If progressives want to know why so many orthodox Anglicans feel that they cannot remain in the Episcopal Church, they should look to a large degree at their own words and actions. The attribution of speculated, and damaging, motives to orthodox Anglican leaders; “glee” at seeming progressive victories; insults and statements that the departures are inconsequential — all of these things, and many more, contribute to orthodox Anglicans feeling that they cannot stay in the Episcopal Church.
The view of orthodox Anglican leaders is so negative and one-sided on the progressive end that people are left with a stark choice. Given that all of us, including godly leaders, struggle with sin daily and have our own weaknesses, are orthodox Christian leaders such as (but not limited to) Minns and Duncan to be respected and trusted? Do they have good ends in mind for the church of God, and for the body of Christ? Or are they nefarious leaders who have been plotting the destruction of one segment of the body of Christ for a decade?
This is not the same question as whether to leave the Episcopal Church. Orthodox Anglicans hold different convictions on that matter, and some are still working through that issue. Rather, the question concerns whether we essentially trust orthodox Christian leaders to have the good of the body of Christ in mind, even if we are not going to follow certain ones in either leaving or staying in (as the case may be) the Episcopal Church. To allude to a choice that Harry Potter must make in J.K. Rowling’s latest bestseller, this is a question of choosing what we believe amid competing voices. The times demand this when orthodox Christian leaders are slandered with abandon.
Forgive me if I don’t grieve for the poor, oppressed “orthodox.”
It’s very hard for me to have much sympathy at the moment. We’ve slandered you? Perhaps our patience runs out at times and we get a little snippy. Why? Let’s see here, being called such things as agents of Satan, a cancer that is to be cut out, purposeful destroyers of the church, lower than dogs, apostates, heretics, children of the Devil, destined for hell, setting up a new religion, willful rejecters of Christ, a gangrenous appendage, etc. Why would be possibly question the motives of certain “reasserters” who have either said such things or encouraged them? How about death threats against a certain person who was elected and confirmed a bishop, such that he had to wear a bulletproof vest under his vestments? How very Christian.
Let me put it simply. The current atmosphere is downright toxic. You don’t trust us. (I’m sure you’ve got reason not to.) But frankly, we don’t trust you either, and that goes back quite a ways. You complain about being vilified and ascribed with hidden motives. Okay, give us a reason to think that you’re serious about reconciliation because right now, everything we’ve heard or seen says otherwise. I’m willing to work on the problems on my end, but you’ve got to do the same on yours.
Kevin
I won’t deny that “reappraisers” are sometimes quick to level the finger of accusation at reasserting leaders. And as I’ve said on the other thread, in the particular case of ++Akinola’s recent statement and who wrote it, I think the accusations are pretty ridiculous and don’t do a lot of credit to our side.
But let’s be fair… reasserters are wont to dogpile on reappraising leaders as well. Every time ++KJS says something and the story is posted on T19, there is guaranteed to follow a lengthy thread of comments attacking her statement, her theological acumen, and her personal integrity. Not infrequently, particularly if the statement involved property disputes, “815” will be assumed to be the source of viciously Machiavellian political maneuvering. Often the thread will require an Elf to intervene and remind people to be civil.
So, you know… motes and beams. There is, unfortunately and perhaps inevitably, plenty of acrimony on both sides.
[url=”http://babybluecafe.blogspot.com/2007/07/word-of-day-snippy.html” ]Snippy?[/url]
BabyBlue,
Yes indeed, you orthodox are so snippy I’m bringing a group of my members to your congregation’s 8:00 am service tomorrow so we can experience your liturgical service. I have no other motivations at this point… as I certainly don’t want to be a mere Lutheran object of snippy …
Brian
Kevin, If I may steal a quote from above, So, you know… motes and beams. There is, unfortunately and perhaps inevitably, plenty of acrimony on both sides.
It unfortunate that we have so much acromony in our beliefs that we can’t be civil. There are true believers on both sides that have felt much pain. I question the statement, (working together) I thought that this procedure had already been decided by TEC.
bktoh
RE: “It’s very hard for me to have much sympathy at the moment.â€
I wonder if any reasserters really want reappraisers/progressives to have “sympathyâ€â€”I certainly don’t. Couldn’t actually care less.
RE: “Okay, give us a reason to think that you’re serious about reconciliation . . . “
Isn’t this a little like my asking “Okay, give us a reason to think that you’re serious about repentance . . . “?
“Slandered with abandon???” You mean by having your vocations dismissed as “political action” and your relationships called “abominations?” By being accused of abandoning the Scriptures you interpret differently than your accusers and your efforts to seek and serve Christ in all persons diminished as political correctness? By having the deepest most important human relationship of your life reduced to crass discussions of specific sexual acts? When the author has walked a mile or two in those shoes then we’ll talk about “slandered with abandon.” Until then let’s call it what it is: hands caught in the cookie jar rightfully named.
