I am slightly tied up catching up with the world this morning. But I want to direct you to this piece on “the permanent scandal of the Vatican” by First Things’ Joseph Bottum. It is the best big picture take on the subject I’ve seen yet.
Hat tip to The Anchoress, who also has written very thoughtfully on the subject.
Monday, April 26, 2010
Friday, April 23, 2010
Global South Singapore Communique: No More Business as Usual
The Communique from the Singapore Global South conference is out. The concluding paragraphs deal forcefully with the present Anglican Communion issues:
16. In contrast, we continue to grieve over the life of The Episcopal Church USA (TEC) and the Anglican Church of Canada and all those churches that have rejected the Way of the Lord as expressed in Holy Scripture. The recent action of TEC in the election and intended consecration of Mary Glasspool, a partnered lesbian, as a bishop in Los Angeles, has demonstrated, yet again, a total disregard for the mind of the Communion. These churches continue in their defiance as they set themselves on a course that contradicts the plain teaching of the Holy Scriptures on matters so fundamental that they affect the very salvation of those involved. Such actions violate the integrity of the Gospel, the Communion and our Christian witness to the rest of the world. In the face of this we dare not remain silent and must respond with appropriate action.
17. We uphold the courageous actions taken by Archbishops Mouneer Anis (Jerusalem and the Middle East), Henry Orombi (Uganda) and Ian Ernest (Indian Ocean) and are encouraged by their decision not to participate in meetings of the various Instruments of Communion at which representatives of The Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada are present. We understand their actions to be in protest of the failure to correct the ongoing crisis situation.
18. Some of our Provinces are already in a state of broken and impaired Communion with The Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada. Their continued refusal to honor the many requests [1] made of them by the various meetings of the Primates throughout the Windsor Process have brought discredit to our witness and we urge the Archbishop of Canterbury to implement the recommended actions. In light of the above, this Fourth South-to-South Encounter encourages our various Provinces to reconsider their communion relationships with The Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada until it becomes clear that there is genuine repentance.
19. We were pleased to welcome two Communion Partner bishops from The Episcopal Church USA (TEC) and acknowledge that with them there are many within TEC who do not accept their church’s innovations. We assure them of our loving and prayerful support. We are grateful that the recently formed Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) is a faithful expression of Anglicanism. We welcomed them as partners in the Gospel and our hope is that all provinces will be in full communion with the clergy and people of the ACNA and the Communion Partners.
20. For many generations Anglicans have lived together with a shared understanding of our common faith; indeed among our great gifts has been the Book of Common Prayer that has provided a foundation for our common life. In recent years the peace of our Communion has been deeply wounded by those who continue to claim the name Anglican but who pursue an agenda of their own desire in opposition to historic norms of faith, teaching and practice. This has led to a number of developments including the GAFCON meeting that took place in Jerusalem in June 2008. [2]
21. Global South leaders have been in the forefront of the development of the ‘Anglican Covenant’ that seeks to articulate the essential elements of our faith together with means by which we might exercise meaningful and loving discipline for those who depart from the ‘faith once for all delivered to the saints.’ We are currently reviewing the proposed Covenant to find ways to strengthen it in order for it to fulfill its purpose. For example, we believe that all those who adopt the Covenant must be in compliance with Lambeth 1.10. Meanwhile we recognize that the Primates Meeting, being responsible for Faith and Order, should be the body to oversee the Covenant in its implementation, not the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion.
22. Over the last 20 years we have been distracted by conflicts and controversies that have kept us from effectively fulfilling the Great Commission. While we have been so distracted, Christian heritage, identity and influence has continued to decline in the West. We believe that there is a need to review the entire Anglican Communion structure; especially the Instruments of Communion and the Anglican Communion office; in order to achieve an authentic expression of the current reality of our Anglican Communion.
Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us. Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:1,2)
Paragraph 21 is most telling. Past communion agreements have been signed with a wink and a nod. See Frank Griswold’s signing of the Windsor Report. The Global South says that will not do with the Anglican Covenant and insists, for starters, on compliance with Lambeth 1.10 before a province can sign. Since that means no gay bishops or blessing of homosexual relationships, that would rule out The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada.
The communiqué also says no to Rowan Williams’ practice of anointing stacked committees to further undermine communion agreements. So forget a stacked so-called Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion to oversee the Covenant. Instead, the Primates Meeting is the appropriate and more representative overseer.
Paragraph 22 further targets stacked Anglican Communion structures, particularly the Anglican Communion office. And one doesn’t have to read much between the lines of the communiqué to see that His Grace’s video request for more patience and timeand dithering is politely ignored. There is instead a since of urgency finally to get past the too many years of being “distracted by conflicts and controversies that have kept us from effectively fulfilling the Great Commission.”
