Inevitably in the times surrounding a fierce, heated battle a soldier must think occasionally "What on earth am I doing out here in the middle of nowhere, fighting for this silly little piece of land that my unit leader has told me to go out and take? It's not worth the bloodshed, I see no tactical or strategic merit to it, and besides, I could get killed for pretty much no reason other than taking that knoll, or traversing the river, or battling all day across this field. I have much better and even more useful things to do back in my tent."
In our own Episcopal church case, I have frequently imagined that we are out in the middle of some forest, with a little stream or river running through it, and a quaint, slightly crumbling and vine-clinging, little stone bridge crossing the body of water. The bridge is made of grey stone, of course, and it has a beautiful arch in its span. It is old, and its architect had an artist's heart, but it has clearly seen better days. Save for those fighting over it, there aren't a whole lot of people around, either to take note of the melee and carry news back to others, or to take part in the battle. It is unlikely that we will receive reinforcements. But for some very strange reason, a number of us -- a small unit -- are being told to fight for this bridge. It is a pitched battle, full of hurled insults and cyber bloodshed, tactical actions, retreats by some [or perhaps calls back to their camp to await further orders], logistics and communications challenges, going awol, unexpected heroism, despair, and much more. We keep waiting for further orders, but so far the same command keeps reaching us -- to hold the bridge. It appears rather unlikely -- we're at hand-to-hand combat at this point.
Inevitably during the battle there arises in the soldier's mind -- perhaps during a lull when the sound of sharpening swords fills the air -- a bemusement over what on earth he or she is doing in this mess?
In my own case, I have always envisioned, somehow, a different life from the one I have led over the past three years. This particular battle over a little stone bridge was not where I had thought I could best use my gifts. ; > ) Somehow I had always imagined that musing deep thoughts, doing a little fiction writing, reading great books, climbing the corporate ladder, hiking various interesting trails, getting my kayak roll and perhaps a little more pop on my serve, and generally examining the beauties of nature, were more where . . . well . . . where my gifts lay.
Pretty much everyone I've talked with on our team feels the same way -- surely there are a whole lot better things to do with one's time! Surely God sees how very much I can offer Him elsewhere? Surely God has been calling me to more pleasant tasks, more suited to my personality! One cannot help but think of David, who announces that he is quite interested in being the chief architect and builder of God's temple; he received a rather rude response to his offer, and I personally believe that I have received a rather rude response to mine! ; > )
There's a reason why I love the excerpt from Teddy Roosevelt's Speech at the Sorbonne which I posted so many days ago. I struggle with practical action and love more the world of ideas and creativity. And as a person who has tended to avoid conflict at all costs, I am certainly similar to that young lord in my favorite line of that speech's excerpt, who "but for the vile guns would have been a valiant soldier."
So here we all are out in the middle of an otherwise quiet forest, sharpening our swords, cooking over a campfire, discussing the little stone bridge, arguing over strategy, and engaging in light or sometimes fierce skirmishes. [To make matters somewhat worse, occasionally soldiers and *particularly* civilians and sometimes even people we had thought allies gallop by our campsite on horses, slinging pejoratives about the worthiness of the battle and the stupidity and hopelessness of whatever it is we are doing or planning -- but we have all learned to think about the bridge rather than the occasional galloping passerby.]
So we ask the question. Why on earth are we out here fighting over this little stone bridge?
I will leave the theologizing and the philosophizing and the issues of Truth and the gospel to other minds, for now, although I have some arguments along those lines. Instead I'll address the question with some very practical responses.
First, we must take note that our Worthy Opponents are in the thick of the battle too. They seem to want this little stone bridge with a great deal of fervor, and all of us must ponder that fact and speculate as to why. I won't speculate, other than to say that we are fighting over this little stone bridge because it is greatly desired by others. That in itself is noteworthy.
I suspect that this particular little bridge is of interest for a number of reasons -- it is little, for one, and thus easily captured. It is crumbling, so that is attractively weak, yet still carries the troops from one bank of the river to the other and so is a useful vehicle. And for a number of decades its bridgekeepers and watchers were somewhat . . . slumberous, shall we say.
Second, once ground is taken, and territory conquered, battle-hardened units don't generally set up fine, plush camps, smoke pipes, and cook gourmet food. They don't establish themselves there . . . they rest a little, tend their wounds, and move on.
