What do you get when Episcolibs negotiate with themselves?
That sounds like the beginning of a joke, doesn’t it? Well, you get this.
Actually, it is a joke, isn’t it?
The ACN and AAC have already made known they are not amused.
Thursday, November 30, 2006
Bishop Schofield Responds to PB Schori (and uses the a-word!)
You might remember that --Schori wrote a little letter to Bishop Schofield inviting him to go away. Well the Bishop of San Joaquin has responded . . and how!
November 28, 2006
The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts-Schori
The Episcopal Church Center
815 Second Ave.
New York, NY 10017
Dear Bishop Schori:
Greetings in the name of our Lord and only Savior Jesus Christ.
Note the use of the word “only.”
I am in receipt of your letter to me and wish to make clear from the outset that I have always remained faithful to my vows as an ordained bishop in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. At my consecration, I vowed to “guard the faith, unity, and discipline of the Church of God.” I was charged by my chief consecrator to “Feed the flock of Christ committed to [my] charge, guard and defend them in his truth, and be a faithful steward of his holy Word and Sacraments.” I carry out my vow by defending and propagating “the historic Faith and Order” which The Episcopal Church commits to upholding in the preamble of its own Constitution.
Unlike --Schori, who set herself up for that paragraph by her laughable call for +Schofield to submit to “the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them.” Speaking of which . . .
In 2003, the General Convention committed itself to a theological path that is irreconcilable with the Anglican faith this Church has received and has torn the fabric of the entire Communion. The Primates repeated calls for repentance have not been heeded. More than half of the Primates and Provinces of the Anglican Communion have declared themselves to be in impaired or broken communion with The Episcopal Church. Beyond our Anglican Communion, relations throughout Christendom have been profoundly strained. With obvious reference to innovations and novelties introduced by The Episcopal Church, last week Pope Benedict XVI publically stated to Archbishop Rowan Williams that recent developments, “especially concerning ordained ministry and certain moral teachings,” have affected not only the internal relations within the Anglican Communion but also relations between the Anglican Communion and the Catholic Church.
The Episcopal Church, as an institution, is walking a path of apostasy and those faithful to God’s Word are forced to make painful choices.
Wow! A bishop actually using the a-word!
At a diocesan level, the choice is between continuing membership in an unrepentant, apostate institution. . .
He used the a-word again! I love this guy!
or following Holy Scripture and the Anglican faith. Whether or not the Diocese of San Joaquin will continue its institutional membership in The Episcopal Church is a choice that will be made by the people and the clergy and not by me. They will express their collective will as provided in the diocesan governing documents which were approved by the General Convention when the diocese was first admitted to membership.
It is important to point out that the vote at the Diocesan Convention in December 2006 is neither final nor irrevocable. Should the Constitutional amendments being proposed pass the “first reading,” then the diocese will simply have positioned itself to make a final decision at a second consecutive Annual Convention in 2007 if that proves God’s call.
Under our diocesan constitution, the second and final reading is automatically scheduled for October 2007. The setting of the exact date may be advanced or delayed by the bishop. There are some significant factors that would influence such a decision.
First, at the meeting with the leading Primates of the Global South in Virginia, November 15-17 this year, the Global South Primates Steering Committee encouraged us by supporting our faithful stand and commitment to Christ, and they expressed a desire to be of help to us to relieve our untenable position. They have promised assistance, the form of which they will bring to the entire Primates meeting scheduled for Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, in February 2007. In the meantime, in keeping with the goals of the Windsor Report and positioning ourselves to accept the Primates’ help, we are responding to the Primates who called upon us to remain flexible until the details are worked out.
And I think this is the right approach. None of this waiting and staying in TEC until the Second Advent. But at the same time, he is seeking to act in consort with the broader communion, particularly the Primates.
An additional consideration was your letter to me. I believe you have shown wisdom and restraint by not issuing an ultimatum. Instead, you have invited further discussion which could possibly lead to some degree of reconciliation.
That’s a very charitable interpretation of Schori’s letter. But I can’t begrudge him that.
