+Schofield Responds to Schori

By the time you returned to the United States, however, you denied your public statement

+Schofield calls ‘em like he sees ‘em.

...back in the Briar Patch,

Thanks be to God for another faithful, stalwart shepherd who follows the Good Shepherd unswervingly.

Please know I do not share your feelings that I am isolated. My understanding of the authority of the Holy Scriptures, as well as Catholic Faith and Order are shared by the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Churches and by some 60 million faithful Anglicans worldwide

[*Standing Ovation*]

The Anglican Church of the Southern Cone has graciously offered the Diocese sanctuary on a temporary and emergency basis. This action is unprecedented but so, too, are the apostate actions of The Episcopal Church that make these protective measures necessary.

[*Very Somber*]Amen.

Peace be with you, +Schofield, and know that you and Dio. San Joaquin are in my prayer regarding this weekend’s convention.

What a fine letter, worthy of a bishop.  God bless and keep you, Bishop Schofield.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/nm/20071205/ts_nm/episcopals_diocese_dc

Swing, crack and it’s out of the park!

Thank you Lord for this faithful servant.  Protect him from all foes and guide his heart always to Your service.  Amen.

Note the greeting -
“Greetings in the name of Jesus Christ, our ONE AND ONLY Lord and Savior.” (Caps added).
Just telling it like it is!!
They are in my prayers as they contend with this difficult issue.

Splendid response. Note that Bp. Schofield’s generously interpreted the Presiding Bishop’s letter to be “pastoral”, and that “discussion” will be possible after this weekend. We all know that the Presiding Bishop intended neither. By linking those statements with the Presiding Bishop’s prevarications at and after Dar, the Presiding Bishop’s approaching repression will demonstrate the true worth of her word. That demostration might help with some of the moderate Primates.

Simply outstanding and beautifully done.  Standing ovation.  Wish I were over there with them…

Thanks for the link, enlightened. A very good article by reporter Michael Conlon.

...back in the Briar Patch,

Ouch, now that’s gonna leave a mark…

+Duncan - strike one!
+Iker - strike two!
+Schofield - strike three and you’re out TEC/KJS!!

Should it be the will of the Annual Convention to accept this most generous gift, I will welcome the opportunity implied in your letter to discuss how it impacts our relationship.

  We anxiously await!

One more honest Christian bishop speaks his mind and Faith. The “moderate” bishops have seen enough examples before this. They will remain on the sidelines until in their view it is safe to come out of the shadows. Expect nothing more from them. The Christian bishops who deserve honor from us already have stood up.

Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori (hereinafter PBJS for the convenience of my typing fingers) is on the pitcher’s mound, and throws a curve. 

I continue to be concerned for your health, and for your evident sense of isolation.

Bishop John-David Schofield (hereinafter BJDS for the same convenience) smacks that curveball over the fence, thusly,

Please know I do not share your feelings that I am isolated. My understanding of the authority of the Holy Scriptures, as well as Catholic Faith and Order are shared by the Roman Catholic Church, Eastern Orthodox Churches and by some 60 million faithful Anglicans worldwide. It is The Episcopal Church that has isolated itself from the overwhelming majority of Christendom and more specifically from the Anglican Communion by denying Biblical truth and walking apart from the historic Faith and Order.

In another of BJDS’s trips to the plate, PBJS throws a variety of junk to no avail, and dipping into her bag of trick pitches, tosses this little one:

While you may believe that the Diocese of San Joaquin can be welcomed into another Province of the Anglican Communion, I believe you will find that few parts of the Communion will recognize such a proposal. Such an action is without precedent, violates long-standing principles of catholic Christianity, and can only harm those faithful Episcopalians who only seek to follow Christ. I urge you to consider whether there might not be a more honorable course for you, personally, than seeking to violate your ordination vows and the Canons of this Church. Together with many in this Church, I would very much value your continued and increased presence at the table – both the table of Jesus Christ and the table of fellowship.

...and BJDS smacks it clean out of the park:

You were in Dar es Salaam, and in the presence of the assembled Primates you verbally signified your agreement to this direction. By the time you returned to the United States, however, you denied your public statement and declared you had only meant to bring it back for further consideration. It was no surprise, therefore, when the Executive Council and the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church later denounced the plan for a pastoral council that you went along with them. This was a clear signal that our religious freedom to practice the Historic Faith as this Church has received it would not be protected by The Episcopal Church.

In view of previous answers to PBJS’s similar missives, the ballgame has turned into quite a distraction for this spectator!

Praise God, and may He continue to bless and protect His servant, +John-David. 
Thanks to +Duncan, +Iker, and +Schofield for bringing hope to those of us who live in dark places.

What an excellent reply. Godly, gracious and charitable. He’s another I wish were my bishop.

I have a blog thingy

Did anyone else notice who’s smiling face adorns the [url=“http://billyockham.blogspot.com/”>news article</a> Enlightened linked to?

<a ] I have a blog thingy [/url]

Excellent Bishop!

Thank You, Sir.

Did anyone else notice who’s smiling face adorns the page that Enlightened linked to.

I have a blog thingy

Well done, for what was said and what was left unsaid.  I’d say Venables’s province will be swelling quite nicely in the coming days.

Masterful.

. . . thy will be done . . .

Peace,

Along with the Bishop’s comment that by the time the Presiding Bishop had returned to these shores she had changed her mind ,we should add the PB’s comments under oath at the Farifax, Virginia trial ... namely that she had not agreed to the Communique. No. Period.

It leaves me wondering how I can accept anything the Presiding Bishop says now. She has, under threat of perjury, stated that her word was not her word, that her yes did not mean yes ... There should be some accountability for this slippery sense of truth.

I keep waiting for others to bring her court testimony and her words in DES to her attention and ask for a visible sign of contrition. But then, I guess I’m just an optimist at heart ...

Mousestalker, we’re going to be seeing that face every time someone opens a closet drawer.

...back in the Briar Patch,

Oops, (Freudian?) slip. I meant closet door.

...still in the Briar Patch,

Todays score:  Orthodox Bishops 3   +Schori 0
Okey dokey. Who’s on deck?

generalissimo snarko

How exciting to see our Lord at work through his servants and shepherds!  I really don’t think the revisionists understand the determination and courage in those who oppose them- they judge these saints using their own standards and simply do not understand the unbending faithfullness that refuses to compromise to the world’s culture.  Whether it was Roman soldiers, or the religious comfortable of the time, they did not and do not understand.  God is God and we are not.

While I don’t agree with the exit strategies of those leaving the Episcopal Church—- I think it premature—- this letter is none the less excellent. I would reckon that should many Episcopalians read it they will be glad for the points made against the direction the church is being taken, and against those unwilling to change course back towards orthodoxy and into line with the rest of the Communion. I have always had great respect for this bishop, and remembered Bishop Robert Mize, of saintly memory, (founder of the St. Francis School for Boys, and the subject of Emily Gardiner’s “Father Bob and His Boys”) saying that Bishop Schofield was a very honorable and good man, a “true Churchman.” Indeed, I can think of few people whose opinion I would regard Higher than Bishop Mize. As a result, and because of Bishop Schofield’s example of orthodox faith and practice in the face of such tremendous pressure and heterodoxy, I may have to change my opinion of those who are choosing to pull out…

That’s my Bishop!

I am continually thankful that he takes every opportunity to proclaim the Gospel and to denounce heresy.

Make no mistake, this letter was written for the encouragement of the faithful.

So any experts on Anglican/ECUSA polity want to weigh in on which will be viewed as more significant in 20 years time 1) the VA litigation; 2) this weekend’s San Joaquin vote?  My vote, at the bottom.

Bless this bishop (and his advisors) in writing a letter that, on a first quick reading, offers no issues on which the Title IV Review Committee could hang a fresh presentment. 

The power of the prior presentment’s dismissal may now come back to haunt some in ways they never imagined.

. . . thy will be done . . .

Peace,

#2

“After this length of time, one wonders how genuine the offer of change for the Church can be by having the “loyal opposition” present at the table”.

Oh, that’s just a case of “let’s keep talking until you agree with me/us”. 

Bravo, Bishop Schofield. 

Fr. Giles:  “Make no mistake, this letter was written for the encouragement of the faithful”.

Yes, and thank God, too, as opposed to for the persecution of the faithful; the inherent purpose of the original missive. 

Out of the park!! 

+Schofield continues to be steadfast and consistent in what he says and does- there is no question where he stands - it is firmly on Jesus the Rock.  He has fought for Biblical Truth well before he became a bishop 20 years ago. 

