Apostles’ Creeds and in the classical Prayer Book tradition, including those documents contained in the “Historical Documents” section of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer (BCP p.863). We further affirm the principles of the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral (BCP p.876) as an expression of the normative authority of Holy Scripture and as a basis for our present unity with brothers and sisters in the Anglican Communion and for the future reunion of all the divided branches of Christ’s one holy, catholic and apostolic Church.

CONTEMPORARY IMPLICATIONS OF THE GOSPEL

Christian mission is rooted in unchanging biblical revelation. At particular times, however, specific challenges to authentic faith and holiness arise which require thoughtful and vigorous response. We therefore speak to the following issues of our time and culture.

The Uniqueness of Jesus Christ. While religions and philosophies of the world are not without elements of truth, Jesus Christ alone is the full revelation of God. In and through the Gospel, Jesus judges and corrects all views and doctrines. All persons everywhere need to learn of him, come to know and believe in him, and receive forgiveness and new life in him, as there is no other name given under heaven by which we must be saved (Acts 4:12).

...

Sanctity of Life. All human life is a sacred gift from God and is to be protected and defended from conception to natural death. We will uphold the sanctity of life and bring the grace and compassion of Christ to those who face the realities of previous abortion, unwanted pregnancy, and end-of-life illness.

...

Marriage, Family, and the Single Life. God has instituted marriage to be a life-long union of husband and wife, intended for their mutual joy, help, and comfort, and, when it is God’s will, for the procreation and nurture of children. Divorce is always contrary to God’s original intention, though in a fallen world it is sometimes a tragic necessity. The roles of father and mother, exercised in a variety of ways, are God-given and profoundly important since they are the chief providers of moral instruction and godly living. The single life, either by call or by circumstance, is honored by God. It is therefore important for unmarried persons to embrace and be embraced by the Christian family.

Human Sexuality. Sexuality is inherent in God’s creation of every human person in his image as male and female. All Christians are called to chastity: husbands and wives by exclusive sexual fidelity to one another and single persons by abstinence from sexual intercourse. God intends and enables all people to live within these boundaries, with the help and in the fellowship of the Church.

SUPPORT OF THE EPISCOPAL CHURCH

We desire to be supportive of congregations, dioceses, provinces, and the national structures of the Episcopal Church and the worldwide Anglican Communion. However, when there arise within the Church at any level tendencies, pronouncements, and practices contrary to biblical, classical Anglican doctrinal and moral standards, we must not and will not support them. Councils can err and have erred, and the Church has no authority to ordain anything contrary to God’s Word written (Articles of Religion XIX, XX - BCP p.871). When teachings and practices contrary to Scripture and to this orthodox Anglican perspective are permitted within the Church - or even authorized by the General Convention - in obedience to God, we will disassociate ourselves from those specific teachings and practices and will resist them in every way possible.”

IMHO, the ABC is unlikely to be surprised by this document - in the past, he has even commented on the writings of Spong.

FWIW, I agree that there should have been an enormous broo-ha-ha and discipline when the slide started, whether with Pike, Spong, Righter, or with the revision of the lectionary for latter versions of the 1928 BCP.

(Pls pardon the long quotes - I even deleted some topics that were also covered by the recent documents.)

#46 Doug Stein,
“TEC the institution can’t be saved. It could die and be reborn - person by person.”
1.  Doug, I’m uncertain what you mean by your second sentence.
2.  I do believe TEC can be saved but it must save itself from within. It certainly is on a self destructive path. Is the Holy Spirit grieved. Yes. Has the Holy Spirit left. No. She can still be brought to repentance. This is a test of faith for us on the outside as much as it is a test of faith for those on the inside. Are we renting our garments or licking our lips?

What’s with the goofy formatting on this thread?

#49 Ask #5

#48 - Dcn Dale
Sorry if I was unclear, but here’s the thinking. The only reason to run an “inside strategy” is to save the lost within the organization. “Let goods and kindred go, this mortal life also…” as the Lutheran hymn declares. Anything good in Anglicanism will be preserved by God as gold that’s passed through the fire. Dioceses come and go - even TEO used to plant dioceses (although now they’re in the mergers business).

Remember that the only thing holding the bulk of TEO together is a shared condescension towards Papists and Baptists, an imposed (albeit disguised and sometimes ignored) worship of the liberal sacraments of abortion and sodomy, and a (diminishing) amount of dead people’s money. If TEO had to live on current cash income (no endowments) the whole thing would collapse within 1-2 years at most.

Demographics is destiny. TEO will decline and faithful parts of the Church will increase. Perhaps ACNA will be one of the successors (especially if they keep planting churches). At the point where “non-TEO” Anglicans number more than TEO, who is the “recognized province”?

Besides growing the Church, we need to counter (take captive) the thoughts that aren’t in submission to the Holy Spirit. TEO is a bouquet of cut flowers. Cutoff from the Lord they can smell and look nice for a little while, but soon the murky brown water, withered leaves, and unpleasant odor of decay will alert folks that there is no life there.

By the way, I’m certainly not licking my lips. I spent 25 years fighting bridge-by-bridge in TEO. I was called out in 2006 and am glad to have left. I have friends still in “durance vile” so I keep smuggling files in the cakes as frequently as possible.

Because of the increase of wickedness, the love of most will grow cold, but he who stands firm to the end will be saved.  Matthew 24:12-13

Deacon Dale #48 raises an important point—are we renting our garments or licking our lips?  We are called to expose works of darkness (Ephesians 5:11) but in love.  We must guard against cold love!

#51 Doug Stein,
“The only reason to run an “inside strategy” is to save the lost within the organization. “Let goods and kindred go, this mortal life also…” as the Lutheran hymn declares. Anything good in Anglicanism will be preserved by God as gold that’s passed through the fire.”
Doug, I think you make some good points and your metaphors are useful. What do you mean when you say the only reason to stay is to “save the lost within the organization”? Do you mean rescue those (who are Christians) lost within the organization. Is this an extraction? or do you mean saving lost souls in TEC? I ask this because it is important in understanding the “inside strategy” As someone who considers herself and inside strategist, I wonder if Sarah Hey would agree with you. I think the inside strategy is a kind of gorilla warfare but that is mostly for lay persons.  What about the professional army made up of Bishops? What is their role in TEC? And beyond TEC for those of us in ACNA, what should our role be? I would like to hear from the Inside folks about this. Do you want us to butt out or other than prayer how can we help?

Yeah, what IS with the goofy formatting on this thread?

Whatever’s wrong with it, please fix it…...it’s driving me nuts!

#55 Cennydd,
I bet the problem is with your browser.  Do you use I.E.?  I use Firefox and the thread is fine.

Cennydd, I’ll read the left side, you read the right and then we can email our respective sides to each other!!! 

Bill

54…and I thought it was just me…phewww!!!

Yay!!!  More documents that ++Cantuar can put in the bottom drawer of his night stand!!!  That’ll show em!!!  Seriously…I skimmed it…it’s okay.

Formatting whiny-babies:

I’ve made some changes to the style sheet which, from what I can tell, have fixed the problem in IE.

IE users, let me know if you still see the problem.

Greg…you’re our online hero!!!