That’s great news, MD Brian. I’ll look for you. Will you be the one wearing the Orioles hat? 😉
bb
I agree with Susan Russell.
Progressive activists are calling whatever they think they’ve discovered “hands caught in the cookie jar rightfully named” and it’s not really my concern what they deem to be “hands” or “caught” or “cookie jars” or “named” . . . none of those words at all meaning the same things for traditionalists as progressives, as is evident by the past 24 hours, unsuprisingly, as well as the past four years.
It doesn’t concern me what they call the “hands” or the “cookie jars” nor am I offended or grieved by the words they use. I don’t need more “sensitivity”, less “negativity,” or fewer attempted “insults” from them either.
My emotion over the past 24 hours has been that of pure enjoyment and fun.
Ah yes, Susan (#7) how very nice of you to show up an put your oar in. As always your words are an inspiration; pure grace and love. Thanks for sharing.
BB,
We’ll be gathered out front around 7:45. This is a field trip for us. We’ll be a diverse group, from those who think what we’re already doing in our traditional service is fine to those who think maybe it’s time to bring some new vitality to our liturgical service. Our two contemporary services are not a problem, one is completely out of space on Sunday mornings.
Oh, and my personal experience of advocates during my time in California was that, if one didn’t agree with them, they’d go out of their way to try and destroy your career. Since then it’s been fairly difficult for me to use the words “reconciliation” and “progressive” in the same sentence.
Peace!
Maryland Brian
Kendall,
Looks to me like Brian hit a pretty significant nerve on this post.
Well, that’s great news – I usually come to the 10:30 and will be out front when the 8:00 a.m. service ends (no Orioles hat I’m sorry to say). Please say hello if you can! I’ll try to keep Miss Snippy at bay. 😉
bb
The irony in all this is that far too often, we think we’re innocent of hurtful or graceless language. Recently a reappraising priest from my reappraising diocese was preparing to move to a diocese that, for all intents, is a reasserting diocese…I hope I have all these terms correct…she’s a liberal and they’re conservatives. She expressed a concern, most likely valid, that she wouldn’t be able to safely speak her mind in church councils, and then she expressed the regret that her new diocese wouldn’t be a safe place for everyone, liberal or conservative, to express their feelings…unlike the one she was leaving. I had to laugh, and pointed out for her that when conservatives in this diocese do speak their minds, or attempt some sort of activism, the response to them is overwhelmingly negative, and usually quite insulting and embarassing, but that as long as we kept quiet, we were treated with a great deal of grace…mixed with a bit of mistrust. I assured her that the conservatives in that diocese would likely be as graceful to her as the liberals in this diocese are to conservatives…
Well, Susan, God does call same gender sex an abomination. Sorry you feel offended.
Waging reconciliation, indeed. Wage on, Wayne. Wage on, Garth.
Anyone who has spent any time on the HoBD list-serve the last 7 years can confirm what the author states. The level of vitriol directed from the left to the right is astonishing. While blogs on the left or right should be given greater latitude, as they are expressly partisan platforms, the HoBD list-serve is a (semi?) official organ of the Church. As such, a much greater degree of civility should be expected but is sadly lacking.
The lack of civility may result from reappraisers’ frustration that reasserters are not persuaded by the reappraiser case. But reasserters maintain that reappraisers have never bothered to present a real case for their position, which shows an incredible amount of disrespect for reasserters. When I personally pleaded for a statement of the case, I was told it would be published at Claiming the Blessing. But what I saw was nothing more than warmed-over works righteousness (agree with us because of our actions).
Many of us hoped for a serious reappraiser case to allow for a real conversation, but it never occurred. Even reappraisers have lamented the fact that TEC did not change its rules BEFORE electing VGR, thereby “consecrating” someone who openly violated the doctrine, discipline, and worship of TEC, that he again vowed to uphold.
Br. Michael [#15] writes: “Well, Susan, God does call same gender sex an abomination.”
God hasn’t been heard from on the subject; people have. Some think those people spoke for God, but that’s far from a unanimous view.
“Anyone who has spent any time on the HoBD list-serve the last 7 years can confirm what the author states. The level of vitriol directed from the left to the right is astonishing. While blogs on the left or right should be given greater latitude, as they are expressly partisan platforms, the HoBD list-serve is a (semi?) official organ of the Church. As such, a much greater degree of civility should be expected but is sadly lacking.”
I’d echo Bill’s statement and add that I have yet to read any response or posting by any reasserter on the listing that is not civil and appropriate.
DC:
“God hasn’t been heard from on the subject; people have. Some think those people spoke for God, but that’s far from a unanimous view.”
>The Scriptures are clear on the subject. People who accept and believe that we can trust and believe God’s Word to us, would disagree with you. The authority and truth with which God gives us through His Holy Word are where we find the fundamental differences between us. Issues of sexuality are but one issue, and that is because it has been forced to the forefront by reappraisers.