Our concern is that in San Joaquin tying itself to the “See of Canterbury” rather than the Anglican Communion at large do they really know where the ++ABC stands? 

+Schofield and ++Venables are “obvious”.  THAT is biblical.  What is hidden is not. 

Bishop Schofield and the Diocese of San Joaquin remain in our prayers.  May God continue to bless you and your diocese, +John-David, with many blessings… and with His full protection and mercy.

The war of spin doctoring continues.  Yet the facts will only be seen and fully weighed in retrospect, as I believe Saint Yogi Berra is supposed to have preached. 

Perspective also matters for the considerable time being.  Is the conservative Anglican realignment glass, half full? Or half empty?

Schofield may end up like the deposed bishop of Recife, also welcomed and somehow resident in this same Southern Cone diocese.  Or another type of new Anglican joining and residence may come to be, on the global grounds of things. 

Messy, either way - simply because neither outcome settles the queer hot bottons of our current controversies. 

The rest of us are still changing our minds and hearts, along with how we newly refrain from mistreating various neighbors.  And we probably will still be changing in all sorts of ways, for the foreseeable future as startling new empirical data floods out from biology, human development, psychology, and the related social sciences. Cosmology and physics after Einstein are also busy, shifting, and at any startling moment, a whole break through in the physical sciences could occur (though not necessarily) - leaving us gaping at an almost mystical physics of subatomic reality meshed with more everyday Newtonian-style realities.  If you have been watching modern physics, you surely have heard the bright sounds of those hunting horns, hard on the trails of unified theory.  The moment that a new physics starts dancing more closely with a new biology and human sciences, a whole new ball game has started, no matter what anybody pledges in conservative terms.

As with the Evolution vs Creationism controversies - new fossils or other new evidence may be found at any surprising moment. 

Animal models or analogues of human sexual orientation are still being investigated, at levels more advanced than ever before in world civilization.  Whatever the new data turns out to be, the Southern Cone’s effective provincial status and traditional claims about queer folks will hardly be the final weighing of it all.  As if Presiding Bishop Venebles could protect anybody, of whatever right to middle to left believer disposition, from the changing facts.

And, PS. Venebles still can be weighed in fundamental human rights terms/values, on a global village basis.  He plunked down, right in the middle of the current century, whether he likes it or not, whether he bothers to pay attention to it, or not. Sub species aeternitas, sub species modernitas.

Athanasius Returns smacked it out if the park and I’m STILL laughing!  What a visual and is God great or what?!?

Our parish in Phoenix, AZ is praying for San Joaquin.

Although he did not say, “Here I stand,” he did echo Martin Luther when he said, “I can do no other.” Only protection from a powerful ally prevented Martin Luther from being burned at the stake as a heretic. Thanks be to God that we’ve progressed past burning people for heresy; PB Schori should take note of that.

Dr. Dan, I think that post wins you today’s Kultursmog Award.

Who is more blessed:

The bride in June, or

the Faithful Shepherd in December?

drdanfee - you obviously do not either understand or accept the doctrine of the fall.

Dr Dan,

All the scientific knowledge in the world will not change one simple truth. Sin is a behavior. We sin when we do sinful things. Homosexual activity is a sinful behavior, regardless of why people do it. Better scientific understanding of why some people have sex with people of the same sex will not change the fact that the action, the behavior, is still a sinful act.

We may better understand why some people cheat on their spouse, but it will still be adultery, and will still be sin. And I know, do not feed the trolls…

All I can say here is that this is a grace filled reply, to a troubling letter.

In this letter +Schofield shows why he should be regarded, as a true shepherd for his flock, along with a rounded understanding of his Consecration.  I believe this exchange in particular, illustrates the duality of the consecration, which the current management, wishes to ignore.  Bishop Schofield very carefully outlines that being a bishop, involves more then following or enforcing the Cannons.  He also states very clearly, what he views as his obligations due to his office.

Dan, it’s nice to know we can count on you.

The new physics is going to have NOTHING to say about biology, because biology exists in a very low-energy realm.  Biology is dealt with pretty nicely by the Standard Model and does not give a crap about unification of forces at temperatures orders of magnitude higher than the center of the Sun.

I found the most interesting part his deference to democracy, saying, in effect, that he would honor the vote taken.  If it were to remain in the Episcopal Church, he says he would remain as dissenter.  This it seems makes it much more difficult to say that he was come-hell-or-high-water determined to remove his see from the Episcopal Church.  It makes it much harder with straight face to say he’s abandoned anything.  And, of course, it sets up KJS as a damnable liar when it comes to all the sweet words uttered about “our democratic polity” as Episcopalians—when it will be democracy that didn’t go her way that she’s trying to undo.  (Indeed, it’s been awhile since I’ve heard that tripe about our democratic polity recently—anyone else noticed that?).

For once I’m on the mantra, get this not-related mess outta here. Evolutionary biology, evolutionary smo-ology! Bleck!

+SanJoaquin has evolved nicely, thank you.

Dear Dr. Dan:
  A question: What did you mean by:

“Venebles still can be weighed in fundamental human rights terms/values, on a global village basis.  He plunked down, right in the middle of the current century, whether he likes it or not, whether he bothers to pay attention to it, or not. Sub species aeternitas, sub species modernitas.”

I know very little about the man…

Put down the bong, Dan.  Now!

drdanfee, what century are you in? None of us have yet reached the middle of the 21st century. 

He plunked down, right in the middle of the current century, whether he likes it or not, whether he bothers to pay attention to it, or not.

You’re the one who doesn’t seem to be paying enough attention to even notice we are in the first decade of a new century. From your rhetoric, you still seem to be stuck in the thought forms of the 1980’s.

Is Dr. Dan the English Lit professor from Animal House?

This sort of considered reply, done in a pastoral, friendly way, is why My wife and I are so proud to be affiliated with this diocese as missionaries.  When we are asked about our Episcopal affiliation, when we say the orthodox Diocese of San Joaquin, we are always acceptable in the strict conservative So. Pacific islands.  + J-D is known and admired wherever we go.
Captain Scott

I think I have figured out an essential difference between the reasserters and reappraisers.  The one is waiting to catch up with God.  The other is waiting for God to catch up with them.

Another attempt to hijack a thread by our beloved doctor.

...back in the Briar Patch,

Bishop Schofield got it wired.  drdanfee got his wires crossed preety bad.

Dr. Dan

You:
<blockquote>Cosmology and physics after Einstein are also busy, shifting, and at any startling moment, a whole break through in the physical sciences could occur (though not necessarily) - leaving us gaping at an almost mystical physics of subatomic reality meshed with more everyday Newtonian-style realities.  If you have been watching modern physics, you surely have heard the bright sounds of those hunting horns, hard on the trails of unified theory.  The moment that a new physics starts dancing more closely with a new biology and human sciences, a whole new ball game has started, no matter what anybody pledges in conservative terms<blockquote>

Dr. Einstein:
<blockquote> I want to know God’s thoughts, everthing else is but footnotes.<blockquote>

Albert has it over you in spades.

RSB

Paula,

You are on the right track.  Not too shabby for RC,  huh?  Episcopalians don’t know the difference.

Interesting that drdanfee points to physics as the an analogy of our understanding of human sexuality.

There’s a growing school that asserts string theory - the current “best thinking” in the field - has cost the science close to thirty years of progress. String theory equations are not solvable and the empirical evidence is not there. Yet, the faculty of most major physics departments are adherents to string theory and tend to hire like minded people. So the community carries forth an idea that fails in the real world and can not be demonstrated theoretically. Why would they do that?

Scientists are humans, too. They often inject their own biases and beliefs (as in it would be a disaster to admit I was wrong…) into their work - there’s plenty of history along this front. Only the fool hearty would think this generation of scientists is any different.

I’m embarrassed for any post-modernist who doesn’t understand such a simple concept.

It leaves me wondering how I can accept anything the Presiding Bishop says now. She has, under threat of perjury, stated that her word was not her word, that her yes did not mean yes ... There should be some accountability for this slippery sense of truth.

Put bluntly. She lies. How are we to believe anything she says with the evidence before us? And why trust her with anything?

Fr Van,

So nice to see that you have joined us again.  how are things in Pine Bluff?

From the perspective of someone who thinks of +KJS as a Godly leader, how do you see her letter?

RSB

Re Einstein’s theology:  Forgive the self-promotion, but a post on my new blog examines Einstein’s mature philosophy of science and religion.  Physicists make really horrible philosophers—not as bad as biologists, but really, really bad.