In other words, they advance their flag, and seek other territory to conquer. The little stone bridge over which they had fought so vigorously the day before, they now use as a launching pad, as a base of operations, from which to field more forces. The leader may establish a base camp, a field operation camp, but he only does so in order to send more troops into battle farther out into the woods, and the fields beyond.
So we are fighting over this little stone bridge because we do not wish for them to be able to use it as a launch pad. The truth is, as long as we are fighting over it, their will be no real "launching efforts" on their part. And here, I step out of the analogy a bit and note that, no matter the fact that the leadership of our national structure is firmly in the hands of our Worthy Opponents [and they are worthy -- more on that another time], they are still unable to speak "as a majestic and unified voice" as long as there is a pitched battle going on and opposing voices within their structure.
There is a reason, for instance, why the national secular media presents two sides to the Episcopal church issue, rather than *one side* and that is because full rulership of the Episcopal church has not at all been fully established. The church is not able to "speak its prophetic voice" to the culture, without another voice piping up from within saying "that's not true and here's why" -- or, to say it another way, "we're not dead yet". If you think this is not a source of endless frustration to the powers-that-be -- that they are unable to make pronouncements without having that very annoying voice *from within* clogging up their news articles -- then I urge you to ponder just how vexed *you* would be if in your organization, your corporation, the same thing were happening. Most such "annoying voices" are your outside competitors, not your internal employees! ; > )
Third, once a piece of territory is captured, and some of the troops venture off to new unconquered fields, other of the troops are deployed as reinforcements to other battles. And here, we must take the back of an eagle and soar up above our own tiny patch of forest and bridge and survey the broader landscape.
As we survey the landscape, we must marvel -- it takes our breath away -- over the sight of smoke rising from the earth and the sounds of metal clashing on metal *all over the land*.
For you see, there are, come to find out, little stone bridges in the middle of forests everywhere and they are being fought over tooth and nail.
And there are fields. And small encampments. And granaries. And great plains with great armies on them. And oceans with ships on them. And small wounded clumps of troops, hunted amongst the rocks after a defeat. All of them are embattled.
There are countless little stone bridges where people, unfit for battle mostly, and certainly not having planned to spend their lives in this way, are fighting pitched battles. The little stone bridges are various. They are the media -- Christians who are working their hardest to offer truthful facts and perspectives of integrity to their readers and viewers. Christians trying to offer alternative vehicles, or Christians working at the New York Times. And those of us at our own quaint little stone bridge know little of them.
The medical field is another little stone bridge. The pitched battles that are being fought over medical ethics, the American Medical Association, the best way to help the poor, and so much more are copious and bloody and long-lasting and far-reaching. There are countless Christian physicians who work in small practices or large, in university hospitals and inner city hospitals, whose political and governmental battles were certainly never sought or imagined when they first set out to practice the healing arts.
The legal field is another. The challenges to the rule of law -- some notion of truth and justice being enforced in integrity and honor -- are too numerous to mention. And the lawyer jokes abound, while Christian attorneys duke it out in their own associations, in the courts, in the offices, and yes, even the government.
Which of course, brings up to the little stone bridge of secular politics, where the fight is intense, and often cast as "unworthy of us Christians". From school boards, and city councils, to state legislatures, and the halls of Federal power, there are Christians who are privately wondering "what on earth am I doing out here in the middle of nowhere, with few allies, fighting over this little stone bridge, which I don't think is all that beautiful, come to think of it".
As we take a closer look at the forests and plains covered in battle, we find numerous stone bridges in other denominations, and even in churches of no denomination. The more obvious are, of course, the mainline denominations, where our brothers and sisters are in various stages of attack, withdrawal, flanking maneuvers, rebuilding, and more.
And then there are the halls of academia. The secular universities, the liberal arts colleges, the private academies, all with Christians who are staking out territory, with their own little stone bridges to fight over.
I cannot leave out the corporate world, of course. In every vast corporation, and in numerous small businesses there are the battles over ethics, the confrontations with the organizations that represent their industry, the internal struggles, the unhelpful and draconian governmental interference, and the corrupt enforcement processes that make life much worse for the customer. Little stone bridges that amount to a huge effect on our cultural life.
