Total visitors right now: 106

Click here to check your private inbox.

Welcome to Stand Firm!

And the Fudge Begins Anew

Monday, February 19, 2007 • 6:00 pm

Jim Naughton has posted some preliminary thoughts over at Daily Episcopalian

The definition of “authorizing,” as in we must stop authrozing “Any Rites for Blessing of same-sex unions,” by Sept. 30 will be hotly debated. As I have said before, I think we are being given some room here, as there is a difference between authorizing and allowing. I take comfort in those capitol letters. We are being asked not to approve texts. Very, very few dioceses have approved texts. Our diocese doesn’t. So I think we can comply with this.

It’s amazing how fast the spin machines can rotate.



33 Comments • Print-friendlyPrint-friendly w/commentsShare on Facebook
Comments:

uh, Jackie, that’s Jim Naughton.  No “Mc”

[1] Posted by The_Elves on 02-19-2007 at 06:07 PM • top

If so—that is, if this is the explicit reading given by Schori and company—the howling will, if anything, get louder.

[2] Posted by Id rather not say on 02-19-2007 at 06:09 PM • top

Sorry - It’s been a long day.  I think the computer is as tired as we are.  I corrected it but for some reason it didn’t save the correction.  Thanks for pointing it out.

[3] Posted by JackieB on 02-19-2007 at 06:11 PM • top

Now let’s see how 815 spins it. They’ll be working overtime tonight. Not going to like that hard deadline.

[4] Posted by JerryKramer on 02-19-2007 at 06:11 PM • top

If we’ve all abondoned ship, why does the “other side” feel the need to spin?

[5] Posted by James Manley on 02-19-2007 at 06:12 PM • top

Man, that’s cutting it fine. Alright if we can’t authorize as long as we can allow? Sheesh!

[6] Posted by henryleroi on 02-19-2007 at 06:18 PM • top

That’s just it James.  This document turns over the helm to someone other than PB.  They’re trying to spin the wheel madly to get away.

[7] Posted by anglicanhopeful on 02-19-2007 at 06:18 PM • top

The spin machines will be going overtime, spinning that fudge.

the snarkster

[8] Posted by the snarkster on 02-19-2007 at 06:20 PM • top

Well, that didn’t take long.  If God Himself cannot state that something is a sin in language so clear and unambigous that the Episcopalians won’t deny it, there is no hope that feeble men can craft anything to contain the evasions of TEC.

[9] Posted by Cousin Vinnie on 02-19-2007 at 06:20 PM • top

“It’s amazing how fast the spin machines can rotate”

Call it rotational momentum.

[10] Posted by Irenaeus on 02-19-2007 at 06:21 PM • top

FYI We’ve started a round up post with links to commentary over on the T19 backup site:

http://t19backup.blogspot.com/2007/02/roundup-commentary-on-communique.html

[11] Posted by The_Elves on 02-19-2007 at 06:24 PM • top

I think Mr. Naughton is forgetting the part about how the ambiguity over local option on gay marriage is what caused the primates to come down on the Episcopal Church as hard as they did.  See para. 21.

[12] Posted by Nasty, Brutish & Short on 02-19-2007 at 06:25 PM • top

If there is anything here for Biblical orthodoxy, it derives from Lambeth 1998.  What inspired, prophetic action to pass 1.10!  It would have been very easy not to rock the boat, and continue in silence, relying on 19 centuries of unbroken Christian tradition, and Bible passages that are some of the least ambiguous parts of Scripture.  Yet, something (I would say the Holy Spirit; reappraisers would say it was chicken dinners) caused the primates in 1998 to try to head off trouble.  It was not entirely successul, but without that anchor, the entire communion would be adrift.

[13] Posted by Cousin Vinnie on 02-19-2007 at 06:36 PM • top

From Mr. Naughton’s interactions here at SF, I consider him a decent and likeable guy.  I appreciate him as one of the few reappraisers that will talk to us like we’re not redneck, bigoted religious nuts.  At the same time, this type of thing is exactly why I will never trust ECUSA.

[14] Posted by Phil on 02-19-2007 at 06:45 PM • top

I hate to be a killjoy, but there could be reason for Jim Naughton’s assessment. There are some holes in the Communique, the TEC made sure that there are some big loopholes. The very things we like could be used to exploit the process. Actually the faster they play ball, maybe to their advantage. [*Sigh*] Our Worthy Opponent have a way of proving themselves worthy. mad

[15] Posted by Hosea6:6 on 02-19-2007 at 06:51 PM • top

We would have titled this as “And the beat goes on”. 

As I have said before, I think we are being given some room here, as there is a difference between authorizing and allowing.

Intent.  Like voting for B033 and then admitting you won’t comply with it anyway. Griswold say he wouldn’t consecrate and he did.  Schori says she’ll comply with Windsor, but now says she won’t give stop in accomplishing the LGBT agenda.  Reminds us of Genesis 2:1:  “Did God really say…”

Discipline?  Where?  When?  October 1st?  You think?