Cheers,

Phil Hobbs

Is the Episcopal Church (and its Executive Council) ready to conform its attitude on abortion to the knowledge of the unborn that is spectacularly available through new technology?  What drdan seems to mean (IMHO) is something like this: if we like the new scientific findings, we will say they are true; if we don’t, we will do as we like, anyway.  It is already evident what kind of pseudo-science the Episcopal Church is willing to endorse.

evan miller wrote: “What a fine letter, worthy of a bishop”. Exactly. It’s the type of statement that faithful Anglicans worldwide have been waiting for years to come from Canterbury, only to have their hopes dashed again and again. The sad thing is that some STILL really think that the current ABC is going to come forth with conviction and show himself to be a defender of the faith once delivered. Hmmmm. Would this be naivate’, unbounded hope, or endless patience? And on the part of the current ABC-I wonder if anything stirs in his heart when he reads the noble, straightforward declarations of Bishops Duncan, Iker, and Schofield, something that would awaken His Grace to his high calling as a Christian Bishop? Certainly we can pray for that.

To Bishops Duncan, Iker and Schofield, our prayers are with you. 

“Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness’ sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake. Rejoice, and be exceeding glad, for great is your reward in the heavens.”

CC: Primates

drdanfee:

That was the weirdest post EVER…  in this you have mastered yourself.

RE:  Science -

Oh yes, the ‘fact’ of evolution - excepting of course, that after 60 years we still cannot take the elements of life and randomly create the
‘mistake’ of life.

SUCH A GREAT THEORY - not provable - and takes way more Faith to believe you could randomly create DNA, cytoplasm and cell membrane and make a cell - like smashing around playdough in hopes that someday you might create the Effel Tower - but so much easier to believe than there’s an Intelligent Mind behind it… yeah right..

If you are going to foist such paltry stuff - please at least take it to people of whom lack scientific knowledge - OK?  That excludes the majority here…

PLEASE…

Speaking of scientists being human and all that entails:

“What if the heads being counted to certify an alleged “consensus” arrived at their positions by counting heads?

It may seem strange that scientists would participate in such a phenomenon. It shouldn’t. Scientists are human; they do not wait for proof; many devote their professional lives to seeking evidence for hypotheses (especially well-funded hypotheses) they’ve chosen to believe.

Less surprising is the readiness of many prominent journalists to embrace the role of enforcer of an orthodoxy simply because it is the orthodoxy. For them, a consensus apparently suffices as proof of itself.”

So if this can happen in climate science and it can happen in physics… could it, maybe happen in areas with even less objective evidence… say in the area of human sexuality…. nah.

Dr. Dan:

Physics and metaphysics are not the same field. True science requires us to change our minds to fit <u>all</u> the facts. What I learned of genetics in 1976 was outdated by 1980. What I learned of human motivations, sin, virtue and obedience in Sunday School has not changed appreciably in 45 years.

As one of my favourite sermons from our interim priest, Tom Wilson, put it: “God does not call us to be natural but supernatural. He calls us to rise above our nature and become more like Him.” To do that, we have the Holy Spirit to help us. But there is a condition precedent to the Holy Spirit showing up: “If you love Me, keep My commandments, and I will pray the Father to send you another Comforter who will be with you forever.”

We who pray for you and your fellow travellers and ourselves, fear that the Spirit that blows through your councils does not come from the Father.

I think the Good Bishop did an admirable and gracious job of responding to <s>David Beers lawyers</s> Bishop Schori.  I agree with others that her letter was the first step in a paper trail necessary for bringing legal action, not “waging reconciliation”.  If things go as most expect, it will be very hard for TEC to keep claming “all is well”, and there is little opposition to their “gift”. 

This is, in the end, about power.  +Schori and her fellow travelers have worked for years to attain the corporate power of the church institution so they can claim legitimacy for their agenda (sorry, “gift”).  They now have that, and the 60’s generation intellectual assurance that they are absolutely right.  They are not going to stand for a “loyal opposition” to their power for long, if at all.

+Schofield, and others, keep reminding her side - much to their consternation - that it is God’s Power that is the real power of the church, not Canons, Constitutions, or General Conventions, and real spiritual knowledge comes from knowing and Him and heeding His Word.  Our Worthy Opponents do not like to hear all that, which is why they couch their words with lots of non-specific feel-good phrases and why they attack any who question their goals or their behavior.

I think Bishop Schofield, Duncan and Iker are doing the right thing.  I do not see them as the “loyal opposition”, but rather as the “loyal defenders”.  And like them, I can do no other.

My Opinion, et. al.

And, of course, it sets up KJS as a damnable liar

I didn’t think she needed to be set up as such, she established that some time back.

This letter is far more gracious than she deserves. IMO.

I thought a PBJS was a peanut butter and jelly sandwich

“I thought a PBJS was a peanut butter and jelly sandwich”

In this case, they might just as well be interchangable.  Except only one of them is nourishing.

My Opinion, et. al.

A world renowned scientist and God were talking. “We can do anything science is so advanced… Why we can even separate the chemicals from ordinary dirt and recombine them to make life.” God said, “Show me.” The scientist bent over to get a handful of dirt and God said, “Wait a minute - get your own dirt!”

Drdanfee, I’ll keep you in my prayers.

I seem to have missed something - can someone direct me to KJS’s letter to +Schofield, please?
Thanks

Kate’s letter is here.

Oh that our Lord would give me words like that to speak and write—without animosity, yet honest and forthright to a fault. God bless, protect and prosper Bishop Schofield and his loyal flock in San Joaquin. Amen.

Prayerfully,
Martial Artist

Clearly a man of God.  Stand Firm San Joaquin.

MassPK

Dr. Dan…
Huh?
Intercessor

Dr. Dan,
As we here in Fresno,California are about to embark on a historic moment perhaps not seen in in 500+ years in the Anglican Communion I would invite you to comment exclusively for the remainder of my natural life in a venue more suitable for your immeasurable intellect:
http://www.merseymike.blogspot.com

Cheers,
Intercessor

That was cold Intercessor.
But I see where you’re going with that one.
Nuff said.

Laytone

This was a clear signal that our religious freedom to practice the Historic Faith as this Church has received it would not be protected by The Episcopal Church. My Ordination vows require me to be a faithful steward of God’s holy Word and to defend His truth and “be ready, with all faithful diligence, to banish and drive away from the Church all erroneous and strange doctrines contrary to God’s Word; and to use both public and private monitions and exhortations…” I can do no other.

Let us pray that God grants us the charity and steadfast courage of this good man for the trials ahead. 
Katherine- all you can take from us are earthly things that when measured against eternity are meaningless.  What the Church gives us are those things of heaven that have no end.  You present us with the choice to submit to you so we can keep the earthly things, or instead to submit to Christ and be granted eternal life.  And you pretend surprise that we choose the latter.

Three threatening letters, three perfect but very different responses.

It will be interesting to watch further developments at 815.  Mrs. Schori does not react at all well to defiance, and she clearly learned nothing at all from the earlier two responses.  I expect her barely concealed rage to cause some serious missteps in the near future.
<hr width=40%>
<a >Intercessor</a>,

Please.  It has been my experience, without exception, that those who airily wave their arms about Christianity being <a >revolutionized</a> by modern physics, or modern biology, or any of the rest—<a >these people</a> know very little about science and nothing whatever about Christianity.  I’ve been waiting in vain for over a year now for DrDan to provide a counterexample; instead he’s consistently given us only further confirming evidence.  But we must have patience.

Next, KJS will claim she never inhaled.

Notice how each reply letter gets stronger.  Two ot three more successionist diosceses and their reply should just about unhing her and send her over the edge. IMHO

Thank you, wportbello and folks in AZ

Dear Bishop Schori:
It is good that Bishop Schofield is using the correct salutation (Bishop Schori) even if she does not properly address her letters to him.
If she decides to send another letter, I hope she at least understands that the proper salutation is Bishop Schofield not John-David.
The use of first names in open letters of this importance can easily be perceived as an attempt to intimidate the person receiving the letter.

Hey Dr. Dan.

What you said above sure sounded a lot like some of the things I’ve heard John Spong say. I understand he gets a lot of his advice from this wise old “affectionate uncle” dude.

