Who needs soap operas . . .
. . . when you’ve got Anglicans!
To keep you in suspense, there’s behind the scenes discussions among orthodox leaders trying to decide what to do now after the House of Bishops meeting.
There’s the Archbishop of Canterbury suddenly announcing he’s taking a vacation – a three month vacation. Fight among yourselves, boys; I’m outta here.
A freshly retired Episcopal bishop is fleeing as well . . . to Rome.
And then, of course, there’s the mess in Colorado. Dr. Mabuse has posted a wonderful send-up of one tawdy episode in that situation.
And that’s all in just one week!
Friday, March 30, 2007
Thursday, March 29, 2007
And you think I’m hard on the Episcopal Church.
Over at Stand Firm I came across this very interesting post at The Iconic Midwest, a blog that’s new to me.
TIM has been watching “the slow disintegration of the Episcopal Church” for years from the outside. But he doesn’t pull any punches:
It was once said that the Catholic Church made philosophy the handmaiden of theology. Well, the Episcopal Church is now attempting to make theology, political ideology's bitch.
And he feels that the Episcopal Church is showing us the future of the Roman Catholic Church. I disagree with him, at least for the foreseeable future, only because of the profound reform of the Episcopate and Magisterium under the long pontificate of John Paul II. But before John Paul, the Roman Catholic Church was heading in the wrong direction and will again if “progressives” or whoever needs to put in their place in the future aren’t indeed put in their place. The fight for the faith will continue until Jesus returns. But Catholics are going in the right direction for the foreseeable future.
But back to the Episcopalians, TIM, in a particularly perceptive passage, quotes Ephraim Radner’s account of a Colorado TEC leader publicly inviting him to leave the Episcopal Church. The said leader has since been appointed to a taskforce on their “common life.” TIM remarks:
There is an almost perfect Stalinist moment in all of this. Obviously the "Taskforce on Common Life" will be used as an instrument of ideological purification when entrusted to the likes of folks like these. Shall we start the purges now or later?
I think “now” is more like it, complete with show trials.
Over at Stand Firm I came across this very interesting post at The Iconic Midwest, a blog that’s new to me.
TIM has been watching “the slow disintegration of the Episcopal Church” for years from the outside. But he doesn’t pull any punches:
It was once said that the Catholic Church made philosophy the handmaiden of theology. Well, the Episcopal Church is now attempting to make theology, political ideology's bitch.
And he feels that the Episcopal Church is showing us the future of the Roman Catholic Church. I disagree with him, at least for the foreseeable future, only because of the profound reform of the Episcopate and Magisterium under the long pontificate of John Paul II. But before John Paul, the Roman Catholic Church was heading in the wrong direction and will again if “progressives” or whoever needs to put in their place in the future aren’t indeed put in their place. The fight for the faith will continue until Jesus returns. But Catholics are going in the right direction for the foreseeable future.
But back to the Episcopalians, TIM, in a particularly perceptive passage, quotes Ephraim Radner’s account of a Colorado TEC leader publicly inviting him to leave the Episcopal Church. The said leader has since been appointed to a taskforce on their “common life.” TIM remarks:
There is an almost perfect Stalinist moment in all of this. Obviously the "Taskforce on Common Life" will be used as an instrument of ideological purification when entrusted to the likes of folks like these. Shall we start the purges now or later?
I think “now” is more like it, complete with show trials.
Wednesday, March 28, 2007
Anglican Federation Growing
While I -- and just about everyone else -- wasn’t looking, the Federation of Anglican Churches in the Americas has grown. The Episcopal Missionary Church (EMC) joined just this year. And I think the Anglican Church in America (ACA) is a recent addition as well. We’re now about 450 parishes.
And last week came word (scroll down) that the Diocese of the Holy Cross in interested in joining.
I think this federation is an excellent way to go – respecting differences among orthodox Anglicans who are high church, low church, and in between while quickly bringing about greater unity based on truth. Doing this as a federation rather than outright mergers gives us more flexibility to do so. And that’s important since the need for orthodox unity is urgent in light of the events of recent years.
And Archbishop Gregory Venables is the Patron of the Federation. You can’t beat that!
I think those who find they must flee the Episcopal Church (or who are considering Anglicanism) would do well to consider jurisdictions in the Federation. But that’s another post.
