The Blocked by Greg Club and Accountability in ACNA

In recent weeks I’ve discovered I’ve become part of a club. I wish I could say it is very exclusive but it does not seem to be as it is growing and getting close to numerous. It is the Blocked by Greg Club, the club of those blocked by the twitter account of Canon Greg Goebel or by the Facebook page of his Anglican Pastor site.  I will say the club seems to be exclusive in one fashion: I only know of traditional Anglicans that have been blocked, not of others.  (There may be others; if so, I am not aware of them.)

The pattern often is that Goebel will post something that provokes traditional Anglicans.  And should one dare to express their provocation and disagreement in a manner displeasing to the Canon, he/she is blocked. 

Now one certainly has the right to act in such a catty manner on a social media account, even a public one.  But it is questionable coming from clergy, much less from a Canon in the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA).  Yes, all are entitled to private online space where one can include and exclude as one wishes more or less.  But I do not think that applies to public Twitter and Facebook accounts on which clergy comment on churchly matters and other public issues. Church people should be able to know what their clergy is saying in public or semi-public settings about church and political issues.  That is basic accountability.

It is fair to say ACNA handles accountability well more often than not and better than most church jurisdictions.  But there are times it does not, and this is one of them. It is not right for a Canon to block people, especially church people, from seeing what he is saying or doing as a minister, except in extreme circumstances or when privacy is appropriate.  Church people should be able readily to know what their clergy are teaching and advocating. And if clergy cannot handle critical responses to that better than blocking the responders, perhaps other jobs should be sought.

In this case, the problem of lack of accountability goes right to the top in ACNA.  For Greg Goebel is the Canon to the Ordinary in the Diocese of the South, the bishop of which is the Archbishop of ACNA, the Most Rev. Foley Beach.

Sir Stephen Cleobury RIP

Sad news comes this morning of the death last night of Sir Stephen Cleobury, past Director of the Choir of King’s College Cambridge.  He died in his hometown of York after a long illness.

I will leave it to others to note his many musical accomplishments. In person, he was a gracious man as I’ve experienced more than once, particularly when meeting him in Beeville, Texas of all places where he gave a organ recital.

November 22^ndhas not only claimed John F. Kennedy and C. S. Lewis, but now Dr. Cleobury as well.  May he rest in peace and rise in glory.

Tennessee Baptists Denounce Critical Race Theory

I am heartened to see that the Tennessee Baptist Convention has “strongly denounc[ed] CRT and intersectionality as inconsistent with the Biblical worldview and theology.”

I could nitpick the passed resolution, particularly the preamble’s acknowledgement of “the presence of structural and systemic racism.” Those are Critical Race Theory terms that I do not think should be given credence.

Nonetheless, Tennessee Baptists have provided a godly example for the rest of the Southern Baptist Convention and for other church bodies infiltrated by CRT and intersectionality.  Yes, that includes the Anglican Church in North America (ACNA).  As I’ve stated here, I think it is needful for ACNA bishops and dioceses to denounce CRT and its cousins, particularly their inherent racism.

May the courage of the Tennessee Baptist Convention multiply.

Blaming the Holy Spirit in ACNA

So many things on which I could post and so little time!  But I am prepared enough for my lecture later this week that I can sneak in a post on the latest from Emily McGowin, Canon Theologian of the ACNA Diocese of Churches for the Sake of Others (C4SO).

She writes vigorously in defense of women’s ordination.  I concede she argues well . . . until this near the end “on the subject of theological method”:

Does the apparent work of the Holy Spirit in setting apart and empowering women for priestly ministry today—not just in the West, but in regions all over the world—have something to contribute to the discussion? Certainly, experience alone cannot be normative within the Anglican tradition, but can it be permitted a seat at the theological “table”?

Ah, yes. Blaming the Holy Spirit for one’s pet innovations. The Holy Spirit has brought about women’s ordination.  Right.

I am amazed that McGowin would make this argument.  Does she not remember that making one’s innovations a work of the Holy Spirit is “the theological method” of apostate bodies, including The Episcopal Church from which The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) fled?  Does she not remember that this is the very method used by those who push any number of ungodly innovations and enormities in the organized church?

