Matt Gunter on Northern Michigan: Why We Should Not Proceed

The Rev. Forrester is also primary author and a signatory of A Response from the Diocese of Northern Michigan’s Standing Committee to the “Dar es Salaam Communiqué,” in which there is the following:

“Baptism confirms this most basic truth which is at once, the Good News: all is of God, without condition and without restriction.”

This is incongruous with each of the Eucharistic Prayers and the Rite of Baptism, particularly the renunciations.

“Because each and every one of us is an only begotten child of God; because we, as the church, are invited by God to see all of creation as having life only insofar as it is in God; because everything, without exception, is the living presence, or incarnation, of God”

Claiming “each and every one of us is an only begotten child of God” and that “everything, without exception, is the living presence, or incarnation of God” is a pantheism incompatible what we say (and pray) we believe about Jesus Christ as the Incarnation of God. It also contradicts the language we use in every rite of the Book of Common Prayer, not to mention the Catechism.

I know these are serious charges. I do not make them lightly. I am not given to finding false teaching under every rock. And it is no small thing to reject a candidate put forward by a diocese to be its bishop. But I also believe, with Charles Gore, that ours is a tradition that is “conspicuously orthodox on the great fundamentals of the Trinity and the Incarnation” (Roman Catholic Claims, p. 173). If we believe the rule of our praying is the rule of our believing, then the prayers of our common worship must guide what we teach and preach. One whose stated beliefs are as at odds with that common worship as are the Rev. Forrester’s can hardly “guard the faith, unity, and discipline of the Church” (BCP p. 517).

Read it all.


Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Episcopal Church (TEC), TEC Bishops, TEC Conflicts, TEC Conflicts: Northern Michigan, Theology

6 comments on “Matt Gunter on Northern Michigan: Why We Should Not Proceed

  1. Fr. Dale says:

    [blockquote]We are a tradition that has sought to embody a generous orthodoxy. But even the most generous orthodoxy will need occasionally to say “no” to teachings that contradict that orthodoxy. The Rev. Forrester’s words indicate that he has departed the room and moved beyond the realm of even a very generous orthodoxy.[/blockquote] How much of KTF is a creation of TEC? Hasn’t TEC itself “….departed the room and moved beyond the realm of generous orthodoxy.” The consent process will be a defining moment for TEC because as Ann Holmes Redding stated, she did not see her faith as outside of the mainstream of the Episcopal Church. Even the phrase “a very generous orthodoxy” sounds like “jumbo shrimp” to me. TEC will be judging itself as it judges Forrester. This is also an example of how one Bishop (Bishop Wolfe) demonstrated by her orthodoxy, that she is a bishop for the whole church.

  2. David Wilson says:

    There was a movie a few years back starring Sean Connery called “Finding Forrester”. Well, we’ve have found Forrester and we’ve found him wanting. Too bad, so sad but he no business being priest let alone a bishop in Christ’s one, holy, catholic and apostolic church. That’s it, Fort Pitt.

  3. robroy says:

    “Because each and every one of us is an only begotten child of God…”

    From my Sunday school lessons back in the 6th grade or so: A dog begets dogs, humans beget humans, God begets God.

    Am I God? Is Thew Forrester God? or more importantly – Does Thew Forrester think that he is God?

  4. libraryjim says:

    KTF is mistaken. Only those who follow Jesus are called ‘children of God’:

    John 1: 10He [Jesus] was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. 11He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. 12Yet to all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God— 13children born not of natural descent,[c] nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God.

    [i]c. John 1:13 Greek of bloods[/i]

    (New International Version)

  5. frreed says:

    Frankly, not going forward with KTF’s election proves nothing. It does not show any true orthodoxy in TEC. It does not show a process by which faithful nominees as selected by dioceses. What it does show is that when enough noise is made and light is given, they will throw their own under the bus.

    KJS & Co. are as heterodox, or worse than Forrester. He may just be more honest about his syncretism. There is no victory in his nomination being arrested.

    The sad thing that if people (primarily bishops) had been so outraged about the Spongs, Chanes, Griswolds, Schoris, and about 500 other nominees for the office of Bishop and candidates for the priesthood we would not be at this point.

    In reality the apostasy of TEC makes KTF seem like a 3rd grader doing theology. He appears to be having fun playing with his toys. KJS and the majority of the HoB appear to be skilfully removing TEC from the realms of the Church.

  6. tjmcmahon says:

    Something that seems to be forgotten in all the hubbub surrounding the bishop-elect is that EVERY, SINGLE Seminary trained presbyter in the diocese of N. Michigan, along with every, single member of the standing committee, and the retired bishop Ray, are signatories to the “Dar response” and the “Affirmations.” And then those same people were given power to determine a selection process for bishop. Those same people have trained EVERY one of the auxiliary clergy (not to mention running the “discernment” processes that have chosen who to ordain). In any orthodox diocese, the lot of them would be deposed. There are no “professional” clergy in this diocese who believe God has only one, only begotten Son. There are a few auxiliary clergy who slipped through the process. Arguably, the auxiliaries are closer to the church in doctrine than the seminary grads.