The timing of this is interesting, indeed.  First, it reinforces the point that the conservative Primates have watched the Dar es Salaam directives be completely ignored.  Therefore, they have accepted that the Primates’ Meeting in its current form is useless.  They decided to be pleasant but firm in expressing their beliefs and to depart in peace.  Next, a document is published which may have an effect on the ACC meeting in June.  Remember it was this body which is the only one to have done anything to TEC.  There remains some chance that body will put TEC and ACiC on actual probation, not double secret probation.

We may see conservative Primates paying less and less attention to official Communion processes in general.  Let them go have their listening sessions and covenant sessions if they want to; we’ve got people to convert and believers needing guidance.  We’ll get back to you if you ever come up with anything interesting.  Meanwhile, we can expect to see the meetings of conservative Primates become more normative for the believing portions of the communion.

And TEC can easily blow the whole thing open in Anaheim in July.

#53 Dcn Dale -
By “lost”, I mean the following…
<ul>
<li>Christians who haven’t kept the wicks trimmed and are low on spare oil for their lamps - and stumbling around in the dusk
<li>Seekers who are at risk of being seduced by a false gospel
<li>The highjackers who are actively and knowlingly trying to tear down the Faith
</ul>
...since Jesus died and rose for all of them. We’re commanded to make disciples of *all* nations, after all!

Whether its an extraction or not depends on the health of the person. If they’re bloodied and suffering shell shock relocation to a hospital is warranted. If sound of mind and body and possessing a working M16 and plenty of ammo (with modern communications the Gospel is a weapon good at long range *and* hand-to-hand combat) then obeying the current orders from HQ is the right thing to do.

You’re correct that laity (and non-stipendiary clergy) have the easiest time of this. Bishops who are Christians should imitate Jimmy Stewart in “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” obtrusively and frequently whenever bishops meet and imitate Mark Twain in their writing. They have authority and should use it. Collegiality is not a virtue here; just make sure any offense and cause for stumbling is the offense of the Gospel and the skandelon of Jesus.

The folks who have it the roughest are the stipendiary priests and deacons. I’d hate to be an orthodox clergy under the gimlet eyes of Bishops Lightloafers and Spong-Sycophant while at the same time having to proclaim the Gospel to folks who think that Church is where the smart folks hang out between protest marches.

As for the outside strategy, ACNA should preach the Gospel in season and out of season. It will attract those who seek the Lord. Plant churches where you’re called and focus on the Lord. Treat TEO as if they’re fancy-dress Scientologists (since they’ve got the lawsuit thing down pat). If ACNA does its job, seekers won’t bother with TEO; no one prefers the gift of free cubic zirconia over free diamond. Show the True Bride and trust the Lord to open folks eyes to see her and cause them to shrink back from the raddled whore they’ve been dallying with.

BTW, I *really* recommend the ST-TNG clip I linked in #46. I think it nails the outside/inside strategies and serves as a manual for how we leave and how we stay based on our call - and how we work together as brothers.

I see the document as an attempt to bring the things of darkness into the light and to follow escalation principles in Matthew 18.  They have been ignored when they went directly to the bishops and structures in TEC institution, and apparently ignored by Canterbury so now are taking it to the church at large.

If bishops are lying about what’s happening and misinformation perpetuated (e.g. saying at Lambeth that TEC is the defendant in all the court cases), and votes (or indaba or press releases or whatever) are based on the lies, then the situation needs to be brought into the light.  I don’t think that many in the COE realize the extent of the problems and persecution of the orthodox in the US.  It’s also a way of presenting their “side” for the mediation (if a mediator is ever even appointed.)

#63 Doug Stein,
First, let me thank you for thoroughly answering my questions and secondly for lending such insight via your metaphors. You have an excellent grasp of things. Thanks for helping with the mind of Christ. I especially like this, “Bishops who are Christians should imitate Jimmy Stewart in “Mr. Smith goes to Washington” obtrusively and frequently whenever bishops meet and imitate Mark Twain in their writing. They have authority and should use it.”
Blessings and keep commenting!

#64- I’m firmly behind the document. Almost none of it was new to me, but it goes a long way toward cataloging error in TEC and ACoC.  However, how is waiting until after the primates meeting following the escalation principles in Matthew?  ++Akinola states that he showed the document only to his fellow Global South brethren but did not submit it in the primates meeting.  Instead he publishes it in an open letter after the meeting is concluded. 

Hopefully, this document will prove useful at the ACC meeting, but the timing to me at least is not ideal.

Since Lent is approaching, I have some things to publicly repent of.  the past few days it has become obvious that I have been confusing my expectations with my hopes.  I believe that hope is how people of faith operate. I am convinced that God’s will is for TEC to repent. For me to publicly proclaim that it will do otherwise is not helpful. I wish my brothers and sisters well who have stayed as martyrs or resisters and will pray my hopes and God’s will for them and TEC. Whether we are on the inside or the outside of TEC I would hope that we would be together in our hopes even though we may not share similar expectations. It is not necessary for TEC to innovate any further to demonstrate how far they have come “inch by inch”.  The AAC documentation is more than enough evidence. I do not believe it is helpful to wish further innovations on TEC at GenCon09 simply to show the world what the world already knows. I believe GenCon is an opportunity for TEC to repent and I will pray that this will happen.

Dcn Dale wrote, “I do not believe it is helpful to wish further innovations on TEC…” Dale has a good heart—this reflects a loving attitude.

And further, ” I believe GenCon is an opportunity for TEC to repent…” Dale, with his good heart, nevertheless has mush for brains. God bless ya Dale!

Dcn Dale, since I think you are trying to do what is right, I will continue my attempt to sober you up. I sincerely hope this helps.

There is a difference between “hoping and praying” for repentance (which is loving and good), and wisdom—that is, wise expectations. Namely, forget the “theoretical,”—there is effectively, pragmatically, and realistically, NO opportunity and NO chance that TEC will repent at GenCon. To suggest otherwise is foolish. Go ahead, please pray for miracles, but don’t disrepect biblical wisdom.

Biblical wisdom provides hope for an individual child of TEC, if repentant, but no honest hope of revival for TEC as a whole. “I have given her [TEC] time to repent of her immorality, but she is unwilling. So I will cast her on a bed of suffering, and I will make those who commit adultery with her [all who are still in bed with TEC (like “inside-strategy-traditionalists”)] suffer intensely, unless they repent of her ways. I will strike her children dead [all who have TEC as their mother church].” (from Rev. 2-3—and NOTE: Everyone one of these hurting/lapsed/imperfect churches, despite their sins, are objectively much better than TEC—and if these churches of Revelation stood under the judgment of God for their lesser failings; how much more TEC!)

Biblical wisdom would have us separate from willful hardness; from calculated heresy; from the pride that calls evil ‘good’ and good ‘evil;’ and from lying to the Holy Spirit.

Biblical wisdom would have us test the spirits and see that some are good and some are evil; and not to treat the evil spirits as if they were good. “Dear children, this is the last hour; and as you have heard that the antichrist is coming, even now many antichrists have come. ... Who is the liar? It is the man who denies that Jesus is the Christ. Such a man is the antichrist—he denies the Father and the Son… I am writing these things to you about those who are trying to lead you astray…If you know that He is righteous, you know that everyone who does what is right has been born of Him.” (cf. I Jn 2).