Or at least I thought we in ACNA fled from this LibChurch “theological method.”

Really, being as sloppy as apostates in theological reasoning and exalting that even is a more alarming problem in ACNA than women’s ordination.

But the two usually go hand in hand, do they not?

Great Whore of Pachamama Update

I apologize for not posting and especially for falling behind on news concerning the Church of Rome.  One excuse I have is I am preparing for a lecture next week on the Venerable Bede’s Explanation of the Apocalypse.

I do want to bring your attention to two excellent items. First is a number of faithful Roman Catholics have issued a public rebuke to Pope Francis and a call for him to repent of the idolatrous worship of Pachamama at the Amazon Synod. It is well written and well titled Contra Recentia Sacrilegia.  I you have not read it yet, I urge you so to do.

Second, Taylor Marshall and George Neumayr have given an excellent video summary of the U. S. Roman bishops meeting and of the current state of the Roman Catholic Church particularly in the U. S.  It is an eye-opener.

I wish I could say more and may when priorities allow.

Pushing “Social Justice” in ACNA Disregards Too Many Faithful

Alexander Wilgus has well responded to an article advocating more unity between The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) and The Episcopal Church (TEC). One problem he has with such increased unity and relationships is that it does not give enough weight to the difficult experiences of those perhaps slightly older who fled TEC.  

Ask any of them: it was not a concern for “being right” that caused the men, women, youth, and children to separate themselves from their ancestral congregations which–they assure me–had ceased to partake in Christ’s body, and instead given themselves over to become literal bodies of death. These acts were discerned through years of deep and careful prayer. Besides this, their decision to flee from false teaching, which in so many cases cost them property, friendships and reputations, ought to be honored by those of us in the next generation… 

I think a similar argument can be made against pushing “social justice” political agendas in ACNA and other predominantly orthodox churches. Part of the bad memories of many who fled “mainline” denominations, including TEC, is they saw their churches pushing political agendas they find repugnant. 

I remember being especially offended by my Presbyterian Church in the U. S. (PCUS), into which I was baptized, pushing legal abortion on demand and constantly siding with the Soviet Union against President Ronald Reagan. (Trust that I am notexaggerating.) Such was done in the name of being “prophetic” among other inane rationalizations. 

When I decided to leave PCUS and “mainline” denominations in general behind for that and other reasons, I thought with relief that I was leaving such churchly Leftism long behind as well.

So imagine my chagrin when I began to see ACNA, the formation of which I enthusiastically supported, being used as a venue for “social justice” agendas.  No, the leadership of ACNA is not as whole hog behind lib/left politics as PCUS was and TEC is. But ACNA initiatives behind “social justice” have proliferated and those who are pushing “justice” (a buzzword in ACNA now) keep getting promoted to leadership. 

When I first noticed this tendency, it was the first time I realized something might be seriously wrong with ACNA.  Yes, I had been warned that ACNA had “the Episcopalian virus,” but I disregarded those warnings . . . until I saw ACNA sponsoring “justice” through the Matthew 25 Project, the Anglican Multiethnic Network, The Diocese of Churches for the Sake of Others (C4SO), etc.  

Anyway, seeing all this has me considering exit scenarios just ten years after attending and cheering the formation of ACNA.  I never thought I would ever be at this point.  I once would have laughed at anyone who suggested I would be.  Again, I thought I had left such toxic church politics behind.  Of course, I knew that ACNA contains people of differing political views.  But it never occurred to me that those of a more Leftist political bent would so disrespect conservatives and gain so much influence as to push their political agendas under ACNA auspices.

I am not alone. Many now in ACNA and other orthodox churches fled “mainline” churches and their toxic Leftist politics.  They have no desire to see their own churches once again being used to push Leftist agendas they find repugnant.  Using the church to push “social justice” offends these faithful and stresses their loyalty and support.  Disregarding their experiences and consciences by returning to the vomit of LibChurch politics* puts the unity of ACNA at further risk.

*Proverbs 26:11

Schiff Prohibits Witnesses Requested by Republicans

If there is any remaining doubt that the present impeachment inquiry is more an attempted coup than a lawful proceeding, it should be dispelled by Democrat Adam Schiff’s refusal to allow key witnesses requested by Republicans.   (I’ve read that he has denied all Republican witness requests, but I cannot verify that yet.)