And finally, of course, there is the much despised "Hollywood" little stone bridge. Christians there are more surrounded than we can imagine, filmmakers, writers, actors, producers, all struggling to produce a good and worthy product while resisting the corrupting trends of their own associations and organizations. And believe me, they have a whole lot of "friends and erstwhile advisors" galloping by and, rather than lending a helpful hand or encouraging word, instead hurling pejoratives and maligning the usefulness of the fight.
And folks . . . the above brief list doesn't cover the half of it. Furthermore, as the "culture wars" -- the attempts by other forces to thoroughly secularize the culture in which we are immersed -- heat up and expand, the battles will become much, much worse, much more intense, and much more devastating. I frankly don't believe that it will get better. The more that Christians become involved in the fights over little stone bridges, the more loud the outrage from those on the other side who until then had enjoyed an easy and convenient advance.
So our survey of the land offers up this third practical reason why we fight over this particular little stone bridge and that is because we don't want the other side, once victory is assured, deploying reinforcements to the other fields of battle where our comrades are engaged in desperate battles of their own.
That completes my short list of practical reasons. But I offer a few more reflections for you to chew on.
What about those who have left this particular little stone bridge or are thinking about leaving?
First, I say go with God, brother or sister in Christ, if you receive other orders. You are a worthy ally, and no doubt we shall meet again on some other field or plain. And second, I hope that you learned whatever it was you were supposed to learn while fighting this battle -- that is, as long as you were fighting it. Because if you were sitting under a shady oak tree and sipping dry martinis when you suddenly heard the sound of warfare a few yards downstream, and having just recently noted the battle, have now suddenly discovered new orders to other more comfortable climes . . . I somehow suspect that those orders have been forged and that you have not at all learned what you were meant to learn.
I am reminded of an early blog comment some time back in 2004, I believe, when a man posted on some site the happy news that he was "outta here" and on to a much better place. He could finally cease all of this silly, and useless fighting over an unworthy trivial corrupt Episcopal church, because he had crossed the Tiber and joined the Roman Catholic church.
He had not learned a crucial lesson, one that I suspect that God wants us all to learn.
I considered a response -- it would have been somewhat cruel, I am sorry to say -- but before I could do so, someone else had piped up with a comment along these lines:
"Welcome, brother. We hope you find rest and refreshment here on the shores of the Tiber. It is a beautiful place. Cast yourself down on its grassy banks and rest a while. . . . . But after you've rested -- and please don't do so for very long -- get up, strap back on your armor, and get back into the battle. We have a whole lot of fighting to do in this church and it is under assault as well."
Sweet! ; > )
But that leads me to what I think is a lesson I've been learning and that is . . . you're not going to leave the battle for long. Wherever you go -- there you are. And there'll be something fierce, something hideous, something demoralizing, something that seems doomed all over again, to fight your heart out for.
So should you leave the Episcopal church, make certain that you leave for something that you love. And make certain you have a passion for whatever battle you choose. For choose a battle you will, if you have learned one of the crucial lessons of this painful drama in the Episcopal church; you won't be able to leave the battle, even if you leave the Episcopal church.
And since we must fight, it is better to fight over something that we love than something that we don't.
Many of you are struggling with the question of what on earth you are to do now. I believe that there has been a great deal of clarity brought to the world over the state of the leadership of our national church. It has not been a very pretty airing.
Furthermore, as I posted yesterday, the most intensive clustering of progressive Episcopalians always occurs at political events, the larger the better, and particularly our national General Convention. Some excellent Episcopalians will leave after this most interesting 11 days, and some have left long before this particular event, years and decades earlier.
And yet, the 2006 General Convention has never been my own personal deadline, as it seems to have been for some Episcopalians. There was never an event that was going to "prove that the Episcopal church was really, really, really doing heretical things" beyond the 2003 GC. I have believed that the 2006 General Convention was clearly a deadline for our church's national leaders, and that deadline for them, and much to their dismay, was set by the Windsor Report and Dromantine Communique. They have responded, for good or ill, to the deadline.
That deadline is now past, and there will be much that unfolds in the coming months. In regards to my own decision-making, I have no time deadline, but I shall be watching with interest certain events and directions of our church history. I will be, for instance, taking a keen interest in the titular leader of the Anglican Communion, particularly if he moves to establish much-needed discipline, order, and structure to this fledgling and fragile global communion of Anglicans. Make no mistake -- should he do so, it will *certainly not be the close or the end of the skirmishes*. We will not be able to cheer for very long, and those who care for the Anglican Communion -- and I care for it more than I do the Episcopal church -- will not then be able to float away on flowery beds of ease.