Biblical wisdom says, just because there are a number of believers in TEC, that is not sufficient justification to remain yoked to the unbelieving others, especially the leaders: “Do not be yoked together with unbelievers. For what do righteousness and wickedness have in common? Or what fellowship can light have with darkness? 15What harmony is there between Christ and Belial? What does a believer have in common with an unbeliever? What agreement is there between the temple of God and idols? For we are the temple of the living God. As God has said: “I will live with them and walk among them, and I will be their God, and they will be my people.”
“Therefore come out from them
    and be separate, says the Lord.
  Touch no unclean thing,
    and I will receive you.”
“I will be a Father to you,
    and you will be my sons and daughters, says the Lord Almighty.” (II Cor. 6).

You don’t have to take my word for it. Test the spirits.

[39] Grant LeMarquand

but they occasionally come across as theologically naive - a couple of the folks quoted protest that ultimately Jesus is the Word of God.

When liberal Christians refer to the Lord Jesus as the Word of God, they inevitably do so in order to denigrate Scripture.  I have seen it countless times.  You quote the Scripture, and are promptly accused of “bibliolatry.” You are sternly reminded the Jesus is the Word of God, and not the words on the page.  You are exhorted to have a relationship with Jesus and not with the book.  But what Jesus would that be?  How do we apprehend the Lord Jesus without the words on the page?  Outside of Scripture, we don’t know a thing about Him.  The typical liberal spins off into subjectivism at this point, and you suddenly realize that Jesus has been declared the Word of God in opposition to Scripture principally so that He (Jesus) can be emptied of all His revealed characteristics.  The resulting empty shell is then available to receive whatever mirrored image of themselves they prefer.  Yes, it sounds orthodox.  But in context, it really isn’t.  It’s a counterfeit like everything else in liberal Christianity.

carl

#67:
Dcn Dale - pray on. We’re commanded to - and it never hurts to draw near to God in thanksgiving, adoration, and petition!
#68,69:
I’m not too sanguine about TEO repenting, but there is a precedent in Scripture - Jonah 3:3-5 where it says:

Jonah obeyed the word of the LORD and went to Nineveh.
Now Nineveh was a very important city—a visit required
three days. On the first day, Jonah started into the
city. He proclaimed: “Forty more days and Nineveh will
be overturned.” The Ninevites believed God. They
declared a fast, and all of them, from the greatest to
the least, put on sackcloth.

As you remember, Jonah needed a bit of encouragement to visit. He also didn’t exactly make the most impassioned, persuasive plea here. (I always imagine him proclaiming using the intonation of Ben Stein in the Visine commercials.) Nonetheless they did repent at that time.
For those of us who are weary and want the whole thing over and resolved already, please read Jonah 4 in its entirety. I think the Lord has something to say to us when we sulk under a vine to the east of the city. The folks in TEO and GenCon truly “...don’t know their right hand from their left” - but the Lord can be concerned with them.
If we pray for a miracle faithfully it doesn’t mean we have to stop planning for other likely outcomes.

“If we pray for a miracle faithfully it doesn’t mean we have to stop planning for other likely outcomes. “
Sounds great to me.

As for Ninevah, how did those folks compare with TEC when their respective sins were pointed out to them?? Same response? I don’t think so. A little different? Not really. Light years apart? Bingo. TEC can’t even hold a candle to the Ninevites. In other words, there is no likely outcome, no realistic outcome, of repentance for TEC.

As for sulking under the vine. I’d do back-flips of joy if they’d repent. TEC is currently one of the antichrists, denying the Lord; but without the grace of God, I’d be just as bad and probably worse. May God rescue as many as possible from TEC’s bed of sin.

Until at least one bishop and one deputy stand up in their respective houses - perhaps using a Question of Personal Privilege - and warn their house of the coming destruction, TEO hasn’t really been warned. Note in the Wikipedia article, it states:

Questions of privilege affecting the assembly may
include matters of comfort, amplification, or safety.
Technically, notifying the assembly of a fire alarm or
bomb threat could be viewed as a question of privilege.

I think eternal separation from the Lord qualifies as a matter of safety

“Tear the fabric of the communion at its deepest level” is a bit too polite and doesn’t hold a candle to “turn or burn” or in Jesus’ own words (Matthew 12:33-37):

Make a tree good and its fruit will be good, or make a
tree bad and its fruit will be bad, for a tree is
recognized by its fruit. You brood of vipers, how can
you who are evil say anything good? For out of the
overflow of the heart the mouth speaks. The good man
brings good things out of the good stored up in him, and
the evil man brings evil things out of the evil stored
up in him. But I tell you that men will have to give
account on the day of judgment for every careless word
they have spoken. For by your words you will be
acquitted, and by your words you will be condemned.”

The gradual, incremental, political path may seem safe to the institutionalist, but it’s a dangerous game. Jesus took only 3 years to alert people that the Kingdom of God was nigh and only 3 hours of darkness to redeem the world and only 3 days before it was made obvious to the disciples.

To the remaining Christian bishops in TEO - you especially need to raise your voices - otherwise what’s the good of being “inside”? Risk the comfy position. Play the man. You won’t even get burned at the stake - only laughed and tittered at. If you manage to strike deep, you may tick them off enough to be deposed - a form of execution that leaves only your pride singed. Trust in the Lord to protect your flock. Sometimes the shepherd has to face the wolves.

TEC and its supporters owe a great deal of thanks to +Akinola/Anderson AAC for this work.  Not a shred of evidence for the case against it, no matter how trivial, is missing.  Knowing what is on the table, it can, if needed, prepare its rebuttal to the charges. 

Its author’s/compiler’s presuppositions about the position of scripture and its interpretation, the creeds, the Lambeth Quadrilateral and the 39Articles is also clear.  And it reveals both the level of sophistication and resources of the opposition that TEC faces and has faced in its province. 

One wonders for whom was it written?  For the GS, well, yes, it proves to its members satisfaction that TEC is sinful, and, should be, for the sake of the faith once delivered, replaced.  For the left, Wales, Scotland, etc., no.  They are aware that AAC is a lobby.  They are aware of Anderson’s activities at Dromantine/Nottingham, AAC presence at every consequentlial intruments of communion meeting and that he was consecrated a CANA bishop by +Akinola for work in the US.  So, for the “middle”?  I suspect yes but I doubt it will have much influence because:  1. A similar catalog of “sins” could be prepared for the GS provinces or their provinces and presented to the world.  2. They recognize pressure group tactics and attempts to influence policy for what they are.  3. They are simply tired of seeing the mission of the communion and the attention of its provinces hijacked by pressure groups. E.g. Integrity, a pressure group could provide a similar document cataloging sins against a biblical warrant of “justice”

Doug and Alfonso,
I once worked with a Special Education student who had more than enough intelligence to graduate from High School but got himself into trouble from time to time. I asked him what hopes his father had for him. He said, “My dad hopes that I will graduate from High School and go to college.” I then asked what his dad expected him to do.  He said, “My dad expects me to wind up in prison like my brother.” I believe boys generally fulfill what their fathers expect of them.  If the father’s expectations are negative then the son has to make a liar of us his father to succeed.
Words are powerful instruments. God spoke the universe into existence. I think it may be one thing to expect that TEC will not repent and it is another to flat out predict that it will not repent. There is no more faith in that than Job stating, “That which I feared most has come upon me”. You simply cannot say at this point that God has given TEC over to destruction. There are too many folks on the inside from Bishops to pew sitters that are Christians. Doug is correct to call for the Christian Bishops to speak the truth in love. Alfonso, you may say that you have given up on TEC but you should not presume to speak for God on this.
The conversation between Alfonso and Doug is an important one.
Dcn Dale (AKA mush for brains)

RE: “I suspect yes but I doubt it will have much influence because . . . “

Good news, if true, for folks like EmilyH, and she need not worry.