“...Above all, do not attempt to use science (I mean, the real sciences) as a defence against Christianity. They will positively encourage him to think about realities he can’t touch and see. There have been sad cases among the modern physicists. If he must dabble in science, keep him on economics and sociology; don’t let him get away from that invaluable “real life”. But the best of all is to let him read no science but to give him a grand general idea that he knows it all and that everything he happens to have picked up in casual talk and reading is “the results of modem investigation”. Do remember you are there to fuddle him. From the way some of you young fiends talk, anyone would suppose it was our job to teach!”

As with the Evolution vs Creationism controversies - new fossils or other new evidence may be found at any surprising moment. 

LOL!  If a Six-Day Creationist gave that “defense,” it would still be lame;  and I’m actually sympathetic to the Six-Day view. 

Here. 
He’s Day-Age… “JUST A STEP AWAY FROM THEISTIC EVOLUTION !!!,” by the reckoning of many Strict Six-Day Creationists. 

Read what he has to say about Evolution. 

..Broaden your horizens, for a change.

My Lands.

Dan Fee,
I sincerely hope that this is the last entry about you and your comment but it is clear that you know very little about modern and Newtonian physics.

The prayer vigil for the San Joaquin convention commences tonight.  A sign-up sheet is posted at Surrounded.  In addition, prayers for San Joaquin have been posted at Lent & Beyond throughout the week.  Scroll down to read them all.  Thank you, dear intercessors.

Amazing.

Drdanfee lobs a troll grenade at 4pm yesterday, generating no less than 22 off-topic comments (including two from yours truly), successfully converting a thread about +Schofield vs. +Schori into a thread about drdan. And he doesn’t even have to reply in order to keep the comments flowing. Fully one-fourth of this thread has been hijacked.

...still in the Briar Patch,

Robertf,

A brilliant allusion to C. S. Lewis’ Screwtape Letters.  Perfect.

This weekend should provide further evidence that a New Reformation is indeed underway, for better or worse.  The first diocese will have amended its constitution to leave TEC and realign with the Global South.  That is historic.  It’s huge.  And in the end, I firmly believe it will be for the better, not the worse.

“Let goods and kindrred go…”

David Handy+
Advocate of High Commitment, Post-Christendom Anglicanism
Fervent Supporter of that New Reformation

The scientist bent over to get a handful of dirt and God said, “Wait a minute - get your own dirt!”

Exactly.  The stronger argument for God’s existence is not “how could things so complicate assemble themselves at random?”  It is “why is there something rather than nothing?

Too bad the vast majority of pew sitters out there with blinders on never see these communications back and forth between the PB and Iker, Schofield, etc.  There is TREMENDOUS “clarity” between the seething anger (or am I reading that into them) in her epistles - and the clear, direct responses.  If only everyone could see this stuff…the blind would see.

Midwestnorwegian,

Personally, what I detect in the Presiding Heretic’s threatening letters to the three bishops is not so much seething anger as something colder and even scarier (as in a murder done “in cold blood”).  But I’m not so sure that even widespread distribution of all the associated letters would open some people’s eyes. 

Many people would wake up, yes, especially in places like where you live in SD (I’m a Sioux Falls native myself, though not of Norwegian descent).  People in “Lake Wobegon” territory aren’t as easily fooled as those in trendier spots, like say southern CA, or British Columbia.

But there is a puzzling mystery at work here, that goes beyond ordinary human blindness.  To me, it resembles nothing so much as the “veil” that Paul described as covering the eyes of most of his fellow Jews, a veil that kept them from recognizing their Messiah (see 2 Cor. 3-4).  Even 4 years after the disastrous General Convention of 2003, I’m amazed at how many of my liberal friends (our “Worthy Opponents”) just “don’t get it.” 

To some degree, it’s culturally induced.  It’s hard for anyone to think outside their worldview, their intellectual and spiritual paradigm.  But I honestly think it’s often more than that.  There’s something supernatural at work here that defies our full understanding.

On the one hand, it is almost certainly demonic (like the veil Paul speaks of in 2 Cor.).  The chief weapon of our Mortal Foe has ever been deception, for he is, and always has been, “the Father of lies.”  But on the other hand, I can’t help but think that there may well be a strange divine prevention of recognition going on here too.  Just as the two travellers along the Emmaus Road were kept from ecognizing the risen Jesus at first, there may be something like that going on here too, for reasons we may never fully understand.

To me, it resembles nothing so much as the familiar story of the Exodus.  As many readers will recall, the complex narrative of the plagues in Exod us 7-11 reveals a complicated situation with regard to Pharaoh’s hardened heart.  Yes, he certainly hardened his own heart and stubbornly refused to let God’s people go (as the J or Yahwistic strand insists, if you accept the standard JEDP theory).  But there is also the mysterious way that the LORD also hardened Pharaoh’s heart, in order to display his glory (as the P or Priestly strand adds and also insists, i.e., if you accept the usual source analysis by biblical scholars).  Both aspects are part of the biblical story.

That is roughly the same situation I see happening today.  How much is due to Satanic veiling of the spiritual eyes of our foes and how much is the even more disturbing act of our Lord himself is unclear and obviously debatable.  But there can be no doubt whatsoever that there is an element of spiritual blindness and hardened hearts going on here.  Lord, have mercy upon us all.

David Handy+
Rejoicing in the Advent of the New Reformation

Dear RSB:
  Thanks for welcoming me back. Things are great in the Ol’ Piney Woods and Delta of Arkansas…To answer your question about the PB. While I understand, and agree, with her desire to hold on to Episcopal Church property, I must say that her public letters have caused me huge concern. At some point I can see that some Congregations and church buildings will undergo a shift in jurisdiction, but not in the manner some are leaving now. I think it will take place with the establishment of the “covenant” as some will be unable to live into orthodoxy. Yet her words and actions seem as full of avarice and mean-spiritedness as those attempting to take property that is not theirs—- and talk so horribly about members of TEC and all leadership. And, I would add, that just as when a rector begins shouting about, threatening, and waving the Book of Canons the battle is over, so it is with the PB or other bishops—- because they have lost personal authority they must rely on outside authority…Sadly, it seems the jig is up for her administration and that of several diocesan bishops, but the question remains as to how realignment takes place and the authority of those who bring it about to bring it about…
I have lost respect for the PB also because she is not advocating adherence to the HOB’s statement, and in fact seems to be brooking with open rebellion on the issue of homosexuality. The Church is on the brink of implosion. On the other hand, I believe the ABC will be the focus of unity. Even though many on this site see him as duplicitous, I respect his intellect, and believe that he will stand by his guns, placing individuals, and dioceses in the position of choosing to be “in” or “out.” Please understand, I still respect the PB, and like her, I just don’t feel “safe” trusting her to act in the best interest of Catholic Faith and Practice (ignoring the whole ordained women question)....I have always held that I would choose to remain in Communion with Canterbury, but was opposed to foreign occupation by conflicting jurisdictions, and with that I believe the PB is in agreement—- the real question for me is how strongly she agrees…

Hi StandFirm Commenters,

Could we please hold it down on the cute names for Beers, Bishop Jefferts Schori and so on?

Our arguments and ideas are far superior, so there is no need to make up names like SquidLady or the Presiding Heretic for the proponents of the really bad ideas.

Thanks,

Sarah

To second Sarah’s plea…Stand Firm is being quoted and linked now on a regular basis on the HOB/D listserv, and other more liberally slanted blogs, so let’s not give them any more ammunition than they think they already have.

Fight the good fight, and stand firm in the faith.

Chip,

Rather, let’s not give them the wrong sort of ammunition. I’d like to think that some of our more able commentators (Sarah, Matt, NRA et al) may be firing some shots that could penetrate the thick hides of stubbornness and pride on the HoBD. If even one HoBD stalwart repents and turns toward Jesus Christ, then all will be worthwhile.

I pray for a wholesale repentance, but my Mom always said I was a hopeless optimist.

I have a blog thingy

Sarah,

I repent, and will henceforth cease and desist using derogatory names for the PB and other “Worthy Opponents.”  I agree that it is counterproductive.

Mousetalker,

Thanks for suddenly elevating me to be among the “more able commentators” alongside Sarah and Matt.  I’m not sure that they would agree with your generous assessment, but I appreciate the compliment.

David Handy+

Toning it down may be a good idea on its own merits, but if I might disagree good-naturedly with Chip, what does or doesn’t appear on the HOBD isn’t a reason for doing so.  At the usual deconstructionist blogsites, you’ll see several hostile names regularly shot at Bishops Iker, Duncan and Schofield, not to mention Greg Griffith and the commenters here as a group, all of which I’m sure go unmentioned on the HOBD (unless it’s praise for the viciousness of the cheap shot).