[16] Posted by The Lakeland Two on 02-19-2007 at 06:53 PM • top

henryleroi, kind of reminds me of “voting to receive” without “voting to authorize.”

[17] Posted by SCVJefe on 02-19-2007 at 07:05 PM • top

And so on 9/30/07 the TEC will not be in compliance because the heretics are in charge. The primates will then take another year or two to decide the fate of TEC. By 9/30/07, my church will no longer exist because people are tired of the hurry up and wait game. In any event, if the council envisioned by the primates is under TEC, no orthodox anglican will accept it. Adios.

[18] Posted by aghsteel on 02-19-2007 at 07:06 PM • top

One thing I pray we all consider carefully.  I could go into a “rollo” about how God, in loving Trinity, gives us the model of what love, person-hood, and κοινονια (real hearts & hands fellowship) are all about (yeah I just had to try that font trick!), but the point is that, wherever we are, we are Christ’s body, called to truly love those around us.  How far is it between saying, “well, I’m not going to stay in this parish because there’s a nut bar three levels up the chain,” and saying, effectively, denying our Gospel presence and witness to our fellow-parishioners?  Church, in whatever flavour, is both an instrument of worship and fellowship, and a ministry.  If the priest is all about, global neighborliness, maybe there’s a place for a subversive in the Sunday School or Rollo to bring in a word about holiness!  Maybe have a Subversive Bible Study during the week to help us encourage one another- not in combating the political trends, but in reaching and ministering to the souls of our friends!

More a confession of my own disordered personality than any kind of boast (amen!) but I’m at a TEC and an overseas parish for ministry, and getting started at a Wesleyan church for midweeks for support.  Like “the Preacher” said, “In the morning sow thy seed, and in the evening withhold not thine hand: for thou knowest not whether shall prosper, either this or that, or whether they both shall be alike good.”  [Ecc. 11:6]

[19] Posted by Robert Easter on 02-19-2007 at 07:30 PM • top

So ECUSA still is in fellowship, PB has been extolled and elevated, a practicing fornicator/homosexual is still a bishop with more on the way, those who want other leadership or to take their church/diocese out have been rebuked, anothe line in the sand 9-30-07, looks to me like Charlie Brown kicking the football.  Why would any true believer want to be in fellowship much less help and be under the authoriety of all those foul spirits and cage of unclean and hateful birds (Rev. 18:2-6)?  I fear The Lord God will deal harshly with all who do.  Lord have mercy!!

[20] Posted by PROPHET MICAIAH on 02-19-2007 at 07:30 PM • top

Sodbuster:

I believe the Communique “suggests” that CANA, AMiA, etc. negotiate the return of these congregations and properties to TEC - see Pastoral Scheme (thanks to our friends who call themselves Windsor Bishops).

[21] Posted by Wilkie on 02-19-2007 at 07:39 PM • top

Cousin Vinnie, you said it the first time, “If God Himself cannot state that something is a sin in language so clear and unambigous that the Episcopalians won’t deny it, there is no hope that feeble men can craft anything to contain the evasions of TEC.”

This is meeting parallels GC06 in several ways.  The fact that KJS was given a Communion office is significant. 
The result is not comforting:
1.  orthodox Anglicans remain yoked with unrepentant revisionists who are busy looking for loopholes. 
2. orthodox Anglicans remain vulnerable to the revisionists politically and as far as property is concerned,
3. orthodox Anglicans remain in the same old controversy ad infinitum, spending precious resources of time, money and energy.

Fewer and fewer orthodox Christians will remain Anglican because the state of the Communion, of TEC and the Western provinces is shameful and embarrassing.

[22] Posted by Theodora on 02-19-2007 at 07:58 PM • top

From Thinking Anglicans
“Same-sex blessings
The cost of the decision not to authorise any Rite of Blessing for same-sex unions in the Episcopal Church is a serious means that LGBT people in America are being asked to carry an intolerable burden. As in England and other parts of the Communion which acknowledge that God blesses covenanted, faithful relationships, we know that priests with the courage of their own spiritual convictions will continue to welcome those who come for blessing.”

Spin is being spun! To heck with Bishops, Primates authority. Priests, please your itching ears!

[23] Posted by fh57 on 02-19-2007 at 08:04 PM • top
[24] Posted by ama-anglican on 02-19-2007 at 08:08 PM • top

Sisters and Brothers in Christ, We must practice Virtue in the Unseen Warfare now more than ever!
Here is a quote on why to fight valiently in the Unseen Warfare:
To-day I shall do this and that; to-morrow I shall repent.’ This is the net of the devil, my brother, with which he catches a great many, and holds the whole world in his hands. The reason why this net catches us so easily is our negligence and blindness. Nothing but negligence and blindness can explain why, when the whole of our salvation and all the glory of God are at stake, we fail to use immediately the most easy and simple and yet the most effective weapon, namely: to say to our selves, resolutely and energetically: ‘This moment! I shall start spiritual life this moment, and not later; I shall repent now, instead of to-morrow. Now, this moment is in my hands, to-morrow and after is in the hands of God.
http://chattablogs.com/hagioipateres/archives/cat_unseen_warfare.html

Here is a Bible verse: For we wrestle not against flesh and blood, but…against spiritual wickedness in high places. (Eph. 6:12)

Here is another book: http://store.holycrossbookstore.com/962271387.html
Godspeed! And please forgive me, a sinner.