In recognition of what you have proposed, I, too, will exercise restraint by not advancing the date of what could be an historic and final act. However, should proceedings be instituted against me as threatened in your letter, I would not feel obliged to exercise restraint. My prayer is that neither of us takes action which upsets the delicate balance which now exists until the Primates have given us direction at their February 2007 meeting.
And that’s a very charitable way of saying, “Back off!”
Until then, powerful forces will be at work that will ultimately shape the future.
I pray that God’s will be revealed to us all.
You may be assured of my prayers for the Holy Spirit’s wisdom and guidance.
In Christ,
The Rt. Rev. John-David M. Schofield, SSC
Bishop of San Joaquin
Who, along with the Good Bishop Jack Iker, is now my hero. What a courageous steadfast clear-minded bishop!
(Are those oxymorons?)
You might remember that --Schori wrote a little letter to Bishop Schofield inviting him to go away. Well the Bishop of San Joaquin has responded . . and how!
November 28, 2006
The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts-Schori
The Episcopal Church Center
815 Second Ave.
New York, NY 10017
Dear Bishop Schori:
Greetings in the name of our Lord and only Savior Jesus Christ.
Note the use of the word “only.”
I am in receipt of your letter to me and wish to make clear from the outset that I have always remained faithful to my vows as an ordained bishop in the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. At my consecration, I vowed to “guard the faith, unity, and discipline of the Church of God.” I was charged by my chief consecrator to “Feed the flock of Christ committed to [my] charge, guard and defend them in his truth, and be a faithful steward of his holy Word and Sacraments.” I carry out my vow by defending and propagating “the historic Faith and Order” which The Episcopal Church commits to upholding in the preamble of its own Constitution.
Unlike --Schori, who set herself up for that paragraph by her laughable call for +Schofield to submit to “the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them.” Speaking of which . . .
In 2003, the General Convention committed itself to a theological path that is irreconcilable with the Anglican faith this Church has received and has torn the fabric of the entire Communion. The Primates repeated calls for repentance have not been heeded. More than half of the Primates and Provinces of the Anglican Communion have declared themselves to be in impaired or broken communion with The Episcopal Church. Beyond our Anglican Communion, relations throughout Christendom have been profoundly strained. With obvious reference to innovations and novelties introduced by The Episcopal Church, last week Pope Benedict XVI publically stated to Archbishop Rowan Williams that recent developments, “especially concerning ordained ministry and certain moral teachings,” have affected not only the internal relations within the Anglican Communion but also relations between the Anglican Communion and the Catholic Church.
The Episcopal Church, as an institution, is walking a path of apostasy and those faithful to God’s Word are forced to make painful choices.
Wow! A bishop actually using the a-word!
At a diocesan level, the choice is between continuing membership in an unrepentant, apostate institution. . .
He used the a-word again! I love this guy!
or following Holy Scripture and the Anglican faith. Whether or not the Diocese of San Joaquin will continue its institutional membership in The Episcopal Church is a choice that will be made by the people and the clergy and not by me. They will express their collective will as provided in the diocesan governing documents which were approved by the General Convention when the diocese was first admitted to membership.
It is important to point out that the vote at the Diocesan Convention in December 2006 is neither final nor irrevocable. Should the Constitutional amendments being proposed pass the “first reading,” then the diocese will simply have positioned itself to make a final decision at a second consecutive Annual Convention in 2007 if that proves God’s call.
Under our diocesan constitution, the second and final reading is automatically scheduled for October 2007. The setting of the exact date may be advanced or delayed by the bishop. There are some significant factors that would influence such a decision.
First, at the meeting with the leading Primates of the Global South in Virginia, November 15-17 this year, the Global South Primates Steering Committee encouraged us by supporting our faithful stand and commitment to Christ, and they expressed a desire to be of help to us to relieve our untenable position. They have promised assistance, the form of which they will bring to the entire Primates meeting scheduled for Dar Es Salaam, Tanzania, in February 2007. In the meantime, in keeping with the goals of the Windsor Report and positioning ourselves to accept the Primates’ help, we are responding to the Primates who called upon us to remain flexible until the details are worked out.