This isn’t a “two wrongs make a right” defense, just an observation that the typical HOBD denizen won’t be swayed by ad hominem, a point-by-point refutation of their ideas signed by Christ Himself, or anything in between.  They will go silent when the Communion has been cleansed of mainstream Christian belief, and not a moment before.

David Handy+-good word, sir. I’m reminded of the scripture, “the election hath obtained it, but the rest were blinded”. Regarding the wicked sons of Eli, Hophni and Phinehas, 1 Samuel records how Eli lectured them to turn them from their evil way, “...But they would not listen to the voice of their father, for the LORD desired to put them to death”. (1 Sam. 2:25). You mentioned 2 Corinthians 3,4; I always cross referenced that section of scripture with Isaiah 25:7. Isaiah 25 is a glorious passage, and speaks of the day when God will establish His kingdom on the earth. Verses 7 and 8 read: “And on this mountain He will swallow up the covering which is over all peoples,      Even the veil which is stretched over all nations. He will swallow up death for all time, And the Lord GOD will wipe tears away from all faces, And He will remove the reproach of His people from all the earth; For the LORD has spoken”. I’ve also pondered the phrase, “Jacob have I loved, and Esau I have hated.” And in that vein, the prophecy regarding them while they strugged in Rebeccas womb:” The LORD said to her, “Two nations are in your womb;And two peoples will be separated from your body; And one people shall be stronger than the other; And the older shall serve the younger.”” (Gen. 25:23). Fascinating stuff, this. I’m sure many other examples could be drawn from the pages of Scripture, but this will suffice for now. Jesus said: “No one can come to me, unless the Father who sent Me draws him…”(John 6:44). So-is KJS a type of Pharaoh? Yes, I think so. She tries to enslave the faithful with falsehood and force, and after numerous warnings, against which she hardens her heart, deliverers from the GS come to bring the people out. As they attempt to leave,  DBB tries to stop them with lawsuits. No an exact analogy, perhaps, but I think it reflects pretty well what the dissenting parishes/doicese are facing now-they are trapped between KJS’ army of threats and lawsuits behind them as they attemt to fjord the reorganization into a “common cause” province so they may enter the new promised land. Or-might DBB and/or KJS be knocked off their horses by a bolt of divine light? Only God knows, of course; but if I were to guess, I’d say that the former scenario, which is playing out as I type, will continue to do so. Forgive my ramble; a blessed day to all.

Our arguments and ideas are far superior, so there is no need to make up names like SquidLady or the Presiding Heretic for the proponents of the really bad ideas.

But Presiding Marine Biologist had such a nice ring to it. Whatever, I shall cease and desist immediately. Heaven forbid the snarkster should be accused of snarkiness. As long as we can still call their “really bad ideas” really bad ideas. Really really bad ideas. Really really really bad ideas. Maybe even “absolutely awful ideas”.

herr schnarchmeister

As reported by Mary Frances Schjonberg of Episcopal News Service

San Joaquin bishop responds to warning from Presiding Bishop

From her letter of December 3

I do not intend to threaten you, only to urge you to reconsider and draw back from this trajectory.

That should clarify things and dispel any rumors.  She never threatened him.  She warned him. 

BobK,  thanks.  As this is, after all, supposed to be a “no whining” zone, I was attempting a more edifying stance.  You are quite correct that the idea that God might harden people’s hearts is found in other places besides the Plague narrative in Exod. 7-11.  Your reference to the wicked sons of Eli is especially frightening, as it involves priests.  But a friend of mine who is another orthodox (TEC) priest in Richmond pointed out to me a particularly apt parallel that has to do with the famous division of Israel into the Northern and Southern Kingdoms (hat tip to Fr. Mario Gonzalez of St. Matthew’s, Richmond, an ACN-affiliated church).

Do you recall that story in 1 Kings?  God sent the prophet “Ahijah the Shilonite” to encourage Jereboam to rebel, promising him 10 of the 12 tribes because of Solomon’s compromises with allowing idolatry in Jerusalem (1 Kings 11:26-40).  And sure enough,after Solomon’s death, his son Rehoboam stupidly insists on continuing and even increasing the reliance on forced labor with the result that the united kingdom did in fact split.  Sure enoug, Jereboam does end up as the first King of the 10-tribe northern Kingdom of Israel, while Rehoboam is just left with Judah and Benjamin.  And the Deuteronomistic comment of the narrator is what strikes me as so significant:

“So the king did not listen to the people, because it was a turn of affairs brought about by the LORD that he might fulfill his word, which the LORD had spoken by Ahijah the Shilonite to Jeroboam, son of Nebat”  (1 Kings 12:15,  NRSV).

Hmmm.  A devastating, long-lasting division in the people of God “was a turn of affairs brought about by the LORD.”  Now I grant that John 17 may be closer to reflecting the true heart of God and his desire for his covenant people, but this biblical theme of the divine hardening of hearts can’t be simply dismissed.  It’s part of the whole scriptural witness, although a puzzling and disturbing part.

Sorry if that seems a little like preaching, especially since it’s largely preaching to the choir on this conservative venue.  But what do you expect when there are so many preachers posting on SF?

David Handy+
(Although my Ph.D. is in NT, I love the OT too)

Beautiful letter from the heart of faith of a true man of God—the third of three great letters from real heroes of the Christian faith in our time.  Thanks be to God for Bishops Duncan, Iker, and Schofield.
It is a great privilege to pray for them and their flocks.

BobK and David Handy+ are coming awfully close to making a compelling case for double predestination…

Thanks David Handy - good words, and I am in total agreement with your observations on this subject.  Have read some of your postings on Northern Plains Anglicans as well….and always happy to hear a fellow Sioux Falls native out there.  I left for many years, but am back here now and LOVE it…despite the present “bishop” in the cathedra.  No Norwegian in your blood?  Hmmm that means I get your lutefisk, lefse and crumkake….

Texex,

I’m assuming you meant that tongue-in-cheek.  But just for the record, I was raised in a large, liberal, affluent Presbyterian church.  And although I got my Ph.D. from a Presbyterian seminary (Union-PSCE in Richmond), I left Calvinism behind when I became an Anglican (don’t tell J. I. Packer).

The hugely unpopular doctrine of double predestination is rightly unpopular because it distorts the biblical teaching, overemphasizing the divine sovereignty at the expense of the more subtly stated but still essential biblical concept of free will.  Augustine’s unfortunate promotion of that grossly one-sided doctrine (i.e., that some are predestined to hell and a smaller number for life in heaven) was condemned already in the early church (the Synod of Orange in AD 529, if my memory serves me correctly).  Even most Presbyterians don’t hold to it anymore.  Anyway, the longest of the 39 Articles (on predestination) certainly declines to endorse it.

“And yet it moves” (Galileo’s line).  Despite rejecting double predestination, there is a strong biblical motif of divine hardening of hearts, and closing of eyes and ears.  Isaiah 6:9-10 comes readily to mind as a further example.

After Isaiah volunteers with his “Here am I. send me.”  The LORD gives him this extremely uncomfortable message to deliver.

“Go and say to this people:  Keep listening, but do not comprehend, keep looking, but do not understand.  Make the mind of this people dull, and stop their ears, and shut their eyes.  SO THAT they may look with their eyes and listen with their ears, and comprehend with their minds, and turn and be healed.”  (A Hard Saying cited in all four gospels).

To me, this is ultimately the only explanation for the incredible spiritual blindness I see among my friends and colleagues in TEC.

David Handy
Wanna be biblical theologian

Midwestnorwegian,

Thanks for your kind words of encouragement.  I’ve seen and enjoyed your postings here and on Tim Fountain’s Northern Plains Anglicans blog too.

(Off-topic):  As for the Norwegian delicacies, you may certainly have ALL the lutefisk (disgusting stuff, for all you non-Scandanavians, it’s codfish soaked in lye…yes, lye.  Yuck! I can’t even stand the smell of it).  But leave me some of the Kroonkaaka (crumcake).  Now that’s delicious!

David Handy
SOOO glad to be in Virginia in the winter

David Handy+, yes, tongue very firmly planted in cheek.

Dale Rye,

I thought so, but I’m glad to hear it.

Alas, I typed too quickly and left out the crucial word “NOT” in the Isaiah 6 quote above.  That is, the very thing that makes the saying so hard is precisely that Isaiah was told to prophesy in such a way that the rebellious people of God would NOT understand, lest they turn and be healed (echoed by Jesus too, for example in Mark 4:12).