While I -- and just about everyone else -- wasn’t looking, the Federation of Anglican Churches in the Americas has grown. The Episcopal Missionary Church (EMC) joined just this year. And I think the Anglican Church in America (ACA) is a recent addition as well. We’re now about 450 parishes.
And last week came word (scroll down) that the Diocese of the Holy Cross in interested in joining.
I think this federation is an excellent way to go – respecting differences among orthodox Anglicans who are high church, low church, and in between while quickly bringing about greater unity based on truth. Doing this as a federation rather than outright mergers gives us more flexibility to do so. And that’s important since the need for orthodox unity is urgent in light of the events of recent years.
And Archbishop Gregory Venables is the Patron of the Federation. You can’t beat that!
I think those who find they must flee the Episcopal Church (or who are considering Anglicanism) would do well to consider jurisdictions in the Federation. But that’s another post.
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
A Word from the Anglican Communion Network
A few days ago, I noted that the Anglican Communion Network has been rather quiet since the House of Bishops meeting. I voiced the suspicion that something big may be going on behind the scenes. And Texanglican confirmed that I might be correct.
Just now comes this in an e-mail from the Network:
Bishop Robert Duncan, moderator for the Network, is meeting with various leaders in the orthodox Anglican movement to pray about and discern the Lord's mind for a biblical, missionary and united Anglicanism in the U.S. that remains in full communion with the Anglican Communion. They ask for your prayers, your continued support and your trust at this critical time.
Let us pray indeed.
A few days ago, I noted that the Anglican Communion Network has been rather quiet since the House of Bishops meeting. I voiced the suspicion that something big may be going on behind the scenes. And Texanglican confirmed that I might be correct.
Just now comes this in an e-mail from the Network:
Bishop Robert Duncan, moderator for the Network, is meeting with various leaders in the orthodox Anglican movement to pray about and discern the Lord's mind for a biblical, missionary and united Anglicanism in the U.S. that remains in full communion with the Anglican Communion. They ask for your prayers, your continued support and your trust at this critical time.
Let us pray indeed.
Jordan Hylden on the HOB Meeting: “The Episcopal Declaration of Independence”
Over at First Things, Jordan Hylden has posted his usual perceptive analysis of the TEC House of Bishops meeting and its aftermath.
Now let me get out of the way my one quibble. I do not share his optimism, if you will, about the upcoming Covenant, that the Episcopal Church will not join it. He may be right. I certainly hope so. But in this post-modern fog in which words mean whatever one wishes them to mean and in which honesty is an artificial construct, I doubt it’s even possible to write up a document TEC won’t sign off on. It perhaps would have to explicitly proscribe pet apostate practices of the Episcopal Church. And that’s exceedingly unlikely.
But the rest of his piece isn’t so optimistic. And since he’s been rather optimistic in the past and is even now an aspirant for holy orders perhaps in the Episcopal Church, that’s saying something.
There’s so much worthy of comment and agreement in his missive, I hardly know where to begin. He sums things up well right at the start:
Last week, the Episcopal Church’s House of Bishops met and let the world know just what they think of the rest of the Anglican Communion. The official text of their resolutions ran to several thousand words, but for the effect they are likely to have on the church’s relations with the rest of the Anglican world, the bishops could just as well have taken a page out of General McAuliffe’s playbook, saved everyone a lot of time, and issued a simple one-word response: “Nuts!”
And . . .
. . . the Episcopal Church apparently decided that it will be bound by nothing beyond itself—not Scripture, not tradition, not worldwide Anglican councils, not anything. And it said so with a vehemence that was surprising, even to many of its supporters.
That’s how I read it as well.
And he notes something revealing I had frankly missed:
Discouraging as all this is, it gets worse. This is the reason the bishops gave for their rejection of the Pastoral Council: “The meaning of the Preamble to the Constitution of The Episcopal Church,” they solemnly intoned, “is determined solely by the General Convention of The Episcopal Church.”
While that may seem opaque to the casual observer, it is actually a bold and sweeping statement that, if acted upon, will lead directly to a final split with Canterbury and destroy the idea of Anglican catholicity within the Episcopal Church.
To make clear the radical nature of the Episcopal bishops’ new claim, the constitution’s preamble is worth quoting: “The Episcopal Church . . . is a constituent member of the Anglican Communion, a Fellowship within the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, of those duly constituted Dioceses, Provinces, and regional Churches in communion with the See of Canterbury, upholding and propagating the historic Faith and Order as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer.”