Most telling is that he will not even allow Republicans to call the Fake Whistleblower to testify.  The Whistleblower Who Must Not Be Named is how the latest phase of the perpetual coup began – in public at least.  But Schiff will not allow Republicans to call even him as a witness.

I am at the point where I think someone has not to be paying attention to miss that this impeachment inquiry is part of the perpetual coup against Trump that began on Election night 2016 and even before. Democrats like Schiff have never respected that election, and they are not respecting basic principles of law and fair play in still  trying to overturn it.

But with hope I agree with the always colorful Senator John Kennedy (R-La): “The American people are going look at this and go, 'I get it. They're going to give the president a fair and impartial firing squad.'"

But how many are so un-American as to be fine with this unending attempted coup?

----

NOTE: Yes, my recent policy about politics on this blog has usually been that of H. P. Liddon:  “A large number of people came to St. Paul’s this afternoon expecting a political sermon.  I disappointed them.”

However, since several ACNA leaders, such as now C4SO Canon Theologian Esau McCaulley and C4SO Bishop Todd Hunter are supportive of Democrat objectives while being silent about the Democrat coup, I think it is time to speak up about the coup in an Anglican context.  So, with apologies (or not), the ongoing coup will now be one of the subjects I address here for this and other relevant reasons I may address in due time.

---- 

BONUS USELESS PREDICTION:
So far every time accusations against Trump have been aired in public, they have been a bust.  See the Mueller Report, Mueller’s testimony, backstabbing lawyer Cohen, the creepy porn lawyer and Stormy Daniels, and . . . I can hardly remember them all anymore.

When the impeachment inquiry goes public beginning tomorrow, it will be a bust as well and may backfire on the Democrats.  We shall see.

Corbyn Still One of the Comrades of Evo Morales

I am among those thankful that the Leftist supposed President of Bolivia Evo Morales resigned under pressure after a fraudulent re-election. But look who is not thankful: the dictators of Cuba and Venezuela . . . and Jeremy Corbyn.

The Glorious Leader of the Labour Party tweeted:

To see [Evo Morales] who, along with a powerful movement, has brought so much social progress forced from office by the military is appalling. I condemn this coup against the Bolivian people and stand with them for democracy, social justice and independence. #ElMundoConEvo

Never mind Morales’ human rights abuses or his election stealing.

By the way, I wonder what Pope Francis thinks of Morales’ resignation.  Will the LibPope miss him?  After all they’ve met at least six times, including as recently as last year when Francis surely knew the nature of the Morales regime.  And remember Morales gave Francis that lovely Communist cross. So maybe Francis will invite his buddy to move into the Vatican where he will be right at home with any number of Leftist abusers.

More about the Timing of the AND Campaign

I’ve mentioned here that the AND Campaign and its timing reminds me of the Seamless Garment political philosophy pushed during the 80’s. There is one aspect of AND’s timing I have not yet mentioned but have been thinking about.

There are indications that Trump might be gaining more Black support than the usual Republican.  The poll numbers are hard to discern but can be read favorably for Trump.  And there is no question that he is making more of an effort to woo Blacks than past Republicans.  There is a large contingent of Black conservatives backing him vociferously.  And one may not want to underestimate the influence of Kayne West.  Of course, that Black unemployment is now the lowest recorded helps Trump.

I understand if readers think this is all anecdotal wishful thinking.  I guess we will find out in a year, won’t we?  But I predict Trump will get 16% or more of the Black vote.  That may not sound like much, but it would be double his 2016 vote.

Of course, if Trump makes significant inroads with Black voters, it would be catastrophic for Democrats just as Ronald Reagan winning over Roman Catholics was in the 80’s.  From a Democrat point of the view, that Must. Not. Happen.

Now I do not presume to know for sure whether one of the purposes of the AND Campaign is to prevent this and to keep largely Black “Urban Christians,” as they dub them, on board with Democrats.  Just as I do not presume to know all the motives of Cardinal Bernardin when he gave his Seamless Garment lecture in 1983. Still, there is no question a big theme of AND is Orange Man Bad.  They do NOT want “Urban Christians” voting for Trump at a time when more of them just might.