It continues to amaze me, how after all this time and all the endless, fruitless “dialogue” and debate, so many people in TEC and all the so-called “mainline” denominations (captive to the cultural mindset) still just “don’t get it.”  It’s baffling.  It’s frustrating.  It’s a perplexing mystery.  That’s what makes me suspect that something supernatural is going on.

David Handy

He’s another I wish were my bishop.

And mine too

Re:  Cute Names

Sarah Kill-Joy Hey - man, just when I was going to start signing my comments:

Eclipse - the Supreme Leader of all the Anglican Cats Blogging on the Internet or ESLACBI for short…...  :(

Oh well…

Does the absence of Dr. Dan mean he is FOILED by our brilliant intellect and well-thought out arguments?  Or does it just mean that he is presently squishing play dough trying to make the Eiffel Tower out of it?  Enquiring minds want to know…

As far as double predestination, I think it wise to keep in mind that God knows the beginning from the end. There is healthy tension between the two positions. The same Peter, who tells us that “They stumble because they disobey the word, as they were destined to do”(1 Peter 2:8), also tells us that “the Lord is…not wishing that any should perish, but that all should reach repentance.” (2 Peter 3:9). Lets face it. The word compels all to repentance, and commands the entire world to be told the gospel. Yet predestination is taught in glowing terms concerning Christs’ church in the Book of Ephesians, for example. I think Paul gives us a tantalizing peek into the mind of God concerning this mystery in the ninth chapter of Romans. While the whole chapter is too long to print here, the part thats gets me to thinking is this: “So then he has mercy on whomever he wills, and he hardens whomever he wills. You will say to me then, “Why does he still find fault? For who can resist his will?” But who are you, O man, to answer back to God? Will what is molded say to its molder, “Why have you made me like this?” Has the potter no right over the clay, to make out of the same lump one vessel for honorable use and another for dishonorable use? What if God, desiring to show his wrath and to make known his power, has endured with much patience vessels of wrath prepared for destruction, in order to make known the riches of his glory for vessels of mercy, which he has prepared beforehand for glory— even us whom he has called, not from the Jews only but also from the Gentiles?” (Romans 9:18-24).  “What if” indeed.

Slightly off topic…  But!

Does anyone else find it just a little ironic that very likely the first Diocese to depart the progressive TEC is a diocese in CA which is probably the most progressive state in the United States?  It’s kind of like going to New York and finding Black Coffee that didn’t have sugar in it and then they served you grits!

Oh and by the way… +Schofield, you rock!

“Our arguments and ideas are far superior, so there is no need to make up names like SquidLady or the Presiding Heretic for the proponents of the really bad ideas.”  Sarah, I have no problem with your request except for one - “beerkat” is just so 21st century and “new thingy”.  Can we keep that one????  Inquiring minds want to know…..

Sarah Hey wrote:

“Our arguments and ideas are far superior, so there is no need to make up names like SquidLady or the Presiding Heretic for the proponents of the really bad ideas.”

But I suppose this is acceptable…

+Schofield Responds to Schori

where one person is awarded a plus in front of his name, while the other is pointedly denied one in front of her name. I suppose it’s a matter of degree? How awful does it have to get to earn us a bad rep?

...still in the Briar Patch,

Hey, no fair picking on California.  The weirdos may get all the press, but there are a LOT more faithful and active Anglicans here than you think.  Just ask Bp. Mathes in San Diego how many churches now are happily nurtured by the Southern Cone, Uganda, Kenya…...  With God’s grace, after Saturday there will be a lot more.  Our prayers go out to San Joaquin.

Having +John-David Schofield as our bishop is not only a great joy, but a great privilege. He is God’s man, through and through, and he was born for this time in history. His mind, soul, spirit, eyes and heart are directed heaven-ward. He has more dear friends and devoted supporters than anyone I know. That’s not because he’s charming and brilliant (although he is), it’s because he is indefatigable in defending the faith and speaking the Truth in love. Bless him, bless him, bless him!

“eyes”: that’s some testimony. I’m rejoicing right along with you! -Bob

Why does double predestination keep comming up?  The main thing against double predestination is that it is anemic compared to triple predestination of quadruple predestination or lapsarianism cubed!  As far as I go, God can have free will and do what ever he wants to do.  And besides, what ever any of us believe, there is nothing we can do about it.  So lets just get busy and stand against heresy and sin like our good bishop J-D S.  IMHO

PM, my friend-we were just having a friendly discussion about an age old topic, fellowshipping around the scriptures. I’m sure you know by now that we are all committed to the good fight, otherwise we wouldnt be here.

Bob K, I know, it was just a weak attempt to some Zen like humor.  Cheers.

LOL No problem, PM. I never DID understand Zen. -Bob

Magnificent letter!
(Could hardly be better)

This is my first post, though I have been reading for several months. Having grown up in the San Joaquin Valley this particular conversation has been of interest to me; for most of my adult life I have lived in Virginia, and am part of a faithful congregation within the Anglican tradition, by grace a people committed to live orthodoxy. Two thoughts: 1) It is not a surprise to me that it is this diocese that is standing firm, and on its way to making an historic decision within TEC. One of my teachers is Wendell Berry, and one of his central theses is that when people lose touch with people and place, especially an honest relationship to the land, we lose something crucial to our humanity. It is a very covenantal insight. The congregations of the Diocese of San Joaquin are full of people who are grounded in an ecclesiastical geography that is primarily agricultural, and they have been there for generations. While that is a cause for disdain from the urbanites/suburbanites of San Francisco and Los Angeles, it is its own great grace for the diocese as it provides the possibility of holding onto more permanent things, as Berry reminds us. The richest theology has always understood that when we don’t truly know ourselves, it is impossible to truly know God. This is not a screed against cities, but only an acknowledgment that the anonymity of the metropolis has its own challenges—and they are not only related to the length of one’s commute. 2) Years ago I hitch-hiked from this great valley across America, and eventually found my way to the little community of L’Abri, where I asked my own honest questions and got honest answers from Francis Schaeffer and others. There have been few who stood as firmly for historic orthodoxy as he did, at a great cost to himself. But he was always someone who believed very deeply in the importance of loving truth and loving people at the same time. He literally cried over heresy, and its devastations in persons and polities. I do hope that the flag raised over the name-calling in Stand Firm, as if this is a game and we are still third-graders, will be taken to heart. These are issues worth our tears. If those we disagree with are to be persuaded by our witness, then it will only be because they see and hear that we have treated them with the grace and honor that we ask of them in return. May God be merciful to us all.

Marney,
Of course there are many faithful in CA and in truth in all places throughout the world.  Meant no offense, I was just pointing out the irony.  I am always amazed at how much of a sense of humor God has.  God really cracks me up sometimes.

welcome alwayshobbits and thanks for your generous post.

Spencer,
I was laughing too. I thank God daily for surrounding me with faithful Christians who know the therapeutic value of a good laugh. God had to be laughing when he sent me to California.  Blessings!

AlwaysHobbits,

Thank you so much for your comments. Your concluding sentence is very gracious:

If those we disagree with are to be persuaded by our witness, then it will only be because they see and hear that we have treated them with the grace and honor that we ask of them in return. May God be merciful to us all.

I am involved in disentangling from the twisted scriptural interpretations and deconstructions to which I have been subjected and fleeing from the coercion of those who have frightened me and befuddled my mind.

So, now I am even more confused. What is the appropriate measure of “grace and honor” to be given to false teachers and bishops who do not honor their vows to uphold the tradition?

Almost a conversation, huh? If you are asking a serious question, then I will offer a serious answer—but I am not really interested in the back-and-forth of “third grade.” Simply, I would say this: we are to love our neighbors as we love ourselves. And so derision, name-calling, the sort of stuff that is too common on this blog, has no place in the kingdom. Sarah Hey and her colleagues seem to understand that. True laughter about what is truly funny—yes, yes, yes. I am not Puddleglum. But we should cry over what God cries over, just as we are to laugh at what God laughs about. That his Church and its witness is being dragged through the streets by TEC is lamentable. But it is lament, not laughter, that is our response—especially laughter that forgets to remember that we are to love even and especially our enemies; and in some sad way, that is what TEC is becoming, as Kathryn Jeffords Schori leads it into heresy. They are becoming the enemies of God. I was in the National Cathedral last night, and I just groaned over what it has become. It grieves me, and I do get angry. But we are still to treat these people as image-bearers of God, and therefore a strange admixture of glory and shame.