And I think this is the right approach. None of this waiting and staying in TEC until the Second Advent. But at the same time, he is seeking to act in consort with the broader communion, particularly the Primates.
An additional consideration was your letter to me. I believe you have shown wisdom and restraint by not issuing an ultimatum. Instead, you have invited further discussion which could possibly lead to some degree of reconciliation.
That’s a very charitable interpretation of Schori’s letter. But I can’t begrudge him that.
In recognition of what you have proposed, I, too, will exercise restraint by not advancing the date of what could be an historic and final act. However, should proceedings be instituted against me as threatened in your letter, I would not feel obliged to exercise restraint. My prayer is that neither of us takes action which upsets the delicate balance which now exists until the Primates have given us direction at their February 2007 meeting.
And that’s a very charitable way of saying, “Back off!”
Until then, powerful forces will be at work that will ultimately shape the future.
I pray that God’s will be revealed to us all.
You may be assured of my prayers for the Holy Spirit’s wisdom and guidance.
In Christ,
The Rt. Rev. John-David M. Schofield, SSC
Bishop of San Joaquin
Who, along with the Good Bishop Jack Iker, is now my hero. What a courageous steadfast clear-minded bishop!
(Are those oxymorons?)
Wednesday, November 29, 2006
No Safe Place: Jordan Hylden on PB Schori
Jordan Hylden over at First Things is at it again with his excellent analysis of the situation in the Episcopal Church.
In his latest missive, he focuses on the statements and intentions of Presiding Bishop Schori. The money paragraph:
…there is good reason to believe she intends nothing less than to run conservatives out of the church, finalize the split between the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, and set up an international communion of liberal Anglicanism as a rival to Canterbury. In short, from her recent actions and public statements, it is reasonable to infer that her term is likely to tear the Episcopal Church in two—and, what’s more, that that is precisely what she intends.
I’m not so sure she intends to “finalize the split” with the Communion. I think she and those of like mind would rather have it both ways and stay in. But I agree she is certainly preparing for a split with the thinly veiled moves to set up a rival liberal communion. And as for conservatives, the only “reconciliation” she is interested in is unconditional submission . . . or else.
In any case, the Anglican Communion Institute and other apologists for eternal waiting not withstanding, I think it neither safe nor wise for the orthodox to stick around for long in such an environment. Orthodox who still remain in the Episcopal Church, Schori and friends are not the least bit interested in a safe place for you. You are a “problem” to be dealt with.
Jordan Hylden over at First Things is at it again with his excellent analysis of the situation in the Episcopal Church.
In his latest missive, he focuses on the statements and intentions of Presiding Bishop Schori. The money paragraph:
…there is good reason to believe she intends nothing less than to run conservatives out of the church, finalize the split between the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion, and set up an international communion of liberal Anglicanism as a rival to Canterbury. In short, from her recent actions and public statements, it is reasonable to infer that her term is likely to tear the Episcopal Church in two—and, what’s more, that that is precisely what she intends.
I’m not so sure she intends to “finalize the split” with the Communion. I think she and those of like mind would rather have it both ways and stay in. But I agree she is certainly preparing for a split with the thinly veiled moves to set up a rival liberal communion. And as for conservatives, the only “reconciliation” she is interested in is unconditional submission . . . or else.
In any case, the Anglican Communion Institute and other apologists for eternal waiting not withstanding, I think it neither safe nor wise for the orthodox to stick around for long in such an environment. Orthodox who still remain in the Episcopal Church, Schori and friends are not the least bit interested in a safe place for you. You are a “problem” to be dealt with.
Tuesday, November 28, 2006
Saying NO to More “Conversation” and “Dialogue”
It’s about time someone tells the Episcolibs they can’t have it both ways. They can’t act like a bunch of apostate wolves, ram their heterodox programs though, threaten the orthodox, and yet coo about “conversation,” “dialogue,” “holy listening” (That one's my favorite.) with any credibility whatsoever.
And who is the one to tell them but The Good Bishop Jack Leo Iker. And when he told them back in New York that he wasn’t interested in further meetings, he meant it. God bless him!