By stating that the meaning of this sentence is determined solely by General Convention, the Episcopal bishops are doing nothing less than claiming that what it means to be Anglican, what it means to be in communion with Canterbury, what it means to be a part of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church and hold to the historic Christian faith—that all of this is to be decided solely by the democratic vote of clergy and laypeople once every two years in a Marriott hotel convention room, with reference to nothing and nobody. It is breathtaking in its arrogance.
Indeed it is. It kind of reminds me of the U. S. Supreme Court. But I better not get started on that.
I also concur that the bishop's Blame the Primates line is also striking in its arrogance, “a long, churlish, and supercilious explanation of their actions.”
And some of you thought I was over the top for my recent porcine analogy.
He concludes by quoting a number of orthodox commentators who state that there is no longer a place left for conservatives in the Episcopal Church. And Hylden seems reluctantly to agree.
There’s much more. I commend his column to you.
Over at First Things, Jordan Hylden has posted his usual perceptive analysis of the TEC House of Bishops meeting and its aftermath.
Now let me get out of the way my one quibble. I do not share his optimism, if you will, about the upcoming Covenant, that the Episcopal Church will not join it. He may be right. I certainly hope so. But in this post-modern fog in which words mean whatever one wishes them to mean and in which honesty is an artificial construct, I doubt it’s even possible to write up a document TEC won’t sign off on. It perhaps would have to explicitly proscribe pet apostate practices of the Episcopal Church. And that’s exceedingly unlikely.
But the rest of his piece isn’t so optimistic. And since he’s been rather optimistic in the past and is even now an aspirant for holy orders perhaps in the Episcopal Church, that’s saying something.
There’s so much worthy of comment and agreement in his missive, I hardly know where to begin. He sums things up well right at the start:
Last week, the Episcopal Church’s House of Bishops met and let the world know just what they think of the rest of the Anglican Communion. The official text of their resolutions ran to several thousand words, but for the effect they are likely to have on the church’s relations with the rest of the Anglican world, the bishops could just as well have taken a page out of General McAuliffe’s playbook, saved everyone a lot of time, and issued a simple one-word response: “Nuts!”
And . . .
. . . the Episcopal Church apparently decided that it will be bound by nothing beyond itself—not Scripture, not tradition, not worldwide Anglican councils, not anything. And it said so with a vehemence that was surprising, even to many of its supporters.
That’s how I read it as well.
And he notes something revealing I had frankly missed:
Discouraging as all this is, it gets worse. This is the reason the bishops gave for their rejection of the Pastoral Council: “The meaning of the Preamble to the Constitution of The Episcopal Church,” they solemnly intoned, “is determined solely by the General Convention of The Episcopal Church.”
While that may seem opaque to the casual observer, it is actually a bold and sweeping statement that, if acted upon, will lead directly to a final split with Canterbury and destroy the idea of Anglican catholicity within the Episcopal Church.
To make clear the radical nature of the Episcopal bishops’ new claim, the constitution’s preamble is worth quoting: “The Episcopal Church . . . is a constituent member of the Anglican Communion, a Fellowship within the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, of those duly constituted Dioceses, Provinces, and regional Churches in communion with the See of Canterbury, upholding and propagating the historic Faith and Order as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer.”
By stating that the meaning of this sentence is determined solely by General Convention, the Episcopal bishops are doing nothing less than claiming that what it means to be Anglican, what it means to be in communion with Canterbury, what it means to be a part of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church and hold to the historic Christian faith—that all of this is to be decided solely by the democratic vote of clergy and laypeople once every two years in a Marriott hotel convention room, with reference to nothing and nobody. It is breathtaking in its arrogance.
Indeed it is. It kind of reminds me of the U. S. Supreme Court. But I better not get started on that.
I also concur that the bishop's Blame the Primates line is also striking in its arrogance, “a long, churlish, and supercilious explanation of their actions.”
And some of you thought I was over the top for my recent porcine analogy.
He concludes by quoting a number of orthodox commentators who state that there is no longer a place left for conservatives in the Episcopal Church. And Hylden seems reluctantly to agree.
There’s much more. I commend his column to you.
Monday, March 26, 2007
Christian Schools and Families . . . Again
My first thought upon hearing that a Catholic school has banned students from MySpace, even at home, on pain of suspension wasn’t, “What gives them the right?”