Sorry, Katharine Jefferts Schori is an image-bearer not of Christ but of Satan.  So, no, I cannot treat an enemy of God as an “image bearer.”  I can, and do, pray.  My heart is rarely in it, but fortunately with the Holy Spirit interceding for me, even my poorest prayers are acceptable to God.  Otherwise, I wouldn’t even bother.
And as regards the National Cathedral, the groaning should have begun 20 or so years ago.
Shame? yes. Glory? no.

AlwaysHobbits,
So you enjoyed the Mrs. Danvers humor but don’t approve of ..... ?

Just think…...if Schori’s grant money for her oceanography work hadn’t dried up, she might still be diving off the coast of Southern California instead running around with her junkyard dog attorney David Beers suing parishs around the country.  I sure hope she didnt’ garage sale her scuba gear, at the rate she’s going, she just may have to “go back to sea.” And by the way, has anyone else gotten an invitation to Bishop Gene Robinsons “marriage” in June.  He told a university crowd, “I always wanted to be a June bride.”  And they wonderwhy people are leaving TEC in droves.

HeartAfire wrote:

Sorry, Katharine Jefferts Schori is an image-bearer not of Christ but of Satan.  So, no, I cannot treat an enemy of God as an “image bearer.”

HeartAfire, I think the Bible tells us that every human being bears the image of God. In each of us, it is distorted by sin, but I don’t think it could be obliterated completely without the person ceasing to be human. I can’t think of anywhere in the Bible that suggests it’s possible for this to happen. It remains even in someone possessed by an evil spirit, and though I agree with some of the earlier comments on this thread that there is some kind of spiritual blinding/deception/hardening of heart affecting many reappraisers, I don’t think KJS is demon-possessed. And IMO, even if it was possible for a person to lose God’s image, nobody is in Satan’s image, because he cannot create anything—he can only destroy.

I can, and do, pray.  My heart is rarely in it, but fortunately with the Holy Spirit interceding for me, even my poorest prayers are acceptable to God.

Then in that respect, you are doing better than I am! I often pray for the ABC that he will be guided and strengthened to do God’s will in this mess, but all too often I completely forget to pray that the scales would fall from our Worthy Opponents’ eyes. It’s a good thing for both them and us that God desires their salvation and ultimate good a great deal more than we are capable of doing.

Shame? yes. Glory? no.

C.S. Lewis wrote somewhere, I think in the Chronicles of Narnia, that to be a Son of Adam or a Daughter of Eve is glory enough to lift the head of the poorest beggar, and shame enough to bow the head of the greatest king. Perhaps that is what AlwaysHobbits had in mind. And the idea that each of us is both a glory and a shame applies not only to our opponents but to us as well. We all bear the image of God, but none of us bears it undefaced.

You have read me, and the Bible, rightly, KYounge1956. I was thinking of Lewis, of Schaeffer, of the biblical commandment about capital punishment, of the story of the creation and the fall…. in and through it all nowhere is there the possibility that we can lose our fundamental identity as men and women made in the image of God. Yes, glory and shame together applies not only to our opponents but to us as well—and none us bears it undefaced, undefiled, unspotted. To think otherwise is arrogance and hubris, the great sin, and evidence that we don’t really know ourselves well at all. It is why John Owen, the immensely wise and godly Oxford and Puritan theologian of centuries ago (JI Packer’s theological mentor) argues so forcefully that it is our propensity to self-deception that is our great temptation as sons of Adam and daughters of Eve. We love to lie to ourselves about ourselves, and tragically don’t see it as lying. We all fall short of the glory of God.

I don’t want to keep us off-topic (the topic being ”+Schofield Responds to Schori”), but I do struggle with comments that seem to say we need always to be very respectful of the heretics who are attempting to destroy the church.

Leaders as early as the Apostle John, and his disciple Polycarp would not even associate with heretics and clearly proclaimed them as enemies of the Gospel, as is recorded about John’s behavior toward the heretic Cerinthus and Polycarp’s toward the heretic Marcion:

Irenaeus in his writing against heresy (Adv. Haer. 3.3.4) wrote that Polycarp said ‘that John, the disciple of the Lord, going to bathe at Ephesus, and perceiving Cerinthus within, rushed out of the bath-house without bathing, exclaiming, “Let us fly, lest even the bath-house fall down, because Cerinthus, the enemy of the truth, is within.” And Polycarp himself replied to Marcion, who met him on one occasion, and said, “Do you know me? ““I do know you, the first-born of Satan.”’

And the Apostle Paul had hard, even sarcastic, words for those who were leading the Galatians astray:

Gal 5:7 You were running well; who prevented you from obeying the truth? Gal 5:8 This persuasion does not come from the one who calls you! .... Gal 5:10 I am confident in the Lord that you will accept no other view. But the one who is confusing you will pay the penalty, whoever he may be. Gal 5:11 Now, brothers and sisters, if I am still preaching circumcision, why am I still being persecuted? In that case the offense of the cross has been removed. Gal 5:12 I wish those agitators would go so far as to castrate themselves!

I have seen the comments saying that we should always be respectful of the heretical TEC leaders and other opponents of the Gospel, and the arguments appear compelling. But then what do we do with what we read from and about the Apostles themselves and from early bishops and martyrs, whose behavior we are supposed to emulate?

Bill Cool wrote:

I have seen the comments saying that we should always be respectful of the heretical TEC leaders and other opponents of the Gospel, and the arguments appear compelling. But then what do we do with what we read from and about the Apostles themselves and from early bishops and martyrs, whose behavior we are supposed to emulate?

Are we supposed to emulate anyone’s behavior except Christ’s? Even if we are not, that doesn’t get me off the hook, as the Lord used to lay shattering rebukes on the Pharisees, calling them “vipers’ brood” and the like. To myself I can only explain this by thinking that what is appropriate coming from a sinless and perfect Lord to a flawed and fallen creature, is not necessarily OK from one fallen creature to another. As for the apostles’ example, does the Bible say anywhere that we should blister the hides of our opponents while refuting their false arguments or pointing out where their teaching is not consistent with the Christian faith? I don’t think so (but I could be wrong). I can think of several places where we are told not to revile, to be angry yet not sin, & so on. I guess I just err on the side of caution with this issue. To me, “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” definitely includes being polite, since I don’t much like it when people are rude to me.

Anyway what could it hurt if we reasserters are polite even to people we disagree with? It might be good practice for being polite to each other while working out some of the contentious issues we will have to deal with, once whatever is going to happen has happened. Things like “that which, if we would not stir up the ire of the Commenatrix, must not be named except on its own dedicated thread”, whether there should be a modern-language update of the BCP, etc, etc, etc.

And now, in a somewhat feeble attempt to relate this comment to the topic of the thread, I will add that Bp Schofield’s response to KJS’ letter, as well as those of Bps Duncan and Iker, have been greatly praised, and deservedly so. And <i>they,/i> didn’t need insults or put-downs to get their point across.

For the longest time, I felt very angry with TEC leadership and the direction they’re taking the church.  I’d get upset, ramble on in forums and state my opinions as if it was really going to make a difference.  I searached websites to see how many folks agreed with me and I found thousands but I still felt frustrated and wanted to fight.  Then all of a sudden it came to me.  What I was fighting for no longer existed.  Things have changed too much.  Our once luxurious ocean liner (TEC) had become a battleship.  It wasn’t the same boat I’d signed onto years ago.  It wasn’t a ship of happiness and friendship anymore, it was now a vessel out looking for other battles (homosexual issues, scriptural interpretations, inclusiveness, suing parishs, threatening clergy, etc.).  It had become an aggessor.  At one point in my life, I’d have felt like I should stay and mutiny but not anymore.  My only choice left was not to re-enlist.  Kind of like the old saying, “if you don’t like it here, go somewhere else.”  Good advice I’m going to follow.  Kind of like in business, when things start going really badly in a company, the smart ones usually “jump ship” first. Do I feel bad about leaving TEC, Nah!  Not anymore.

I get very angry about the state of ECUSA. My language gets quite Old Testamenty at times. I fight very hard not to write jeremiads. I wish I had the grace that Bishop Schofield has. I’d love to be more Christ-like.

But Hosea continues to have more and more meaning given the state of the church. And when the church you love breaks your heart in a continuous and unrepentant fashion in much the same way that Gomer betrayed Hosea, it’s hard not to vent in some way.

My only outlet remains sarcasm. If I could not laugh about what is going on, I don’t think I’d ever stop weeping.

I have a blog thingy

kyounge1956 wrote:

As for the apostles’ example, does the Bible say anywhere that we should blister the hides of our opponents while refuting their false arguments or pointing out where their teaching is not consistent with the Christian faith? I don’t think so (but I could be wrong).