Bill C [#19], I was referring precisely to the Scriptures: So far as we can tell, God didn’t write the holy books of any religion; people did. Sure, various religions claim that their books’ authors were inspired by God to some degree. But we have no way of verifying to what extent, if any, this might be true, and to what extent it’s merely wishful thinking. In any case, the authors were still human; we have no reason to think they didn’t “view” the putatively-divine message through the usual human prisms of cultural conditioning, personal experience, individual biases, and the like, any of which can distort the message.
I’m beginning to think there are two kinds of people in the world: Those who, for whatever reason, feel compelled to believe God gave us binding guidance about how to live our lives, and thus excused us from the burden of exercising judgment in those matters; and those who aren’t persuaded that such a luxury is ours to enjoy in this life.
(Of course, there are really 10 kinds of people in the world, as the old geek joke goes: Those who understand the binary numbering system, and those who don’t.)
Is this conversation being held by adults or is it being held by a bunch of ragamuffins who can’t control their hate and disgust for each other. How about if we stop thinking so much about ourselves and trust God! Everyone needs to grow up a bit and be more civilized and caring about their fellow man. Yes I have left ECUSA after more than 56 years and no… I will not be reconciled to ECUSA. I am where I am because I am feeling with my whole heart that God put me here for a reason and this is something I have never felt before.
Verifying! I think if verificationism is your weapon of choice then a lot more than Holy Scripture is going to go up in smoke. Be careful you don’t turn to ash things you actually do have confidence in.
There is a lack of civility here, but this lack is scarcely noticeable in the light of the level of vituperation on other blogs. This is, indeed, why I never visit them any more.
There are all sorts of reasons for this, but the primary one is the loss of self-restraint that is now institutionalized in American culture. That is, it is now a requirement that one fight back in any way available. One never accepts an insult of any sort, and the retort should always exceed the cause. The creates a downward spiral which can be left only when the American attention span is exceeded, but this expiration is always followed by another insult and retort.
The answer is the reestablishment of another culture, and religion should be in the forefront. On the other hand, in a world created by and dominated by television and its bastard children – the cell phone, e.g., – it may be that self-dicipline and forbearance can never be restored to cultural control.
RE: “So far as we can tell, God didn’t write the holy books of any religion; people did.”
Another nice demonstration of why the two gospels won’t be recognized. Not that we needed another one, but still . . .
Isn’t the instense support on the “reappraiser” side for taking to the courts against my ADV / CANA church prima facia as to which side is nasty and unbeholding to basic Christian principles of charity and peace? And MD Brian – am I reading it correctly that you are going to Turuo today to protest during their worship service? By what possible interpretation of Scripture would that be justified? I have posted several times on FrJake – very civil comments, and none have ever made it online. What does that tell you? The reappraiser side and their attacks on CANA churches have helped rekindle my faith over the last year – perhaps we see God’s hand in this after all.
D.C. – As I’ve written on Fr. Jake, here, and other places; all clergy take a vow that they believe the Holy Scriptures to [b]be[/b] the Word of God. The 39 Articles refer to Holy Scriptures as “The Word of God, Written.” Just as the Word of God, Incarnate (Jesus) has both fully human and fully divine natures, so does Holy Scripture. It is fully human – it was written (edited and compiled) by men in specific places with specific cultures. We need to understand those cutures and times to fully understand Holy Scripture. Holy Scripture is also fully divine – it is the Inspired (God breathed) and reflects the mind of God. It is the authoritative record of God’s self revelation to us. All other revelations are measuered by Holy Scripture.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
DC, I think we all know your view of Scripture. In fact, you believe very little of what the Church officially teaches. As Philip Snyder points out clergy take a vow asserting that Scripture is the word of God. And Ms Russel is clergy.
John #25,
Uh, no. I think you have me confused with another Brian. It’s why I sign Maryland Brian.
I brought a number of my worship leadership to Truro for very different reasons than the ones you’ve highlighted.
Maryland Brian
All of this over who wrote a letter?
Good grief, reappraisers, you sound desperate! Susan Russell compares this to homosexual fornication. Pathetic! No wonder your religion is dying: you can’t even pick a good fight.
And reasserters: laugh at them. That’s all this merits.
#28 And I thought you were a doctor, Brian. 😉
#20: 01010, I appreciate what you are saying but Phil Snyder just articulated (#26) far more thoroughly what I feel and feebly was trying to say.
Peace, 01010
Bill
Bill,
Well … yes, but not the way you probably thought!
Dr. Brian Hughes
Lead Pastor
St. John Lutheran
Columbia, MD
StJohnMD.org
#28; Broan – My apologies. I was not following the thread accurately. I’m very relieved – God Bless.
– John
Good article (truly one for “read it all”) and very clearly demonstrates the desperation of the reappraisers.
One howls in protest much louder when one knows one is wrong.