It is a private school. Therefore it can mandate that students must say a hundred Hail Marys a day while standing on their heads should those in charge so desire. It has the right.
No, my first thought (or close to first) was, “There we go again.” There’s another Christian school running roughshod over families. Granted, what the school in question is doing is exceptional. But it’s far from the first time I’ve seen Christian schools push around families in an unchristian manner.
While living in Denton, I was familiar with a Christian school that showed little regard for families and their time by assigning excessive (and sometimes dubious) homework even to elementary school students. So my thinking upon hearing the MySpace story is why do Christian schools so often intrude on turf that belongs to families?
Christian schools, if genuinely Christian, should know better about respecting family space. Yet they often show less respect than public schools. And with the sorry track record public schools often have in this area, that’s saying something.
If a school, private or public, told me that a kid of mine couldn’t use MySpace anywhere at all, even in the home, I would ask what business is that of theirs. And I would be tempted to use less than wholesome language in so doing. People can have different opinions about MySpace. And they are quite welcome to espouse them. But if someone tries to impose their opinion on my house, they are asking for a fight.
And it is no school’s business what social networking web sites kids use at home. That is the family’s business. You’d think a Catholic school of all institutions would know that and respect the prerogatives of families.
What provokes me further are the parents at the school that support the new policy. What? They need the school to maintain order at home? Or do they think their opinion about MySpace should be imposed on all families of that school? Stick to looking after your own children, Stupid!
And some Christian schools also would do well to mind their own business a bit more, and leave family matters to families.
My first thought upon hearing that a Catholic school has banned students from MySpace, even at home, on pain of suspension wasn’t, “What gives them the right?”
It is a private school. Therefore it can mandate that students must say a hundred Hail Marys a day while standing on their heads should those in charge so desire. It has the right.
No, my first thought (or close to first) was, “There we go again.” There’s another Christian school running roughshod over families. Granted, what the school in question is doing is exceptional. But it’s far from the first time I’ve seen Christian schools push around families in an unchristian manner.
While living in Denton, I was familiar with a Christian school that showed little regard for families and their time by assigning excessive (and sometimes dubious) homework even to elementary school students. So my thinking upon hearing the MySpace story is why do Christian schools so often intrude on turf that belongs to families?
Christian schools, if genuinely Christian, should know better about respecting family space. Yet they often show less respect than public schools. And with the sorry track record public schools often have in this area, that’s saying something.
If a school, private or public, told me that a kid of mine couldn’t use MySpace anywhere at all, even in the home, I would ask what business is that of theirs. And I would be tempted to use less than wholesome language in so doing. People can have different opinions about MySpace. And they are quite welcome to espouse them. But if someone tries to impose their opinion on my house, they are asking for a fight.
And it is no school’s business what social networking web sites kids use at home. That is the family’s business. You’d think a Catholic school of all institutions would know that and respect the prerogatives of families.
What provokes me further are the parents at the school that support the new policy. What? They need the school to maintain order at home? Or do they think their opinion about MySpace should be imposed on all families of that school? Stick to looking after your own children, Stupid!
And some Christian schools also would do well to mind their own business a bit more, and leave family matters to families.
Sunday, March 25, 2007
New Links
I finally got bored enough to add some links. Watching two teams I *ahem* dislike (Georgetown and UNC. I’m rooting for UNC, God help me.) play to go to the Final Four can do that to me.
I am very selective in my links. You may have noticed my link list is short. That’s not just laziness.
Anyway, I’m adding Kraalspace and The Bovina Bloviator mainly because both are so brilliantly written I’m tempted to jealousy. I thought it more godly to link them instead.
The Continuum focuses on The Anglican Continuum, of course, of which I’m a proud member.
Prydain is chock full of red meat for mind and spirit and is therefore worthy of my link list.
I finally got bored enough to add some links. Watching two teams I *ahem* dislike (Georgetown and UNC. I’m rooting for UNC, God help me.) play to go to the Final Four can do that to me.
I am very selective in my links. You may have noticed my link list is short. That’s not just laziness.
Anyway, I’m adding Kraalspace and The Bovina Bloviator mainly because both are so brilliantly written I’m tempted to jealousy. I thought it more godly to link them instead.
The Continuum focuses on The Anglican Continuum, of course, of which I’m a proud member.
Prydain is chock full of red meat for mind and spirit and is therefore worthy of my link list.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)