I shall also be watching with interest, and taking note of the actions of the Global South, should Canterbury fail to strengthen the identity and discipline of the Anglican Communion. I personally believe that if he fails, it will be a great tragedy for a historic, worldwide church body, and that that body will also fail and fracture terribly. Those two places -- Canterbury and the South -- will be attentively observed by me and others.
But in the meantime, should you find those observation points as interesting as I do, what can you do while you are watching international events unfold? What can I do? For in an earlier post I stated that my philosophy is that there can be no passive waiting in the Episcopal church by traditional Christians. They are either working and working hard, or they are leaving. I see no "in-between" R&R possibilities for us.
I hope that you will take time to think, pray, read scripture, and take counsel with your local allies and friends. I hope that you will watch leaders like Kendall Harmon and Bob Duncan. Their choices may not be right for you, but their attitude and perspectives will probably be helpful.
Some of you are "stuck" -- you are in a small town with few choices. Or for various family or some intensely personal reasons you do not feel able to leave the Episcopal church. Some of you are in strong parishes in unhealthy or revisionist dioceses. Or in weak parishes in healthy dioceses. Others are certain of their calling to fight over this little stone bridge, but are not sure how.
A number of commenters have asked "if I'm here in the Episcopal church, what can I do?" Over the coming months, I will be offering a series of practical essays on what we average laypeople within the Episcopal church can do in our parishes and dioceses. No matter what sort of diocese you live in, or what sort of parish, there is much to be done and many efforts, allies, and victories to be won. I can assure you that, with God’s grace and if you have His calling, you will become a better person for it as well. The details of this battle will move to local and regional and diocesan fields and away from the national structures -- territory will be gained and territory lost in regions. I can certainly share stories of past defeats and past victories, with some guideposts along the way.
I also believe that Stand Firm as a whole has much to offer in the coming months. Greg, Matt, and I have found the time to discuss and ponder what our next steps will be concerning this site. And I hope that you will be pleased with the things we have in mind.
Take a while to mull things over, and consider what you want -- and what God might want. And please . . . if you are in a parish or a diocese no matter how weak or strong, healthy and thriving or sick and wounded, and you have a mind to take a little action -- drop me a line at fancyfreesarah@yahoo.com and I will be happy to engage in some email conversation and strategy with you.
Who knows? Someday we both might look up and find that we are fighting side by side on a little stone bridge.
|
Sarah! That was wonderful! Your article takes the reader way past the little stone bridge to the much larger battle for Christianity. Thank you! The little stone bridge truly matters. Peace! Posted by Milton Finch on 06-22-2006 at 08:04 AM [link]
|
|
Sarah: How you can be so wonderfully cogent, illustrative and encouraging after what you have been through just amazes me. As an Episco-Baptist (no kids in our parish, wouldn’t raise them in a liberal parish), the culture wars, the media wars, all effect us as well. Was here all ten days (also, probably helping to crash your computers), praying and observing the bridge I will probably someday return to hold. Your call is a very special one, and I will cover your rear anytime! Lynn Posted by Crabby in MD on 06-22-2006 at 08:18 AM [link]
|
|
I sat and, for the first time, was able to weep over this whole thing as I was reading your article. Thanks be to God for your gift of verbalizing some of our deepest struggles so beautifully. Wish I was still in Upper SC so I could give you a hug when you get home. Posted by GL+ on 06-22-2006 at 08:35 AM [link]
|
|
What a wonderfully encouraging piece this is, Sarah! Thank you SO much. I intend to copy it and save it and look back on it often.
Posted by drjoan on 06-22-2006 at 08:42 AM [link]
|
|
Sarah, As I read your piece, I cried, because, through your analogy, I realized that I have been comfortabley reclining near that stone bridge for far too long. I know now that I am being called to fight for the bridge. I do not know how you have enough energy and brain cells left to write such a pearl. The Holy Spirit is at work in you, my sister. He has given you many gifts, not the least of which is evangelism and clarity through your writing. May He bless you mightily! I will now rise from my couch and fight. I thought I was fighting before, but you have shown me that I must put on the FULL armor of God! Bless you! The hills of Greenville beckon to you. Rest in His Love, knowing you are fighting the Good Fight. Love from the Diocese of South Carolina! Posted by mspk on 06-22-2006 at 09:01 AM [link]
|
|
For the want of a nail, the shoe was lost,
Posted by DaveW on 06-22-2006 at 09:06 AM [link]
|
|
Thank you. As someone who made the agonizing decision to leave his beloved Episcopal parish for a new Anglican church, I am attest that the battle continues on different fronts (including my rear, from worshiping in folding chairs!). But I have to say it is nice not having to fight over fundamental issues within my denomination. Posted by Going Home on 06-22-2006 at 09:24 AM [link]
|
|
Simply Beautiful, Sarah. What an outstanding picture you have painted here.