RE: “A similar catalog of “sins” could be prepared for the GS provinces or their provinces and presented to the world.”

Certainly—“sins” from revisionist perspectives.  The question is . . .  would those in the middle think them “sins.” 

After my time at Lambeth, I think not.  I think that the “middle” in the AC would certainly think that which is presented in this document to be sins—and that which would be presented as “sins” by the progressive activists in TEC, as simply laughable.

That’s what happens when you have two different gospels sharing the same Communion.  Neither gospel agrees on the definition of much of anything, including “sins.”

I personally think that the main thing that this adds on the “moderate” side of the AC is simply . . . another straw.

And straws are quite important.

I certainly don’t think the document will directly lead to any particular action.

But I like straws.  They mount up.

Thankfully, though, EmilyH isn’t concerned.

[74] EmilyH

Not a shred of evidence for the case against it, no matter how trivial, is missing.  Knowing what is on the table, it can, if needed, prepare its rebuttal to the charges.

Or TEC could have the commenters at SF write the rebuttal for it.  We have seen it all before.  There are no mysteries here.  I hope TEC does respond however.  The rebuttal would become Exhibit A in TECs own prosecution,  for it would inevitably confirm the very thing the AAC’s document sets out to prove - that TEC preaches the very different gospel of a very different god.

carl

RE: “Not a shred of evidence for the case against it, no matter how trivial, is missing.”

Yeh—not certain where EmilyH gets that notion.  The triumph of hope?  ; > )

The AAC document, while laudable, barely scratches the surface. 

Plenty more stories to see from the past.  Plenty more to come.

But her main point was the “sins” that the progressives think “sins.” 

But again, after seeing first-hand the disgust the “moderates” at the AC had with all the shenanigans of the left-wing TECans there, I’m pretty confident that they don’t define “sins”—or pretty much anything else to do with the Gospel—in the same way that the progressive activists TECans do.

Actally, Emily H #74, I can think of several items that are not included in the report that are worthy of inclusion. 
Off to work.

This document is not presented for human “action” or “response” in my mind, another move in the political dance between false teachers and faithful Christians.

This is God’s Spirit on the move, and the inspired creation of publications like this one and the Jerusalem Declaration are more of a trumpet call, a proclamation of reality and Truth before judgement (much like the prophet’s condemnation against Isreal and Judah prior to exile.)
What is “accomplished” by inspired writings is God’s purpose - His Word will not return to Him empty. Those who see it and hear it against the backdrop of the events of the last decade will be moved one way, those whose hearts are filled or cluttered with anything other than a desire for God will not see anything at all and will not turn. But it is not a human vs human battle.
I also believe the time has come when we can no longer speak of how whole “groups” of apostate organizations will respond to God’s reality proclaimed, for some of those groups will disintegate as they implode from within (Disintegrate, by the way, is the antithesis of INTEGRITY.)

Lord, have mercy.
Christ, have mercy.
Lord, have mercy.

Carrie

I always appreciate it when TEC apologists appear on this blog, as it certainly livens things up a bit.  But what I wonder is, whether those apologists really are buying into the apostasies of TEC, or whether they simply are bound to some misguided institutional loyalty.  How about it?  Anybody out there want to “enlighten” me?

If ECUSA bothers to respond - and it’s so arrogant, I would be surprised if it did - then perhaps it would adopt the theme that its cyberspace defenders take.  Namely, that it doesn’t matter what anybody does or says in the real world, because the BCP says what ECUSA believes, and there’s nothing wrong with it.  And, besides, General Convention has never officially decided Christ isn’t lord, even if a lot of Episcopal priests and bishops think so.

It’s like saying citizens of the USSR were the most free in the world, because that’s what the Soviet Constitution said.

[78] Sarah Hey

But her main point was the “sins” that the progressives think “sins.”

I have noticed that liberals tend to see sin in terms of the collective.  “Building Trident Missile Submarines.”  “Failing to implement National Health Care.”  “Fighting the war in Iraq.”  Sin thus becomes a collective action that must be laid at the feet of one’s political opponents.  This definition tends to focus on “immanentizing the eschaton,” and thus diffuses responsibility.  Collective guilt for collective sin - except of course for good liberals who have nothing to feel guilty about.  Liberals have made the liberal political agenda equivalent to the revelation of God - ironic since they routinely beat up religious conservatives for violating “separation of church and state.”  This is consistent, however, with the relentless liberal focus on this life - either because they believe there is no next life, or believe the next life is already a given.

carl

Emily H, it doesn’t matter if the list is complete or not.  The root of radical inclusivity bears the fruit of innovation.  More fruit will be revealed as time goes on.  The two go together.
DFW lawyer, the radical revisionists control the levers of power.  The institutional revisionists can’t stop them, though they would like to, because they have nothing to stand on.  Their choices are to acquiesce, challenge and be labeled, or retire.  The labeling will intensify and become more sophisticated.  Look for mandatory psychiatric evaluations of clergy, just like the Soviet Union.

2 comments.
1. Doug, you’re a good-natured bloke; and with whatever mush you’ve got, I’m sure my synapse protoplasm is often mushier.

2. DFWL wrote, “I always appreciate it when TEC apologists appear on this blog” You must be talking about me.

I dunno why I’m so positive on TEC; I guess I think it unfair and untrue to say they are all damned.

I am sure that if TEC responds to this report….and they probably will….they’ll embarrass themselves, as usual.

Alfonso - I don’t think they were talking about you . I appreciated your viewpoint to remember we are not God.

Ahhhh let’s see now if we can conjure up that list of “sins” that EmilyH is so sure that will be brought to bear on those bloody conservatives and their bloody self-righteousness:
*All those millions of people killed in the name of Christianity throughout history - yeah that’s a good one to lay at the feet of the conservatives;

*The plain reading of scripture, the creeds, the Lambeth Quadrilateral and the 39 Articles - you conservatives can’t expect things to mean what they obviously mean - that is simple and unsophisticated - major sins in the eyes of the progressives;

*Lobbying or advocating anything other than the progressive agenda du jour - major sin and heresy to the progressives - we are wise beyond your ken, trust us to guide you into the New Thing. It is not fair that the AAC be present at all these meetings and event - along side the ever-present Integrity;

*And those damnable GS provinces presuming to tread upon the sovereign shores of these United States and the mighty kingdom of TEC, only our noblesse oblige prevents us from lovingly destroying your minions for the sake of social justice and inclusiveness;

*Integrity is categorically not a special interest or pressure group - unlike the AAC - it is a social justice and information source and has every right to be present everywhere to present the case for social justice;

*All those GS provinces are run by patristic demagogues who want to push their simplist, male-dominated, misogynist, gay-phobic, tribal third-world fundamentalist views of scripture, reason and tradition on the valiant and forward-thinking people of the enlightened and intellectually superior west. Worse they presume to have imperialistic designs on capturing our money and properites without our permission, and trying to export their view of Christianity on the naif and unsuspecting middle-of-the-aisle slumberers who we need to fund our New Reformation;

*Are complicit in the condemnation of those we raise up as exemplars of our broad acceptance of gays, by publically recording their self-destructive behaviors, and their duplicity. It is wrong to presume that monogamous means the same to our gay brothers and sisters as it does to you recidivist heteros, and that the hetro monogamy is preferable to the gay monogamy.