[25] Posted by Margaret in Orthodoxy on 02-19-2007 at 08:20 PM • top

I left in November and I see nothing in the Communique that woull lure me back.

[26] Posted by DaveG on 02-19-2007 at 08:22 PM • top

So ECUSA still is in fellowship, PB has been extolled and elevated, a practicing fornicator/homosexual is still a bishop with more on the way, those who want other leadership or to take their church/diocese out have been rebuked, anothe line in the sand 9-30-07, looks to me like Charlie Brown kicking the football.  Why would any true believer want to be in fellowship much less help and be under the authoriety of all those foul spirits and cage of unclean and hateful birds (Rev. 18:2-6)?  I fear The Lord God will deal harshly with all who do.  Lord have mercy!

Thank you, PM.  You nailed my state of mind.  And don’t forget the “Primatial Vicar” under the authority of KJS.  Oh, that is just ducky!!

It’s not about homosexuality, it’s about heresy.  It’s about the blatant and unequivocal denial of the divinity of Christ, the exclusivity of Christ, of His literal and bodily resurrection, about the atoning nature of His passion and death. 

Life turns on a dime.  In the past year, three of my friends have died, all under the age of 65, one was just into his 40’s.  I know in my heart that KJS and the vast majority of the HoB are not believers in the basic doctrine of Christian faith.  (And most of the rest of us know it too)  I just don’t feel like endangering my immortal soul; I’m not sure that waiting for the comminique to go into effect or the Covenant to be put into place is going to cut it with our LORD as a reasonable excuse for not leaving a body yoked to heretics.

Well, it’s not the first time I choose God over a more pleasing social situation.

[27] Posted by Gayle on 02-19-2007 at 08:31 PM • top

Margaret in Orthodoxy,

Agree that it’s all spiritual warfare and thanks for the reminder. 

Blessings.

[28] Posted by The Lakeland Two on 02-19-2007 at 08:35 PM • top

There is a story about four priests that meet weekly for bible study and mutual support.  Three of them are reappraisers and one is a reasserter.  Predicably, the reappraisers usually side with each other against the reasserter.  One day, they reasserter can’t take what they are saying.  He bows his head and prays:  “God, you know the truth and that I am speaking Your Truth.  Please give us a sign that I am following your truth here.” 

Just then, the lights in the building flicker.
“Just a coincidnece” one of the reappraising priests says.

“God, they didn’t accept your sign.  I pray you make it more plain.”

The lights go off, the sky darkens and a bolt of lightening strikes the ground outside the office.

“A freak thunderstorm” the second reappraising priest says.

“God, I don’t wish to try your patience, but can I have a more direct sign?”

The sky darkens, the lights in the building go out and a voice from heave says:  “He is right on this!”

“So?” says the third reappraising priest.  “It’s still three against two!”

YBIC,
Phil Snyder

[29] Posted by Philip Snyder on 02-19-2007 at 08:55 PM • top

DavidG,

I left awhile ago for the sake of my children’s souls, but I still count this as a vicotry.

Despite Jim’s spin - and, poor thing, it is a desperate attempt - this communique has given me more hope than any other.  Why?  Because it’s GS aurthorship is obvious; because, in spite of my knowing Katharine to be a winsome lass, she obviously failed her main objectives here; because the fact that GS membership is as important to Rowan (him or his Queen? Not sure - don’t at the moment care!) as is ECUSAn money. 

I would not go back to TEC - I would never take Communion in a TEC Church that was not declared in broken Communion with its leadership. 

But I call this a Victory - all the while, completely realizing this is still spiritual warfare.

Western Christianity, in general, has a long, long, LONG way to go to come home.

I’ll take my victories where I can get them.

If Jim N. Must “spin” to get a victory, well, “Those Who Have Ears, let them hear.”

[30] Posted by MJD_NV on 02-19-2007 at 08:56 PM • top

Gotta give the ABC credit. He heaped burning coals upon the head of +KJS, and has given her some dignity and respect… and then got her to agree that they can take it away if she doesn’t get TEC to toe the line.  A hat tip to the ABC. I just hope that those in power in TEC have enough sense to go along with this. It is a compromise… nobody left the table completely happy. But it may be a way for TEC to move forward, which is what we are going to have to do if we are going to survive. All of this quarrelling isn’t good for the children…

[31] Posted by The Ranter on 02-19-2007 at 08:58 PM • top

Nothing definitive about this whole sordid tale to me.  This is more Episcobabble and nuance, leading to nowhere.

When definite leadership was needed, we get more of this fudge.

Sorry…but to me, the Anglican experiment has proven to be a failure.

-Jim+

[32] Posted by Fr Jim+ on 02-20-2007 at 02:23 AM • top

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


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