Proud to be your comrade at arms, even though i wear a different uniform, I am
Posted by Marty the Baptist on 06-22-2006 at 09:52 AM [link]
|
|
Sarah,
Posted by johnd on 06-22-2006 at 10:06 AM [link]
|
|
Sarah while you’re on leave pick up a copy of the 6/12/06 issue of New Yorker. Study especially the cover, it is eloquent about battle and the untenable situations where troops (in this case our own in Iraq) routinely find themselves. Actually the whole mag is filled with battle stories which dispell the romantic fiction that battle isn’t messy, non productive, and more dangerous for the “collaterals” than the pros. Anyone who’s actually been there knows all this, but the myth persists. Good reading while you’re on leave. Posted by terebinth on 06-22-2006 at 10:51 AM [link]
|
|
“Nevermind that man behind the curtain” (Wizard of OZ) Maybe the “collaterals” will begin to understand that Christianity is a battle. (Not a chapel of ease) Posted by Milton Finch on 06-22-2006 at 11:30 AM [link]
|
|
Great Post Sarah! Here is the salvo I sent to my Bishop today: Dear Bishop Wimberly, I am writing to implore you to stand up and be a true Pastor to the entire diocese. At the conclusion of GC 2006 it is abundantly apparent that it is the wish of The Episcopal Church to “walk apart” from the rest of the Anglican Communion. The facts are: 1. Any member of clergy that voted for the election of Vicki Gene Robinson violated their ordination vows and should no longer be treated as such. Much less the heretics that consecrated him. 2. Likewise any member of clergy that voted for the blessing of same sex unions (the legitimization of sodomy, I still do not understand how one blesses an abomination) has done the same. 3. The majority delegates to GC 2006 refused to pass the necessary legislation to comply with the Windsor Report. 4. The convention elected a woman who was probably the least qualified candidate to the office of Presiding Bishop by political maneuvering. This should act as a slap in the face to the Anglican Primates that do not support the ordination of women. The time for enjoining in conversation is over; it is now time for action! The Episcopal Church by it’s actions at GC 2003 and GC 2006 has become some kind of a heretical sect. We are truly the laughing stock of Christendom. Please lead us out of this situation, whether it be by requesting alternative oversight from the Archbishop of Canterbury, standing with the Anglican Communion Network for an alternate province in North America , or some other means of leaving The Episcopal Church in it’s present incarnation. You said in your June Column, “We may be comfortable because our churches will be there and will be largely unchanged by events at General Convention.” The diocese can no longer take this isolationist view! What happens in the national church affects each and every one of us in the pews. This is a war for the eternal souls of our membership and right now the ‘Evil One’ is winning. It is time to stand up and provide TEC the rebuke Jesus gave Peter in Matthew 16:23 ‘Jesus turned and said to Peter, “Get behind me, Satan! You are a stumbling block to me; you do not have in mind the things of God, but the things of men.” ‘. If we do not stand up and condemn these actions for what they are then we are providing de facto approval! I do not condone these actions nor do most of the informed communicants of this diocese that I know. I do not harbor any ill will toward the people that have hijacked my church and created this mess. I just do not care to walk with them on their journey to Hell! Thank you, for your consideration and I eagerly await your guidance! All of God’s Blessings, Raymond K. Johnson
“I wish they’d remember that the charge to Peter was feed my sheep; not try experiments on my rats,
Posted by revdrrayj on 06-22-2006 at 01:01 PM [link]
|
|
Good for you revdrrayj! I hope this is happening in every diocese in the USA! Thanks Sarah for sharing your heart and soul all week and making us examine our own. The Stand Firm team was raised up for such a time as this and I want to thank Greg, Matt, Andy and you for answering this important call on your lives--getting information out to the entire world about the travesties that were going on in Columbus.