While this is more summary than exhaustive, be assured that it is wholly representative of the worst of the conservative agenda. I’m just trying to be nice and loving and inclusive by not being more pointed in my catalog of conservative sins.

Man, this must have been what C.S. Lewis felt like writing the Screwtage Letters.

Masternav:  Masterfully written!  Thank you!

I just finished reading the document, and my heart shrivels under the burden of it.  I have been terribly lax in my prayers for the poor sheep who unwittingly sit under this “teaching” week in and week out.  I am not an Episcopalian, nor an Anglican.  I have been drawn here because I see signs of the same smoke in my temple-so to speak-and I came to see how the people of God deal with it.  But no Christian is a mere observer; we all have the ear of the Almighty Who can do all things. Please forgive me.  I pledge to pray for the sheep of the Anglican churches each day.  May God deliver you soon!

Actually, I wasn’t talking about any single person, Alfonso.  And I wasn’t denigrating those who appear here as TEC apologists.  I was just wondering what is their motivation for standing (often courageously) in defense of an institution (acting through its General Convention) that many of us have observed as moving quickly away from the core beliefs of Anglicanism and Christianity.  But thanks for responding, and God bless you.

Fine Young Calvinist, thank you for sharing the spiritual burden of the very tragic state of affairs in TEC.  If you are in the PCUSA, the same tide is indeed moving in.  Please ask God to use you to stem it and of course pray for the sheep in that denonimation in addition to your prayers for us Anglican sheep. The seminaries have also been infected in your branch of Christianity and are the major source of the disease.  Do not ever hesitate to sit down and ask clergy what they believe, how they came to know Jeusus Christ and how He has changed their lives.  These are the revealing questions.

Now back to this document:  Congratulations to all those at the American Anglican Council who have labored faithfully and diligently to simply tell the truth about the moral and theological bankruptcy of TEC. As this document shows again, so often commentary is not even necessary because the words of those in power in TEC do the incriminating.  The AAC has an incredible staff of bright, hard working and faithful people. All those who have been called into the battle to preserve the “faith once for all delivered to the saints” in the Anglican Communion owe them a tremendous debt of gratitude.  +David Anderson, Phil Ashey+, Mary Orr, Robert Lundy, Ralinda Gregor, Carol Frederick, and all. . . BRAVO! and keep up the good work!

My big question is why didn’t Archbishop Akinola distribute this document to everyone (not just the GS primates) in Alexandria as was the intention???  Can anyone answer that, because I simply do not understand it and I believe a real opportunity for education was missed.

#48 said “2.  I do believe TEC can be saved but it must save itself from within. It certainly is on a self destructive path. Is the Holy Spirit grieved. Yes. Has the Holy Spirit left. No.”

From whince do you know the Holy Spirit has <i><u>not left?

#48 If we shake dust off our feet, do we keep stepping backward across the last line we drew in the sand all over again???  When does it get TOO dusty to remain behind the line???

#93 and 94
I left my TEC Parish one year ago. Fortunately there was an Anglican Diocese to go to. None of us can say for certain if an individual who claims to be a Christian is one or not. The same is true for an entire denomination. I left but that is not what God has called others to do.  Each of us has to examine our “predictive” statements in light of how those statements may affect those who remain in TEC to resist the revisionists or as martyrs. Martha, ever the realist stated “He has been dead for three days, surely he stinketh” (John 11:39). Is that a statement of faith? How about this instead? “..the God who gives life to the dead and calls things that are not as though they were (Romans 4:17). If you want TEC to continue to decline then I would ask you to examine your heart and ask yourself why you would want a church to perish. I stated before that some are renting their garments and some are just licking their lips. I was in the latter group and have repented of that.

DcnDale, you wrote: “None of us can say for certain if an individual who claims to be a Christian is one or not. The same is true for an entire denomination.”

Well, we can discern and must speak to whether we observe outward behaviors that do or do not conform to the character of Christ and the Word, Commandments of God.  If we do not warn an errant professing Christian, whether back-sliden or an unregenerate sinner (I still believe in the necessity of conversion) or a corporate body, their blood is on our hands.

#95 - I don’t have time for long theological discourse today, but what concerns me a continued assumption that TEC is identifiably Christian. To be simple, I believe that to be Christian, the Word of God has to be applied by the Holy Spirit, which effects a spiritual transformation of every believer and the </i>true Church</i>. What I observe in TEC is a masquerade, much like Ananias and Sapphira sought to imitate Barnabas, it’s not the work of the Holy Spirit. It is, as Peter said, a lie to God. (Acts 4 & 5). TEC does not exhibit the character of the larger body (communion) as a unified expression of Anglicanism. What has cheapened this whole thing is the ++ABC and the Primates, while recognizing TEC’s masquerade, refuse to clearly express this and deal with the issue at hand. It is the reason I left the Anglican Communion for now. His Grace ++Akinola is correct to call it on a whole for what it is and stop beating around the bush.

Dcn Dale:

None of us can say for certain if an individual who claims to be a Christian is one or not. The same is true for an entire denomination

Real Christians do not call sin a “virtue,” nor do they label virtuous people as sinners

Real Christians do not raise unrepentant, active sinners to the highest offices in their organizations and call them good.

Real Christians do not bless people living in sin, and tell them they are saved, that there is no need of repentance, and celebrate their sinful states.

Real Christians do not disregard and turn their backs on scriptural authority.

Real Christians do not sue other Christians.

Real Christians do not find a need to simultaneously pursue the religions of Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, or Wicca.

Real Christians do not believe that you can come to the Father via Buddha, Allah or Ashera.

And most of all, Real Christians do not say: “Forget the Church, we’re doing it OUR way.”

We ARE commanded by scripture to “unyoke ourselves” from non-believers, to shake the dust from our sandals when a group of people refuse to hear the Word of God, and if that isn’t a description of where TEC is at this moment, I don’t know what is.

I can’t help but think that if the ABC and KJS had been at Nicaea, we would all be Arians now.

I forgot perhaps the most important one:

Real Christians do not support abortion and call it sacramental.