Thus the timing of AND is interesting, is it not?

Is the AND Campaign a Democrat Front Group?

Up to now, I have given the benefit of the doubt to the motives behind the AND Campaign.  They certainly present themselves winsomely and sound earnest.  But after digging a little deeper, I cannot see how I can give the benefit of the doubt any longer.

What I’ve just found out is a bit embarrassing because I should have known before now.  Finding out just who is leading a political campaign is a rather obvious thing to do, but my focus was on what AND was saying, particularly in their 2020 Presidential Election Statement. Nonetheless, I have now looked into their leadership.

The President and Co-Founder of the AND Campaign is Justin Giboney.  I will allow his intro at the AND site to speak for itself (Emphasis mine):

Justin Giboney is an attorney and political strategist in Atlanta, GA. Mr. Giboney has managed successful campaigns for elected officialsin the state and referendums relating to the city’s transportation and water infrastructure.

In 2012 and 2016, Georgia’s 5th congressional district elected him as a delegate for the Democratic National Convention and he served as the co-chair of Obama for America’s Gen44-Atlanta initiative.A former Vanderbilt University football player and law student, Justin served on the Urban League of Greater Atlanta Board of Directors. Additionally, Justin has participated in LEAD Atlanta, Outstanding Atlanta and the Georgia Bar Association’s Leadership Academy. He’s written op-eds for publications such as Christianity Today.

So the President and Co-Founder of AND is a Democrat “political strategist” who was a delegate to the Democrat National Convention in 2012 and 2016. He was surely an Obama delegate in 2012.  He was a delegate for Hillary Clinton in 2016.  So we are supposed to trust the judgement and leadership of someone who still supported Obama after four years of his regime and then supported Hillary in 2016? Really? And he also worked for Obama for America.

Not much Christian judgement and not much non-partisanship there.

Okay, but maybe the Number Two in AND leadership will provide a little bi-partisan balance.  Let’s see…

Michael Wear serves as Chief Strategist and member of the executive leadership team for The AND Campaign. 

As one of President Obama's "ambassadors to America's believers" (Buzzfeed), Michael directed faith outreach for President Obama’s historic 2012 re-election campaign. Michael was also one of the youngest White House staffers in modern American history: he served in the White House faith-based initiative during President Obama’s first term, where he led evangelical outreach and helped manage The White House’s engagement on religious and values issues, including adoption and anti-human trafficking efforts.

He founded Public Square Strategies LLC, a consulting firm that helps religious organizations, political organizations, businesses and others effectively navigate the rapidly changing American religious and political landscape.

Michael is the author of Reclaiming Hope: Lessons Learned in the Obama White House About the Future of Faith in America. He also writes for The Atlantic, Christianity Today, USA Today, Relevant Magazine and other publications on faith, politics and culture. He holds an honorary position at the University of Birmingham’s Cadbury Center for the Public Understanding of Religion. He is also a Senior Fellow at The Trinity Forum. Michael and his wife, Melissa, are both proud natives of Buffalo, New York. They now reside in Washington, D.C.

But of course they do.

So the two top leaders of the AND Campaign are both experienced Democrat political operatives.  Both were all in for Obama, even in 2012.  And Wear directed conning Christians, er I mean, “faith outreach” for the Obama re-election campaign in 2012, again after the nature of the Obama regime was quite clear after four years.

So now he is again directing conning Christians for Democrats.

That may seem harsh.  But that is what Wear has done and is doing. And really, with those two leading the AND Campaign, isn’t that is what AND is doing?  If not, then why the heck are two Democrat political operatives leading the AND Campaign?  Why would you have two Democrat political operatives lead unless you intend to do some Democrat political operating? 

With their leadership and with their 2020 election statement, it is hard to come to any conclusion but that AND’s intended purpose is persuading evangelicals into thinking supporting Democrats is the Christian thing to do. Their supposed non-partisanship is a mask, a front.

As much as they may try not to appear so, AND is beyond a reasonable doubt a Democrat front group with the current chief purpose of getting evangelicals to vote Democrat in 2020.  Do not be deceived.  Do not be conned.