Many many people are now enlightened about things that they never imagined they would ever see or hear in The Episcopal Church.
You were all letting your “little lights shine!” Posted by BettyLee Payne on 06-22-2006 at 04:26 PM [link]
|
|
Sarah, beloved sister in Christ, I’m going to address you in a separate comment if you don’t mind. But right now I would like to do a bit of networking with another poster. Hey Raymond K. Johnson, I am also a parishioner in the diocese of Texas under the lackluster leadership of bp. Wimperley. You should have seen the letter I blasted him with in 2004 after diocesan council. I wonder if you have seen what he wrote in response to Ms. Schori’s election as pb. Here’s the link, it isn’t reassuring. He calls her a delightful presence, wise and extremely smart. He considers it to be an exciting moment but acknowledges that not everyone feels that way. I’m in Austin, while there is a Coalition in the diocese I think we need to ramp up our own strategy. In some ways I think we live in the worst of situations, technically we don’t have a revisionist bishop, but we don’t have way who is anything but an institutional conservative. My impression is that we have a man totally lacking in any type of Christian courage. I think he’s real good at rationalizing alot to himself. I am also extremely concerned about the direction of the diocese in the election of Dena Harrison as suffragan. I have been going through alot of re-evaluation in regards to WO. We need to form a network. Posted by Gayle on 06-22-2006 at 05:02 PM [link]
|
|
Sarah, you are the Winston Churchill of Episcopalians. You are right, either get out and give no support of the enemy or dig in and fight with all your might. I have more frequently seen Christian groups who win a battle and rejoice not realizing that the enemy was still out there and regrouping for a counter attack. A battle is not the war. So many are wanting to fight old battles that have already been decided--nostalgia I guess. Fight where the battle rages, march toward the sound of the cannons. Posted by PROPHET MICAIAH on 06-22-2006 at 08:28 PM [link]
|
|
Sarah,
Gayle...ditto here in Mississippi. I wonder if our Bishop, Duncan Gray, just copied Wimperlys letter????? I am from a small town and our parish has shrunk remarkably since I was a child. Our attendence drops yearly and there are less and less families. There are several of us here who feel unable to continue in TEC but have nowhere else to go. We are too few to start a new Anglican church, but perhaps if the ANC and others were to merge we could find some kind of umbrella under which to stand until we could grow larger. There are many in our little church who probably won’t leave until the new prayer book is issued..and I feel that will be coming very soon as this movement seems to be forging ahead at great speed. I want to thank you and Matt and Greg for all you have done to bring this convention to all of us. If we had had this kind of feedback ten years ago we might not be in the fix we are in now. Thank you all so very much. Posted by church lady on 06-23-2006 at 06:42 AM [link]
|
|
drjoan: I will probably never make a good Baptist. I am just waiting for my kids to grow up, or Bishop Ihloff retires and a more orthodox bishop takes over MD (I know, fat chance!) He has done more to squash the “reasserters” here than anything else. I have butted heads with him and have felt like he wishes I was a bug he could grind under his heel. There is so much pain among the Orthodox here, I don’t even see new Anglican startups anytime soon. I would suggest a recovery course, or a healing conference for all participants, because the new congregation would not be able to put their individual axes down without it. Meanwhile, I can still pray, contribute as I can. I think America as a mission field for our African brothers to evangelize would be a splendid idea. Having met some of them in the past, they are articulate and strong in the Spirit, and would go anywhere, anytime to sit under them! Love you, Lynn Posted by Crabby in MD on 06-23-2006 at 07:06 AM [link]
|
|
Sarah Great post, and I wish you the greatest luck with your battle for this little stone bridge. I faced my own battle some ten years ago in the Presbyterian Church (NB, apt acronym - PCUSA). The question I found myself asking is, is this something worth dying for? It this the right battle to fight? It wasn’t. I crossed the Tiber shortly thereafter, not to avoid the battle, but to be able to fight for a worthy objective. Anyway, my heart goes out to all still trying to retake the bridge—I sincerely hope you win the fight. Posted by Ron M on 06-23-2006 at 10:37 AM [link]
|
|