Absolutely fascinating discussion.  While not drawing direct parallels, I’m reminded of
—-Abraham pleading with the angel of the Lord to spare Sodom if he found 10 righteous people (Gen 18)
—-Moses standing in the breach before God to keep Him from destroying the children of Israel (Ps 106:23)
—-God telling Elijah, when he thought he was alone, that He had reserved for Himself 7000 who had not bowed the knee to Baal (1 Kings 19)
—-God telling Ezekiel that the watchman will be held accountable for the blood of His children who are not warned (Ezek 33)
—-the promise of restoration by choosing the Lord (Deut 30)
The victory is already won, by the cross of Jesus.  How the battle will play out, I cannot say.  I suspect that God is calling different people to do different things, and though it is confusing, a beautiful tapestry is being woven. 
One thing seems clear to me, though.  Denial is not an option.  When one rends his clothes, he must acknowledge his own sin in the development of this tragedy, and he must work to set things aright.  I find the silence of some sectors of the church to be staggering, e.g. retired clergy (with a few notable exceptions).  They will be called to give an account (Heb 13:17) and approach the time of that accounting.
Perhaps our greatest hope is that scripture is still read in the liturgy.  The promise of scripture is that God’s word will not return to Him empty (Isa 55:11).  I believe we need to be more diligent in praying for listening hearts that are turned around by God’s word.

100, Jill Woodliff, Great Response.
96, 97, 99.  I understand your collective arguments, you simply cannot say TEC is not a Christian Church because many of it’s leaders do not appear to be Christian. I have too many Christian friends who believe God has called them to remain. They in fact are upset with me for leaving and believe that if more folks had stayed they would have a better chance of things.  I would say to them that God called me out of TEC. My “prophetic voice” was becoming increasingly strident and counterproductive. If you are saying that TEC is not a Christian Church then what should those folks do who are Christian and remain there? I am not an adequate apologist for those who have stayed. What is the tipping point for God in this? I don’t know what the event or critical mass will be.

I find the silence of some sectors of the church to be staggering, e.g. retired clergy (with a few notable exceptions).  They will be called to give an account (Heb 13:17) and approach the time of that accounting.

Jill, you’ve hit on an important point.  The deafening silence of retired bishops and priests is shameful.  These are folks with nothing temporal at stake (they can not lose their retirement benefits).  The “worst” that can happen to them if they speak the truth is that they might have the honor of being deposed.

Silence is not an option. Their ordination vows obligate them to find opportunity to speak the truth, to acknowledge the Gospel—and they will be called to give an account.

The status of being deposed because of one’s beliefs is a Grand High Exalted status indeed!  Praise the Lord!

#101 - I really have better things to do today, but to address why I believe I can call TEC a non-christian entitiy is as follows:
1. The works of the church are an observable manifestation of our relationship to Christ.
2. There is an event of conversion that leads one to into fellowship (i.e. Church)
3. The nature of the church articulates a clear understanding of its relationship to God, Christ, and the Holy Spirit, as well as the external world.
4. What is important is the church’s embodiment or what it is becoming is observable.
5. There is a shif that is occuring in Anglicanism (and other denominations) from its essence as established in scriptures, the Apostles, early church fathers, etc. to one of an exsistence as an existential interpretation in dynamic flux.
6. This has led to the Episcopal Church and the Communion in the northern hemisphere to express its purpose in disciplines and methodoligies rather than dogmatics and theology. (And therefore the whole hermeneutics effort is a non-starter).
7. Its dynamic flux avoids any adherence foundational essence and necessitates alterations to long held doctrines in order continue to define itself.
8. The local church from its earliest beginnings was tied to the universal church. In the case of Anglicanism, the Communion defines part of our universal ties, as well as ecumenical relationships with Rome, etc. Therefore the church is “one throughout the whole world yet fully present in every individual assembly.” (Coenen, Church, p 303)
9. As such, observation dictates that local believers display the same qualities of Christ as a whole. Keeping this focused on TEC, they have decided for themselves that they do not. The Anglican Communion has refused to ackowledge this and thus the issue we now see, and therefore necessitates such a response by ++Akinola. The above also shows that there is an inevitable split coming between the northern hemisphere churches and the Orthodox and the global south.
10. God takes the initiative in choosing his people - the church.
11. A particular holiness is expected of the people of God.
12. The Church is the representation of Christ. Eph 1:22-23 illustates the connectedness of the local and universal aspects. The image also identifies unity with Christ. Salvation is identified with this unity.
13. There is one Holy Spirit, possessing understanding of truth and providing the seal or mark of salvation in gifts, leading to qualities that express the genuineness of our relationship to Christ. (1Cor) This includes the aforementioned unity, oneness of aim and action (in our sense the Communion), a sensativity to each other and the Lord’s expressed will, and constantly reminds us of the Lord’s teaching.

It’s easy to refernece the above to scripture and apply it to TEC, other bodies, etc. It is easy to see why the RC is so cautious with whom they establish relationships. Who can blame them? It also demonstates why there is necessity of action at this primates’ meeting, also how TEC has strayed. It also lays out how indiviuals or organizations like ACNA have connectedness with the Communion outside of TEC. I am not attacking the heart of anyone who chooses to stay in TEC. However, I have said I do not believe it will be a sensible solution in saving TEC. TEC has chosen a path not identified with Christ.

EmilyH, you mentioned Integrity and the “social justice” issue. 

All right, you want to talk about “social justice?”  Okay, here’s a “social justice” issue for you:  How about “social justice” for us Anglican Christians whose faithful bishops have been kicked out of TEC for defending the Faith of Christ crucified?  Or how about “social justice ” for all of us whose voices have been ignored at General Convention while pleading with other delegates to not lead the Church astray….while all of the time saying to us “you are included,” when you know we’re really not, except when we kowtow to the majority with no hope of ever making our voices heard, and when you made us feel unwelcome in our parishes and diocesan meetings when we defended the Faith of our ancestors?

How about “social justice ” for us when all of the time your Church’s Presiding Bishop says we’re welcome to come back to TEC, providing that we do so only on her terms?  In other words, we’re welcome to come back so long as we agree to swear allegiance to The Episcopal Church, and never mind the rest of the Communion, because as far as Mrs Schori’s concerned, TEC is the only part of the Communion which really matters, because they’ve got the money to keep the ACC running, and therefore they control the ACC, which in turn runs the Communion.

So how about it, EmilyH?

Here’s a good argument for leaving TEC:
1 Timothy 5:22:    22Do not be hasty in the laying on of hands, and do not share in the sins of others. Keep yourself pure.

How true this is!

Do you all know that difference of doctrine is not allowed to be presented in a court of law because it is a first amendment violation so is not a defense in keeping your property.

So Katherine can be as heretical as she wants, but departing from that influence is not a defense to take your property with you and to protect it for the purposes for which it was intended.

The trust Katherine has to own it trumps everyone’s trust to keep it sacred.

So?

One does what one can.  The hostile takeover of the national church has put Christians in an unenviable position.  Wack-jobs form a large majority in the HoB. I don’t know how insiders can do it ... rather fight than switch I guess ... like the old Doral commercial with the black eye penciled in on the Doral smoker.

#110 monologistos,
Your example is encouraging since Doral cigarettes are still on the market.

I guess it depends on how you grew up.  When I was a kid, fighting and/or smoking was a sign of ill health.  Smoking is still an addiction but now it’s become a very expensive one.  Fighting is certainly an old occupation but not necessarily mission.  I’m sympathetic of those who have remained although I think it is becoming clear that for Christians to remain in TEC is not so different from joining yourself to the body of a prostitute.
Where some call for hope, I would point out that to remain requires a Congregationalist understanding of the Church ... or a reduction of “communion” to some unseen, mysterious reality that only God knows.  Kind of like me celebrating marriage with Sarah Hey.  It sounds like a great idea (for me) but on the ground, I might be a bit challenged to say exactly this differs from my marriage to Joan of Arc or any contributer here.  In fact it is precisely the unreality of communion within TEC which allows conservatives to remain.