Christopher Johnson has the text and the usual to-the-point analysis here.
It’s about time someone tells the Episcolibs they can’t have it both ways. They can’t act like a bunch of apostate wolves, ram their heterodox programs though, threaten the orthodox, and yet coo about “conversation,” “dialogue,” “holy listening” (That one's my favorite.) with any credibility whatsoever.
And who is the one to tell them but The Good Bishop Jack Leo Iker. And when he told them back in New York that he wasn’t interested in further meetings, he meant it. God bless him!
Christopher Johnson has the text and the usual to-the-point analysis here.
Wednesday, November 22, 2006
The Self-Destruction of the Episcopal Church?
I’ve been wondering this week if we’re witnessing a phenomenon mentioned time and again in Scripture: people who willfully oppose God and His people often act in ways that bring about their destruction. The Psalms talk again and again of those who lay nets for God’s people falling into them themselves. Paul wrote in Romans 1 that willful sin debases even the minds of those who persist in it so that they irrationally destroy themselves.
In a similar vein, Euripides said, “Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.”
Are witnessing this in recent events in the Episcopal Church?
At General Convention, TEC bishops and delegates elected the most divisive, most extremist, least qualified candidate available. If they desired to hold the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion together or at least keep bloodshed to a minimum, that surely wasn’t the way to do it. She, Katharine Schori, then promptly alienated Christians with her statements, beginning with calling Jesus “our mother.”
Then this past weekend, she hit a new low with her already infamous remarks about the childbearing and intelligence of Catholics. (Here’s another lampoon of those remarks, from a Catholic wedding no less.) Doesn’t she realize that many Episcopalians feel kinship with the Catholic church? And not a few cast furtive glances across the Tiber. I imagine yet more have decided to jump in and swim across thanks to her remarks. And a great many less Catholic-minded Anglicans find her remarks beyond the pale.
Then “almost immediately,” as a certain English comedy troupe would say, came her letter to +Schofield inviting him to shove off . . . in Christian love, of course. Does she not realize that sort of conduct serves only to alienate further those who are deliberating their future in the Episcopal Church? Did she give any thought to how this sort of vicious attack on the orthodox may use up the remaining patience of the Primates?
Even liberal-minded Anglicans sympathetic to Schori are noting (if quietly) that she is showing little if any political sense. And that’s being charitable. She’s flat out not thinking straight. If there’s a way to act in a more self-destructive manner, it’s hard to imagine it.
We may be witnessing the Episcopal Church bringing about and accelerating its own self-destruction. And in that way, for a change, the Episcopal Church may be downright Biblical.
Housekeeping: As I’m sure many of you will be, I will be quite busy the next few days. So it’s unlikely I’ll post until next week. (But you never know with me.) Until then, have a great Thanksgiving!
I’ve been wondering this week if we’re witnessing a phenomenon mentioned time and again in Scripture: people who willfully oppose God and His people often act in ways that bring about their destruction. The Psalms talk again and again of those who lay nets for God’s people falling into them themselves. Paul wrote in Romans 1 that willful sin debases even the minds of those who persist in it so that they irrationally destroy themselves.
In a similar vein, Euripides said, “Those whom the gods wish to destroy, they first make mad.”
Are witnessing this in recent events in the Episcopal Church?
At General Convention, TEC bishops and delegates elected the most divisive, most extremist, least qualified candidate available. If they desired to hold the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion together or at least keep bloodshed to a minimum, that surely wasn’t the way to do it. She, Katharine Schori, then promptly alienated Christians with her statements, beginning with calling Jesus “our mother.”
Then this past weekend, she hit a new low with her already infamous remarks about the childbearing and intelligence of Catholics. (Here’s another lampoon of those remarks, from a Catholic wedding no less.) Doesn’t she realize that many Episcopalians feel kinship with the Catholic church? And not a few cast furtive glances across the Tiber. I imagine yet more have decided to jump in and swim across thanks to her remarks. And a great many less Catholic-minded Anglicans find her remarks beyond the pale.