To all those in dwindling or stranded in hostile parishes and/or dioceses, Go underground. Or in other terms, do an end around. Cross that stream and come at the attackers from behind. In practical terms this means meeting for worship in your homes. If there are just a handful of orthodox in your area and are not enough to have your own separate place of worship, this is the best option. No rent or overhead. You can even lead your own services as lay people. No need to hire a full time clergyman. You could find a sympathetic priest to come in say once a month for Holy Communion or other sacraments. The rest of the time will be prayer and praise. The great advantage to this would be neighborhood evangelism. Put out flyers to those living on the block or the several blocks surrounding you telling your neighbors about your services. This would be such a good way to build community and to grow until you could afford to rent somewhere and have a full time clergyman. It can be done with determination. We in this time are not charged with retaking an apostate church. We are charged I think with rebuilding an orthodox Anglican presence in America from the ground up. In most places this will be literally building from the ground up since there is almost nothing left. Just remember that our Church started with just twelve apostles and a handful of believers. They believed and success followed. We all must believe that our current circumstances are a blessing in diguise and that by believing and working hard, something good can come out of all of this. Let the pessimists leave. I wish they wouldnt but that is their call. I look forward to the powerful results that will come from the remaining body of optimists that they leave behind. Maybe we wont see the success in our lifetimes but we can be sure that we will succeed simply by refusing to quit. May future orthodox Anglicans enjoy the fruits of our labor and have the majority among US and Canadian Anglicans. Our reward will be in heaven. Posted by StayinAnglican on 06-25-2006 at 02:31 PM [link]
|
|
A very fine piece of writing in every way. Written with great compassion, civility, and erudition. But it is like so many things Anglican just words, words, and more words. I doubt if these words bring much comfort to deposed priests, priests losing their licenses, parishes facing lawsuits, or parishes losing their beloved church properties. I tend to feel the Global South leaders would also find the essay well written and moving but of little value in the real fight. As Archbishop Nzimbi recently said, “It is time to stop talking and time to take action.” Sarah, the fine sensitive person she is, may feel she has the luxury of waiting to see what happens before making a decision. The rest of us don’t. We are too busy praying and fighting. Posted by PapaJ on 01-28-2007 at 06:41 AM [link]
|
|
Again, I have to look at these events with the glass half full / half empty paradigm. The things that affect TEC affect the rest of the Church. The pervasive problem of how to deal with sexual sin is treated weakly (though not as weak) on the conservative side just as it is on the liberal side. That the TEC failed to discipline herself for the past 30-40 years, will be met with devastating punishment. I believe that what we are seeing is part of that punishment. The suffering that goes with it, is not from the reasserters. It comes from the Hand of the Lord. It’s never evil when the Lord punishes. It’s especially not evil if His servants “wake up” from the punishments. That the Reasserters are the instrument by which the punishment is applied, changes nothing. God in His Love is punishing us. God in His Love is waking us up. The question we have of what He is forging us into, will require patience and fortitude on our part, to hear. Without rallying around the either “leave,” or “stay” cries, I will say this: I look forward to seeing the fruits of His handiwork; the fruit that comes when all the pruning is done.
Brothers and sisters, I can’t wait.
Posted by Moot on 02-17-2007 at 03:21 PM [link]
|
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.






Sarah
, the war was won.
First of all, let me thanks you and Greg and Matt for a tremendous amount of work over the last week and a half. I know it was no easy task, given both the hours as well as the scope of the issues at hand. No doubt I was one of the contributors to crashed servers which my constant refreshing
Secondly, I watched this battle from across the Tiber as I am an orthodox Roman Catholic but let me tell you, as you so aptly pointed out in your analogy above, this is a battle and indeed whether one is a orthodox Anglican or an orthodox Roman Catholic, we indeed are fighting much the same battle. From my perspective, you and many other folks are truly fighting a valiant rear-guard action and I am cheering you on. At West Point we studied many battles in which “a little stone bridge” was at stake. The 300 Spartans at Thermopyle died to a man, including their King Leonidas, not because they thought they could defeat 20,000 Persians, but because they had committed themselves to slow the Persian advance, their own little stone bridge. They did die but what they showed the world was that an “irresistable” force was not so irresistable in the face of resolute courage and determination and that lesson was well learned by the rest of the Greeks. Darius, the Persian King, didn’t last very long in the Greek peninsula and while the battle was “lost” (I would argue that strategically it won the war by breaking the Persian myth of invincibility
Rest assured that I for one, stand firm with you in your stand against forces which would have us abandon that which we most hold dear.
Ramon