#112 monologistos,
“...or a reduction of “communion” to some unseen, mysterious reality that only God knows.  Kind of like me celebrating marriage with Sarah Hey.”
That is a rather crowded mysterious reality for all of us “fellow fawners”. (I think that is why we are beat before we start in debates with her)

Exactly!  Too bad my pitiful flirting has no chance.  I’m old enough to be her great grandfather.  I’m so old, I died back in 1957.  The reason I have no use for Purgatory is that I’m there now.  However, I take it on faith that my presence in Purgatory means I have not been consigned to TEC in a handbasket.  Apparently, I wasn’t doctrinally flexible enough to play Limbo or serve the Presiding Queen of the Underworld.  Rest assured, if I ever met her, I would not eat even a single pomegranate seed, if offered.  I have well noted where that got Persephone and the HoB.

Cennydd.  I am unaware of any cases where TEC has deposed a conservative bishop based on theology.  TEC has deposed on the basis of discipline and suits have been based on the belief that those individuals leaving have attempted to leave with property that TEC belongs to the Episcopal Church in furtherance of its mission.  TEC requires of its vestrymen and clergy an oath to be subject to its discipline.  If you are a TEC vestrymen (or were) you may have been subject to such an oath, as an ordinary member of the church, I don’t believe you ever took one.  On suits, Grace St. Stephens Colorado Springs, now CANA, I believe origniaged the suit, and St. James Newport appealed the decision made against it when it could have walked away.  It takes two parties for litigation.  In most of the cases the parishes/dioceses that are attempting to leave TEC are in possession of the property in question, if TEC/dioceses do nothing, the parishes take the property by default.  Litigation is not desired because, in most states, the parishes/dioceses will lose and lose fast…summary judgment.  Can you imagine ++Akinola if confronted with a departing Abuja cathedral saying:  “Go. My blessing with you and take the cathedral with you”  The biblical argument of Christian no suing Christian doesn’t work in our context, the nature and process of suit, the nature of judges, how evidence is gathered etc. is an entirely different animal than a 1st 2nd 3rd century world.

I very much appreciate this document, but it is meaningless to RW or TEC leadership.

Most of the Anglican Province leaders vehemently disagree with the activities outlined in this document. Nevertheless, the votes do not exist among the Primate’s for any action that would effectively expel TEC from the Communion, because it would effectively require the type of rupture with Canterbury that many conservatives are not willing to risk. For many of the smaller orthodox Provinces, an association with Canterbury is still considered valuable. They are not going to risk that association simply because the conservatives in the US want them to do so to help their cause.  That may change over time, but it would be foolish to bank on it.

The important variable to watch will be the ACNA. Will it coalesce and grow as a US church body?  Will it have the type of visionary, articulate Priests needed to grow and make a mark on our nation?  Can it get beyond the point where it defines itself by its disagreement with the Episcopal Church?  Its long term future lies not with disaffected Episcopalians, but in attracting those with no background, and little interest, the latest Episcopal outrage or the the intra-Communion fight over who gets to have tea with the Queen.

If the ACNA membership become effective community evangelists, they will grow and the group will play an important role in God’s kingdom. The Communion issues will take care of themselves.

Going Home, I think a related question is what ACNA, or the PCA or other reformational denominations that emerge from the ash-heap of mainline liberalism, will look in 100 years.  Right now, everybody in ACNA, PCA, etc is self-selected.  They want to be there, they sign onto the doctrine, and have a lot of good leaders in them.  They aren’t burdened (yet) with nominalism because of the sheer number of church plants and the conscious decision to leave things behind to be there.  Yet, the church has sinners in it.  Pastors are still going to run off with parishioners, come out of the closet, invent new theologies.  The list goes on.  The great grandchildren of founding members may not understand what the fuss was about and not have the same fervor.  As generations go by and the initial fires burn lower, will these bodies have the ability to, with God’s help, reform themselves from within?  Or will we have yet another round of rearrangements?  One more round of rearrangements, and we’ll finally have a theologically sound church.  We’ve been saying this for generations. 

Or, the short version: what will we do when the “new car smell” wears off?

Keep trying!

117, excellent questions.  Our fallen nature makes it a good bet that the cycle you describe continues; it’s been the story of God’s people since Adam.

I am interested in the PCA because of the obvious similarities with our reform movement. The PCA’s best “second generation” hope may lie in the type of mission focus found in places like the Redeemer Presbyterian in New York.

The ACNA needs to have a similar focus on bringing an increasingly unchurched public to Christ and His church. Will that goal remain at the top of the list, or somewhere in the middle, below more parochial concerns? Do we have it in us to, say, go door to door to invite a neighbors to church, or to otherwise boldly proclaim our faith in a way that would have caused embarrassment in the past? 

Do we feel a burning need to introduce people to the real Jesus Christ, instead of the counterfeit version that is being promoted by many? 

Can we define ourselves outside of our relationship with TEC?

These are enormous challenges.  But regardless of the long term prognosis, I would not go back. God has promised me only today on this earth, and I must use it wisely.

115   EmilyH, I was a vestryman on and off at my former Episcopal parish in the Diocese of El Camino Real for fifteen years, and not a single one of us on that vestry were ever required to swear or sign an oath of loyalty or fealty or obedience to the Church, and as far as I know, no other vestrypersons at any other parish were ever required to swear or sign such an oath in that diocese.  Such oaths may be a new thing required by The Episcopal Church.  If I were told to sign such an oath, I would flatly refuse.

I won’t debate with you about the depositions except to say that I believe, as do so many others, that disgreements on theology certainly did enter into Dr Schori’s decision to depose these bishops….though that was not the main reason for her having attempted to do so on at least one occasion, when she tried….without success….to depose my bishop, +John-David Schofield, and retired Bishop Cox.  Bishops are no different than other people; they have the right to speak freely, and that means that they have the Constitutional right to openly disagree with their superiors when they have every good reason to believe that their superiors are wrong.

Contrary to 115, I was a vestryman for a gazillion years (it seems like) in a TEC parish and never once took any loyalty oath.

I’m sure there are plenty of former and current vestry members in TEC parishes on this forum, and I’m curious to see if any of them took a loyalty oath as a condition of their ministry.

#119 Going Home,
“Can we define ourselves outside of our relationship with TEC?”  This is an important question for ACNA. It is similar to the question a person who is recently divorced must ask her/himself. Because the relationship was dysfunctional and enmeshed each person must discover where he/she ends and the other begins.

116   Going Home, I too wouldn’t count on TEC being booted out of the Anglican Communion.  Instead, I think they’ll leave on their own. 

The reason I say this is that they’ve thumbed their noses at the rest of us; amazingly enough, at Rowan Cantuar himself by virtue of the fact that Dr Schori deposed one of his bishops two weeks ago! 

The 42 page documents published this week by the AAC contain just about everything that TEC has done in the years since 1973….most of which shows them to be apostate and heretical, and totally uncaring about what the rest of us think.

If TEC elects to walk out on their own….and it would come as no surprise, I’m sure….they won’t exactly be missed.