In short, the communiqué forcefully and in some detail says “No” to what has become business as usual under Rowan Williams.
16. In contrast, we continue to grieve over the life of The Episcopal Church USA (TEC) and the Anglican Church of Canada and all those churches that have rejected the Way of the Lord as expressed in Holy Scripture. The recent action of TEC in the election and intended consecration of Mary Glasspool, a partnered lesbian, as a bishop in Los Angeles, has demonstrated, yet again, a total disregard for the mind of the Communion. These churches continue in their defiance as they set themselves on a course that contradicts the plain teaching of the Holy Scriptures on matters so fundamental that they affect the very salvation of those involved. Such actions violate the integrity of the Gospel, the Communion and our Christian witness to the rest of the world. In the face of this we dare not remain silent and must respond with appropriate action.
17. We uphold the courageous actions taken by Archbishops Mouneer Anis (Jerusalem and the Middle East), Henry Orombi (Uganda) and Ian Ernest (Indian Ocean) and are encouraged by their decision not to participate in meetings of the various Instruments of Communion at which representatives of The Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada are present. We understand their actions to be in protest of the failure to correct the ongoing crisis situation.
18. Some of our Provinces are already in a state of broken and impaired Communion with The Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada. Their continued refusal to honor the many requests [1] made of them by the various meetings of the Primates throughout the Windsor Process have brought discredit to our witness and we urge the Archbishop of Canterbury to implement the recommended actions. In light of the above, this Fourth South-to-South Encounter encourages our various Provinces to reconsider their communion relationships with The Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada until it becomes clear that there is genuine repentance.
19. We were pleased to welcome two Communion Partner bishops from The Episcopal Church USA (TEC) and acknowledge that with them there are many within TEC who do not accept their church’s innovations. We assure them of our loving and prayerful support. We are grateful that the recently formed Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) is a faithful expression of Anglicanism. We welcomed them as partners in the Gospel and our hope is that all provinces will be in full communion with the clergy and people of the ACNA and the Communion Partners.
20. For many generations Anglicans have lived together with a shared understanding of our common faith; indeed among our great gifts has been the Book of Common Prayer that has provided a foundation for our common life. In recent years the peace of our Communion has been deeply wounded by those who continue to claim the name Anglican but who pursue an agenda of their own desire in opposition to historic norms of faith, teaching and practice. This has led to a number of developments including the GAFCON meeting that took place in Jerusalem in June 2008. [2]
21. Global South leaders have been in the forefront of the development of the ‘Anglican Covenant’ that seeks to articulate the essential elements of our faith together with means by which we might exercise meaningful and loving discipline for those who depart from the ‘faith once for all delivered to the saints.’ We are currently reviewing the proposed Covenant to find ways to strengthen it in order for it to fulfill its purpose. For example, we believe that all those who adopt the Covenant must be in compliance with Lambeth 1.10. Meanwhile we recognize that the Primates Meeting, being responsible for Faith and Order, should be the body to oversee the Covenant in its implementation, not the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion.
22. Over the last 20 years we have been distracted by conflicts and controversies that have kept us from effectively fulfilling the Great Commission. While we have been so distracted, Christian heritage, identity and influence has continued to decline in the West. We believe that there is a need to review the entire Anglican Communion structure; especially the Instruments of Communion and the Anglican Communion office; in order to achieve an authentic expression of the current reality of our Anglican Communion.
Therefore, since we are surrounded by such a great cloud of witnesses, let us throw off everything that hinders and the sin that so easily entangles, and let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us. Let us fix our eyes on Jesus, the author and perfecter of our faith, who for the joy set before him endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. (Hebrews 12:1,2)
Paragraph 21 is most telling. Past communion agreements have been signed with a wink and a nod. See Frank Griswold’s signing of the Windsor Report. The Global South says that will not do with the Anglican Covenant and insists, for starters, on compliance with Lambeth 1.10 before a province can sign. Since that means no gay bishops or blessing of homosexual relationships, that would rule out The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada.
The communiqué also says no to Rowan Williams’ practice of anointing stacked committees to further undermine communion agreements. So forget a stacked so-called Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion to oversee the Covenant. Instead, the Primates Meeting is the appropriate and more representative overseer.