Then “almost immediately,” as a certain English comedy troupe would say, came her letter to +Schofield inviting him to shove off . . . in Christian love, of course. Does she not realize that sort of conduct serves only to alienate further those who are deliberating their future in the Episcopal Church? Did she give any thought to how this sort of vicious attack on the orthodox may use up the remaining patience of the Primates?
Even liberal-minded Anglicans sympathetic to Schori are noting (if quietly) that she is showing little if any political sense. And that’s being charitable. She’s flat out not thinking straight. If there’s a way to act in a more self-destructive manner, it’s hard to imagine it.
We may be witnessing the Episcopal Church bringing about and accelerating its own self-destruction. And in that way, for a change, the Episcopal Church may be downright Biblical.
Housekeeping: As I’m sure many of you will be, I will be quite busy the next few days. So it’s unlikely I’ll post until next week. (But you never know with me.) Until then, have a great Thanksgiving!
Monday, November 20, 2006
BREAKING: - - Schori’s Letter to +Schofield
I won’t repost the text, nor make extensive comments at this time. But the Presiding Heretic of the Episcopal Church has written a letter to the Bishop of San Joaquin that basically says “Submit or else.”
She isn’t wasting any time going after the orthodox, is she? We already see what her idea of “conversation and reconciliation” is.
And her calling +Schofield to submit to “the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them” is just hilarious. How she can miss the irony of that statement is beyond me.
Are we having fun yet?
I won’t repost the text, nor make extensive comments at this time. But the Presiding Heretic of the Episcopal Church has written a letter to the Bishop of San Joaquin that basically says “Submit or else.”
She isn’t wasting any time going after the orthodox, is she? We already see what her idea of “conversation and reconciliation” is.
And her calling +Schofield to submit to “the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them” is just hilarious. How she can miss the irony of that statement is beyond me.
Are we having fun yet?
++Purple Haze Inserts Foot in Mouth.
Wow. Speaking of attitudes of superiority, TEC Presiding Bishop Schori has held her office for less than a month, and she already has said something . . . well . . . incredibly stupid and self-destructive that reveals just a little too much of her superior attitudes:
Q: How many members of the Episcopal Church are there in this country?
A: About 2.2 million. It used to be larger percentagewise, but Episcopalians tend to be better-educated and tend to reproduce at lower rates than some other denominations. Roman Catholics and Mormons both have theological reasons for producing lots of children.
Q: Episcopalians aren’t interested in replenishing their ranks by having children?
A: No. It’s probably the opposite. We encourage people to pay attention to the stewardship of the earth and not use more than their portion.
O. K., let’s tick off the stereotypes and banalities there. Catholics are less educated and produce lots of children ‘cause the Pope tells them to. And having twenty children is bad for the environment and overcrowds the world, you know. So more enlightened people such as us don’t have so many children.
You’ve got to hand it to her though. She managed that much self-destruction in just sixty words. A very economical use of the English language there.
Amy Welborn among others is having a great deal of fun with this. I suspect it very soon won’t be so fun for ++Schori.
Wow. Speaking of attitudes of superiority, TEC Presiding Bishop Schori has held her office for less than a month, and she already has said something . . . well . . . incredibly stupid and self-destructive that reveals just a little too much of her superior attitudes:
Q: How many members of the Episcopal Church are there in this country?
A: About 2.2 million. It used to be larger percentagewise, but Episcopalians tend to be better-educated and tend to reproduce at lower rates than some other denominations. Roman Catholics and Mormons both have theological reasons for producing lots of children.
Q: Episcopalians aren’t interested in replenishing their ranks by having children?
A: No. It’s probably the opposite. We encourage people to pay attention to the stewardship of the earth and not use more than their portion.
O. K., let’s tick off the stereotypes and banalities there. Catholics are less educated and produce lots of children ‘cause the Pope tells them to. And having twenty children is bad for the environment and overcrowds the world, you know. So more enlightened people such as us don’t have so many children.
You’ve got to hand it to her though. She managed that much self-destruction in just sixty words. A very economical use of the English language there.
Amy Welborn among others is having a great deal of fun with this. I suspect it very soon won’t be so fun for ++Schori.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)