I served several times on vestries in two different churches and never once was asked to sign an oath.

Oaths that have little to do with scripture, are the way for TEC to keep track of their ‘loyal’ members.

123, why would TEC leave, when they can just keep doing what they are doing, and more, and remain?

In my view, the only chance that TEC would have left the Anglican Communion would have been if the ABC had not declared TEC in substantial compliance Communion resolutions and not invited its leaders to Lambeth. Some TEC leaders were posturing to leave when they were concerned that DAR resolution would be enforced. Williams made sure that would not happen when he cut the legs off the enforcement action.  He has cast his lot with TEC, and will do what is necessary to keep Canterbury and TEC joined at the hip. In other words, he has created a situation where a Primate seeking to expel TEC will also have to break with Canterbury. A majority aren’t going to do that in the forseeable future, IMO.

EmilyH

The biblical argument of Christian no suing Christian doesn’t work in our context,...

That seems to be the excuse for anything in the Bible you and the powers that be in TEC don’t agree with.  Is there anything in the Bible that could not be contradicted with this logic?  How do you decide which parts of the Bible do work in our context?

Never once as warden or vestryman was I asked to sign or assent to an oath.

I vaguely remember something about an “employee handbook” being developed at my former TEC parish. At the time I questioned why an entire handbook was being developed to deal with disciplinary procedures for church volunteers. In the handbook volunteers were described as employees. I always understood an employee to be someone who was paid for their services. This was a “Remain Episcopal” Parish in the DSJ. Since I am no longer a member I don’t know if/when it was implemented. The job of the Priest was not a part of the handbook. One thing I do know is that many important decisions were not processed even through the full vestry.  The decisions were processed by the Executive Council which consisted of the Priest, the Senior Warden and another vestry member. These major decisions were done on what was considered an “emergency basis” by the Executive Council to justify what was being done. This is the way “due process” was circumvented in our parish. Additionally, the congregation was not informed of the decisions being made until much later if at all. I personally believe this is how a small minority can take over an entire parish and is probably a microcosm of TEC in general.

“I’m sure there are plenty of former and current vestry members in TEC parishes on this forum, and I’m curious to see if any of them took a loyalty oath as a condition of their ministry.”

 
What?  Take an oath that would supersede my commitment to the Church of Jesus Christ?? Absolutely not!

Dale, we never had an “employee handbook” at my TEC parish, but we did have an “executive committee” composed of the rector, senior warden and junior warden….no one else.  I never was aware that I was considered to be an “employee,” never was on the payroll, and never filled out any forms reflecting my status, etc.

#131 Cennydd,
Who appoints the Senior Warden? The Priest of course. It would be easily possible for the direction of an entire congregation to be controlled by the Priest who could circumvent the Vestry.

EmilyH and TEC’s leadership think and work in a “for profit” commercial corporation context; Chairman of the Board, CEO, CFO, Board of Trustees, stockholders, and employees, and not in a religious context.  Profit, loss, and gain are their goals.

Yes, I’ve heard this group talk about “CEO-type” priests as a good thing.  Reminds me of the book Darkness at Noon”. What was the expression?  Headless men?

132   Yes, Dale, it could….and I’ve seen this happen first-hand.  That’s one of the reasons why my wife and I left ECR.

Monologistos, corporate affairs of the Church must always take a back seat to religious affairs, but the problem is that TEC’s leaders have ignored that fact.  TEC, it seems, has become a dictatorship of sorts lately, with Dr Schori’s assumption of powers not specifically delegated to her  by General Convention.  Of course, since she is the “Presiding Bishop,” she thinks she can get away with doing whatever she wants to do….never mind what anyone else thinks!

And one other thing before I take my midmorning coffee break:  EmilyH, in your post #115, you avoided answering my comments point-by-point, and therefore, I must assume that you chose not to answer them because you have no defense against them.

Hmmm Loyalty Oaths?

Let’s see…starting in 1987….Served as
1. Youth minister—mission planner
2. Lector
3. Sunday School teacher
4. High School Bible Study teacher
5. Parish Treasurer (3 different TEC churches)
6. Vestry Member (2 Different TEC churches)
7. Alpha Leader (2 churches)
8. Capital Campaign Committee person

I’m sure there is more I’m forgetting in 20 years, but I do remember clearly never, ever, having to swear allegiance to anyone or anything save the Creeds I said in Church every Sunday.

No loyalty oaths.  Not a one.

KTF!...mrb

#138 Mike B.,
Mike I think you were the reason TEC decided that it would be a good idea to initiate loyalty oaths.  It’s on your head young fella! You are to loyalty oaths what Marion Jones is to drug testing.
By the way, now that you’ve shamelessly trotted out your credentials, I must say that you qualify to be next in line to replace the ABC.  You are obviously overqualified to take over the Presiding Bishop’s (and Primate) job.

Oh, Dcn Dale, they wouldn’t like me.  Not at all….The English would find me too historical, too literal, too enamored of Empire for their modern sensibilities.

The House of Bishops would find me far too vocal and opinionated.  And frankly, I hold very high expectations of anyone who has been ensconced in an Episcopate.  I expect unbridled faith, honed and tested, burned and stratified, cleansed and smelted down to purity by the time of such an ascendancy.

Of course, if you have a system where you can go from Marine Biologist/Oceanographer to Presiding Bishop in under 10 years (was it even that long?) you’re bound to have some problems.

KTF!...mrb

Actually, I believe Dr Schori had twelve years between the time she was mistakenly ordained a deacon, and the time when she was mistakenly elected Presiding Bishop.

#139 Mike Bertaut,
“Of course, if you have a system where you can go from Marine Biologist/Oceanographer to Presiding Bishop in under 10 years (was it even that long?) you’re bound to have some problems.”
Of course Michael, in Marine Biology too rapid an ascent will lead to a case of the bends.

Mike Bertaut:

“I hold very high expectations of anyone who has been ensconced in an Episcopate.  I expect unbridled faith, honed and tested, burned and stratified, cleansed and smelted down to purity by the time of such an ascendancy.”

As soon as I read that, I thought of Latimer’s last words to Nicholas Ridley, but then I thought of another sermon by that great Bishop that is even truer today than it was when he preached it in the 1550s…

“And now I would ask a strange question: who is the most diligentest bishop and prelate in all England that passeth all the rest in doing his office? I can tell for I know him who it is; I know him well. But now I think I see you listening and hearkening that I should name him. There is one that passeth all the other, and is the most diligent prelate and preacher in all England. And will ye know who it is? I will tell you: it is the devil. He is the most diligent preacher of all other; he is never out of his diocese; he is never from his cure; ye shall never find him unoccupied; he is ever in his parish; he keepeth residence at all times; ye shall never find him out of the way, call for him when you will he is ever at home; the diligentest preacher in all the realm; he is ever at his plough; no lording nor loitering can hinder him; he is ever applying his business, ye shall never find him idle, I warrant you. And his office is to hinder religion, to maintain superstition, to set up idolatry, to teach all kind of popery. He is ready as he can be wished for to set forth his plough; to devise as many ways as can be to deface and obscure God’s glory…O that our prelates would be as diligent to sow the corn of good doctrine as Satan is to sow cockle and darnel.”