Paragraph 22 further targets stacked Anglican Communion structures, particularly the Anglican Communion office. And one doesn’t have to read much between the lines of the communiqué to see that His Grace’s video request for more patience and time
In short, the communiqué forcefully and in some detail says “No” to what has become business as usual under Rowan Williams.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Archbishop Duncan Presides at GSE4 Holy Communion
I don’t want to read too much into this. But I think it worthy of note that ACNA Archbishop Robert Duncan has presided at Holy Communion at the Global South-to-South Encounter meeting in Singapore.
Wednesday, April 21, 2010
Report: GS Reaction to ++Rowan’s Video Address is . . . Silence.
Rowan Williams via video to Singapore asked for more patience from the Global South. He in effect asked, “Trust me.” For after all, “as I speak to you now, I am in discussion with a number of people around the world about what consequences might follow from [the election and consecration of Mary Glasspool in Los Angeles].”
Wow! The Archbishop of Canterbury is in yet more discussion! We must therefore wait upon him no matter how many years he strings us along!
The reaction of the audience at the Global South conference was much less snarky than mine. However . . .
. . . after Archbishop Rowan Williams' video address to the Global South-to-South Encounter audience was over, there was silence. No one applauded, and glances around the room revealed lots of head-shaking and eye-rolling. According to one of the sources, "it did not go off well."
And that is as it should be when someone who has betrayed trust again and again . . . asks for more trust.
Wow! The Archbishop of Canterbury is in yet more discussion! We must therefore wait upon him no matter how many years he strings us along!
The reaction of the audience at the Global South conference was much less snarky than mine. However . . .
. . . after Archbishop Rowan Williams' video address to the Global South-to-South Encounter audience was over, there was silence. No one applauded, and glances around the room revealed lots of head-shaking and eye-rolling. According to one of the sources, "it did not go off well."
And that is as it should be when someone who has betrayed trust again and again . . . asks for more trust.
Tuesday, April 20, 2010
++Okoh on the Gospel and Apostasy
After reading ++Nicholas Okoh’s address on “The Gospel of Jesus Christ” at the Global South meeting, I am glad he is the new Primate of Nigeria.
Two things about the address stand out to me. First, it is very scholarly, packing a lot of meaty teaching into one address.
Second, at the end he calls out those *coughTECcough* who have committed “the treachery of another Gospel which is afraid of and denies the deity of Christ.” His concluding words:
. . . the deity of Christ is increasingly becoming offensive in some quarters in our communion. For others the uniqueness of Christ cannot be taught in our pluralistic society. But pluralism was there, in the first country. The Jewish religion was there, so were the Greek Philosophies and religions, hence it was said that the cross was foolishness to the Greeks, and a stumbling block to the Jews. The creeds, the 39 articles (see 2, 3, 4) and the Holy Scriptures, all uphold the deity and uniqueness of Jesus, the Christ. To deny these fundamentals is to abandon the way; it is apostasy; it is “another gospel”, which is condemned in scripture.
Methinks Dr. Rowan Williams’ desire that this Global South meeting does . . . not much of anything about The Episcopal Church and its enablers just might be disappointed.
Hat tip to Northern Plains Anglicans.
Two things about the address stand out to me. First, it is very scholarly, packing a lot of meaty teaching into one address.
Second, at the end he calls out those *coughTECcough* who have committed “the treachery of another Gospel which is afraid of and denies the deity of Christ.” His concluding words:
. . . the deity of Christ is increasingly becoming offensive in some quarters in our communion. For others the uniqueness of Christ cannot be taught in our pluralistic society. But pluralism was there, in the first country. The Jewish religion was there, so were the Greek Philosophies and religions, hence it was said that the cross was foolishness to the Greeks, and a stumbling block to the Jews. The creeds, the 39 articles (see 2, 3, 4) and the Holy Scriptures, all uphold the deity and uniqueness of Jesus, the Christ. To deny these fundamentals is to abandon the way; it is apostasy; it is “another gospel”, which is condemned in scripture.
Methinks Dr. Rowan Williams’ desire that this Global South meeting does . . . not much of anything about The Episcopal Church and its enablers just might be disappointed.
Hat tip to Northern Plains Anglicans.
Tea Parties and the Arrogance of Obama and Clinton
Another benefit of the Tea Party protests I forgot to mention yesterday is that they have smoked out just how arrogant Democrat leaders are. Thousands protest mainly to ask that they be left alone and that their children not be saddled with ruinous national debt and taxes. That’s not asking for much. The response from Obama, Pelosi and their ilk? Ridicule and smears.
Recent statements on Tea Parties from Obama and Bill Clinton are typical. Charles Krauthammer sums up their arrogance well.