It does seem that the essential is to be obedient in “refuting their false arguments or pointing out where their teaching is not consistent with the Christian faith”. One more early example, like our current faithful bishops’ letters does this strongly, but without doing what we in the age of the Internet sometimes call “flaming” the opposition. The last paragraph is especially strong and seems so current:

“He , who has spurned the ecclesiastical tradition and darted off to the opinions of heretical men—he has ceased to be a man of God and to remain faithful to the Lord.”

“We call those heretics ‘empty’, for they are destitute of the counsels of God and the traditions of Christ. In truth, they are bitter like the wild almond, for their dogmas originate with themselves.”

“Those who have a craving for glory voluntarily evade, by arguments of a diverse sort, the things delivered by the blessed apostles and teachers, which things are wedded to inspired words. They use human teaching to oppose divine tradition, in order to establish the heresy….They do not have the key of entrance, but rather a false counterfeit key. With this they do not enter in, as we do. For we enter through the tradition of the Lord.”

(Clement of Alexandria 150-215)

Yes, mousestalker, this is a time for great anger, and also great overwhelming sadness. Yet, in spite of all that, it is a time of anticipation and great expectation. If the Lord has won the final victory, as the scriptures and traditions we believe have said, then he will not abandon his church, and he will raise up faithful leaders and faithful congregations of his followers, as he is doing with those like +Schofield and the Diocese of San Joaquin.

Angry?  Upset:  Unkind words?  Damn right.  Centuries ago, people would have stormed the church and dragged heretic clergy from the pulpit but these days we’re too “cool” “refined” “educated” so we sit back and watch them “hijack” our church.  Mousestalker…I’m with you….if I could find a forum where I didn’t have to watch my language, I’d be posting there rather than being lectured on how to deal with heretics.

kyounge1956 :

You said that well.

Re:  Name Calling

The first thing that comes to mind is “Do not be overcome with evil but overcome evil with good.”

However, I made up a few really fun names for my former bishop before I left TEC out of hurt, really, of the pain he was inflicting upon all of us, so I’m afraid that sarcasm and humor are too much of my friends in conflict.

There are times, really, that we need to laugh when we feel so frustrated and powerless - we loose that and I think we begin to take ourselves TOO seriously. 

In our situation we had some who tended to be TOO humorous, like me who needs to go to “Our Lady of Perpetual Repentance”, and then others who dealt with it by being SO frightened and intimidated that SOMEONE would be offended that they lost the ability to laugh at all.  I have to believe there is a medium between the two.  Somewhere where we laugh - but not in spite or anger or with the intent of cruelty.

In this case, I think the intent is to belittle these people and that is never of Christ… that’s not treating others the way we want to be treated. 

However, giving respect to those who do NOT earn it is not Christ-like either - it’s really devious and duplicitious.  Treat them openly and fairly.

I have a brother who at present who is not a believer and very apostate.  I was talking of him the other night to my son as we were sorting out lights - I remember your Uncle and I doing this, etc.  My son said, “Mom, how come you sound so positive about your brother when he is so wrong.”  I said, “Oh, I will never quit loving my brother.  I will tell him he is wrong and I’ll point him to Christ - but my love for him is constant.  He’s my brother - that never changes.”

Perhaps that is the spirit we should strive for.

DJ
Thank you for your clear, honest assessment of the situation.  Once again, my decision (and I believe the Lord’s leading) to abandon ship has been reaffirmed.  Yes, I believe God will reign victorious over His church - but I am not at all convinced His church has anything to do with TEC at this point.  When I think about secular organizations like Doctors Without Borders who are doing such invaluable human service to mankind, I sometimes wonder if God doesn’t value their service more, because it is done with integrity and without effort to shroud it in some pseudo religion. But, please understand, this is pure speculation on my part as I truly have no idea of the mind of God.  However, I cannot imagine that God is at all comfortable with deceit…which is the rock that the “new thing” TEC seems to be built upon.

I have a question, in regards to church property I hope someone can answer.  PB Schori made the statement:
“If a building is sold to a congregation, The Episcopal Church as a whole is not so concerned if it’s going to be a community church,” she said, although there must be assurances that stewardship was addressed and that the building was sold at fair market value. “But if a congregation purports to set up as another part of the Anglican Communion, we are concerned about that.”
The last sentence is the one that puzzles me most.  Isn’t that a form of discrimination, saying she’ll sell, but not to people of a particular religious group. ?  Isn’t that like saying….I have my house for sale, but I won’t sell to people who are now or will ever become Jewish?  I’m so used to seeing her stick her foot in her mouth I thought maybe she’d done it again with that statement.  Any thoughts.

DJ, it is also an example of her way overstepping her authority, telling dioceses how to dispose of property. There is a discussion over at David Virtue’s by retired Bp Wantland on her authority and its limitations.

This woman is like a loose cannon.  Isn’t someone or some group responsible for putting a muzzle on her?  Our church used to be concerned with feeding the poor but at the rate Schori’s going, after all the lawsuits are over and assuming the mortages of churchs properties she inherits, how much will be left for Gods work.  And what happened to the request for a more transparent reporting of the spending of church funds.  Seems to me last time they turned their backs on the problem, someone went to prison.  Is anyone watching the checkbook?  WHERE IS THE ACCOUNTABILITY?
And I would really like to know how much David Beers, Schoris attorney has made so far off all these lawsuits.  Is that information anywhere to be found?

DJ,
Here is the response to the request for information on the costs of the lawsuits, financial accountability, etc.

http://www.livingchurch.org/news/news-updates/2007/11/29/executive-council-officers-address-bishops-concerns

Lawsuits:  Thanks Marie at Rez for the website, now next question:
I’m not familiar with the overall “business structure” of TEC is, but like it or not, it’s still a business, and seems to me that someone in the organization has to be accountable to someone for the monies being spent.  There are some things Schori and the others can do to “put spin” on what’s going on, but at the end of the day, someone has to be accountable for all the spending.  They may not want to tell us how much is being or has been spent, but don’t they have to tell us.  Even Enron had to eventually do a full disclosure.  TEC can’t hide behind their “spin” forever.  I wonder why this isn’t being persued more aggressively.

DJ,

Plainsheretic (formerly Plainsparson) showed me this excellent link which contains much in the way of financial data. If you click on the link to October 2007, you can see how much has been spent this year on legal fees, up to 10/31/2007.

I would never have found that information on my own.

I have a blog thingy

Interesting that if you look at the financial data, it appears they didn’t even have such an item at the end of December 2005.  I’m not good at looking at balance sheets, so would be interested in learning if this is correct or am I reading it incorrectly?

thanks mousetalker.

i do wish we coul dopen up anoterh thread fro someof this though, just because much has taken off from +schofield responding to schori.

Mousestalker, thank you for the addy for the financial statemetns.  Very interesting.  I sent just sent an email to Mr. Barns of the Financial Office of TEC.  In my email I asked:  “I just finished reviewing the latest 2007 budget numbers issued by your office (Financial Office of the Episcopal Church).  I am a member of the Episcopal Church and would like to know under which category I could find the figures representing expenditures on lawsuits involving Church properties.”
Will wait and see if he replies.

I’m not an accountant but I went to TEC financial statement and created a spreadsheet for 2005, 2006 and 2007 YTD.  I found line item:  “Title IV investigations, trial and legal.”  In 2005 and 2006, $100,000 was budgeted each year for that item (8333/mo.).  Total budget for those 2 years was $200,000 yet during that period, actual spent was $1,100,000.  Legal fees in 2006 alone were $430,638.  In 2007, that line item was increased from 8333/month to 25,000/month.  An increase of 300%.  Even more interesting is another line item was added in 2007, “Property Protection for Missions - Legal Costs.  Budget for that $41,600/month or (get this) $500,000 per year.  I don’t know if the two items are connected, but even if they’re not, the Title IV item alone increased from $100,000 to $300,000 a year and if the property protection is where they’re getting the money to sue then that means the total “war chest” for suing parishes amounts to about $800,000 a year.  Now, on top of that, they may assume the mortgages of all the properties that could steal from San Joaquin and add that to the cost of all the litigation one has to wonder how many church ministries are going to suffer as a result of all this.  Tis truly sad that TEC has to continue down this path at the expense of so many people.  I do hope someone can find fault withthe numbers I’ve stated because the thought of spending nearly a million dollars a year on frivolous lawsuits is a sin of monumental proportions.  How many people could be fed with that money?