On Obama saying those ungrateful peons who protested on April 15th should “be saying thank you”:
I think it was Obama with his usual condescension — except he ratcheted it up to Code Orange into snootiness — where he looks down his nose at the gun-and-god crowd, the lumpenproletariat, as he sees it. And he ridicules them because they're not grateful enough to him. . . .
And I think it is in his character to ridicule — this is a man on the day he won the Democratic nomination said that day would mark a day on which the earth began to heal and the oceans recede. So he does not have a low opinion of himself.
On Bill Clinton once again using the Oklahoma City bombing to smear the Right:
I think it's disgusting. It's a replay of what he did — his administration did — after Oklahoma City. Remember, that happened shortly after he got crushed in the mid-term elections, the Gingrich revolution, that he began his comeback by exploiting Oklahoma City and implying — and having his minions imply — that it was a result of Newt and Rush and all the agitated, angry white males, as it was called by the media at the time. This is a replay.
When there was dissent in the Bush years, he was called a Nazi, Cheney a war criminal, and there was actually a play on the assassination of George Bush — you didn't hear a word from him or others about agitated language.
When a Republican is in power, dissent is the highest form of patriotism. And when a Democrat is in power, dissent is near treasonous and a call to mutiny and insurrection. This is really disgraceful.
I couldn’t say it better myself.
There is nothing like a little opposition to bring out the arrogance of those who worship their own power. The opposition of Tea Partiers to the Obama regime has exposed that arrogance in spades. And for that we should be thankful . . . to the Tea Party movement.
Recent statements on Tea Parties from Obama and Bill Clinton are typical. Charles Krauthammer sums up their arrogance well.
On Obama saying those ungrateful peons who protested on April 15th should “be saying thank you”:
I think it was Obama with his usual condescension — except he ratcheted it up to Code Orange into snootiness — where he looks down his nose at the gun-and-god crowd, the lumpenproletariat, as he sees it. And he ridicules them because they're not grateful enough to him. . . .
And I think it is in his character to ridicule — this is a man on the day he won the Democratic nomination said that day would mark a day on which the earth began to heal and the oceans recede. So he does not have a low opinion of himself.
On Bill Clinton once again using the Oklahoma City bombing to smear the Right:
I think it's disgusting. It's a replay of what he did — his administration did — after Oklahoma City. Remember, that happened shortly after he got crushed in the mid-term elections, the Gingrich revolution, that he began his comeback by exploiting Oklahoma City and implying — and having his minions imply — that it was a result of Newt and Rush and all the agitated, angry white males, as it was called by the media at the time. This is a replay.
When there was dissent in the Bush years, he was called a Nazi, Cheney a war criminal, and there was actually a play on the assassination of George Bush — you didn't hear a word from him or others about agitated language.
When a Republican is in power, dissent is the highest form of patriotism. And when a Democrat is in power, dissent is near treasonous and a call to mutiny and insurrection. This is really disgraceful.
I couldn’t say it better myself.
There is nothing like a little opposition to bring out the arrogance of those who worship their own power. The opposition of Tea Partiers to the Obama regime has exposed that arrogance in spades. And for that we should be thankful . . . to the Tea Party movement.
Monday, April 19, 2010
Whither the Tea Party Movement?
Since the April 15th Tea Party protests, I’ve been thinking about the future direction and strategy of the Tea Party movement.
And I think it is time for a shift in strategy.
To date, Tea Partiers have put a lot of energy into public protests. And those have been successful, serving the following purposes:
1. The protests let those unhappy with the radical direction of Obama and his allies know they are not alone and not powerless. This is significant. I was among those who felt overwhelmed by the onslaught of Obama in 2009. Remember when it seemed he had a new Leftist initiative every day last Spring? My hope for this country was not very strong at that time. And I was not alone in that regard. The quick rise of Tea Party protests revived hope.
2. The protests made it easier and more acceptable to oppose Obama and his agenda. It is human nature that it is easier to take a stand when one sees thousands of others taking the same stand.
3. The protests provided a vent for popular anger with Obama and his allies. As I’ve posted, when a government shows such disregard for consent of the governed as the Democrats have, the anger that disregard provokes raises the danger of violence. The Tea Party protests did the country a service by providing an important vent to popular anger.
4. The protests helped slow the progress of Obama’s agenda. They were a very visible part of strong public opinion against Obama’s Leftist agenda. That public opinion increased resistance in Congress to Obama’s designs. Yes, Obama and Congress did a lot of damage. It would have been worse without the Tea Party movement.
Others can surely find additional benefits of the Tea Party protests. And many thanks to those who organized and led those protests!
But now I think it is time for those in the Tea Party movement to shift their energies from protests to the nuts and bolts of working the electoral process for the following reasons:
1. Many sympathetic to libertarian/conservative ideas think that elections really don’t matter. So they cast their vote foolishly in ways which do not help or even hurt conservative candidates (by, for example, voting for a third party candidate when a conservative Republican candidate has a chance of winning) or they do not vote at all. These need to be educated and exhorted to vote and vote wisely. Protesting in the streets may instead feed the attitude that the more prosaic task of casting a wise vote doesn’t matter.
2. Human energy and enthusiasm is limited. Therefore, turnout for tea party protests are likely to decrease, which would not help the cause. Personally, I attended two tea party protests last year. But I am not eager to attend another. Holding protests with lower turnout would send the wrong message.
3. Because energy and enthusiasm is limited, we must make sure to channel limited energy into the elections, through voter registration, getting out the vote, working for good candidates, etc. Our anger/enthusiam won’t do much good if we don’t turn out the vote to unelect those who attack our freedom and to elect those who will defend it.
4. Although the Tea Party movement has done an admirable job of protesting peacefully and of not letting their protests be hijacked by loons and Leftists, continued protests are very risky in this environment. Combine a news media and a regime eager to discredit the Tea Party movement with the fact that protests (no matter what the cause) almost always attract a few who are misguided or just don’t restrain themselves well, and you get an environment where further protests can easily backfire.
In short, I see the benefits of continued protests as diminishing while the risks increase. And that at a time when the nearing November elections, as well as the primaries beforehand, demand that we pour time and energy (as well as money) into getting the right people elected. That should now become the focus of the Tea Party movement.
And I think it is time for a shift in strategy.
To date, Tea Partiers have put a lot of energy into public protests. And those have been successful, serving the following purposes:
1. The protests let those unhappy with the radical direction of Obama and his allies know they are not alone and not powerless. This is significant. I was among those who felt overwhelmed by the onslaught of Obama in 2009. Remember when it seemed he had a new Leftist initiative every day last Spring? My hope for this country was not very strong at that time. And I was not alone in that regard. The quick rise of Tea Party protests revived hope.
2. The protests made it easier and more acceptable to oppose Obama and his agenda. It is human nature that it is easier to take a stand when one sees thousands of others taking the same stand.
3. The protests provided a vent for popular anger with Obama and his allies. As I’ve posted, when a government shows such disregard for consent of the governed as the Democrats have, the anger that disregard provokes raises the danger of violence. The Tea Party protests did the country a service by providing an important vent to popular anger.
4. The protests helped slow the progress of Obama’s agenda. They were a very visible part of strong public opinion against Obama’s Leftist agenda. That public opinion increased resistance in Congress to Obama’s designs. Yes, Obama and Congress did a lot of damage. It would have been worse without the Tea Party movement.
Others can surely find additional benefits of the Tea Party protests. And many thanks to those who organized and led those protests!
But now I think it is time for those in the Tea Party movement to shift their energies from protests to the nuts and bolts of working the electoral process for the following reasons:
1. Many sympathetic to libertarian/conservative ideas think that elections really don’t matter. So they cast their vote foolishly in ways which do not help or even hurt conservative candidates (by, for example, voting for a third party candidate when a conservative Republican candidate has a chance of winning) or they do not vote at all. These need to be educated and exhorted to vote and vote wisely. Protesting in the streets may instead feed the attitude that the more prosaic task of casting a wise vote doesn’t matter.
2. Human energy and enthusiasm is limited. Therefore, turnout for tea party protests are likely to decrease, which would not help the cause. Personally, I attended two tea party protests last year. But I am not eager to attend another. Holding protests with lower turnout would send the wrong message.
3. Because energy and enthusiasm is limited, we must make sure to channel limited energy into the elections, through voter registration, getting out the vote, working for good candidates, etc. Our anger/enthusiam won’t do much good if we don’t turn out the vote to unelect those who attack our freedom and to elect those who will defend it.
4. Although the Tea Party movement has done an admirable job of protesting peacefully and of not letting their protests be hijacked by loons and Leftists, continued protests are very risky in this environment. Combine a news media and a regime eager to discredit the Tea Party movement with the fact that protests (no matter what the cause) almost always attract a few who are misguided or just don’t restrain themselves well, and you get an environment where further protests can easily backfire.
In short, I see the benefits of continued protests as diminishing while the risks increase. And that at a time when the nearing November elections, as well as the primaries beforehand, demand that we pour time and energy (as well as money) into getting the right people elected. That should now become the focus of the Tea Party movement.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)