The Cathedral of St. James will host a Eucharist and reception to honor the Bishop for this special occasion tonight at 7 p.m. Congratulations to him and the diocese.
The Cathedral of St. James will host a Eucharist and reception to honor the Bishop for this special occasion tonight at 7 p.m. Congratulations to him and the diocese.
Alas, I regret to say that +Ed Little has turned out to be one of the bishops I’ve been most disappointed in. When he was first elected, I had high hopes for him. His ministry in San Joaquin had borne much fruit and he bravely walked out in protest along with some 18 other conservative bishops when the HoB consented to the election of Gene Robinson back in 2003. But although he’s supported the CP bishops in general, he’s certainly not proven to be a strong voice for orthodoxy in TEC. He’s entirely too conciliatory for my liking.
But that said, I wish him well. And as long as we live, there’s always the chance to change…
David Handy+
I guess it is always a good time to have a party In Northern Indiana. The years 2002 through 2008 were not kind with Members down 26.0 percent, ASA down 23.4 percent, and Plate & Pledge (adjusted for inflation) down 12.7 percent. Using these data I ranked the diocese at 87 of 95 considered. In 2008 there were 62 Infant baptisms and 94 Burials. And in 2008 there were 75 percent (27 of 36) of its churches with Plate & Pledge of less than $150K which means that each “rich” church had three “poor” churches to help. Also in 2008 24 of the 36 churches had ASA of 70 or less with four of the 24 with 20 or less. And the band played on. Statmann
[Comment deleted by Elf]
I would really like to know why Ed Little went to Rowan Williams prior to Lambeth as part of a Schori contingent to beg RW to allow Gene Robinson to come to Lambeth. It just doesn’t make sense.
+Ed Little is a wonderful bishop and a totally genuine person. He is universally loved in the diocese. There’s not a priest among us, of what ever stripe, who wouldn’t do anything for him.
Last night the cathedral was packed. Almost every cleric, including retired priests, were there. It escapes me why on such a joyous occasion persons cannot bite their tongues and if they can’t say something nice, merely say nothing at all.
Ditto to #5.
OK, #5 & 6. You have a valid point.
I was regrettably snarky. I’m glad that +Ed Little is so popular within the diocese. I just wish he’d use all that capital of goodwill he’s accumulated and do something with it.
Maybe it illustrates how revealing is one of the standard questions that “Dr. Phil” regularly asks his guests on his show. He often asks those in troubled relationships, [i]”Would you rather be right or be in relationship?”[/i]
Now in a marriage it’s surely more important to maintain the relationship. But not always in the Church, at least not when outright heresy is rampant and blatant sin being unrepentantly practiced.
My answer to Dr. Phil’s question is, [i]”I’d rather be right.”[/i] It seems that +Little’s answer is, “I’d rather stay in relationship.” And therein lies much of the difference between those of us in the ACNA and those honorable conservatives (like wvparson and Fr. Martins of Covenant) in the CP movement.
Anyway, I’m sorry for raining on +Little’s parade.
David Handy+
David,
I was going to say something in quite a positive tone before I saw your comment, but now it is going to sound like only a reaction to what you said. So forgive me for dog-piling.
But….
You said you had high hopes for the new Bp Ed Little, but you didn’t say what those hopes were, except perhaps that he would be a strong voice for orthodoxy.
Hey, I value the strong voice, too, but wouldn’t you place a higher priority on the efficacy of a reasserter bishop to always have the power to stop what needs stopping, or change what needs changing, or revitalize what needs revitalizing in TECUSA?
If you sense I am leading you into an untenable position, you are correct.
What TECUSA bishop today, whether publicly strong in their orthodox or not, have been able to be efficacious for reasserter change, or reclamation? Without any such track record (and that is not an indictment on my part, simply an observation of the seemingly impenetrable wall that is currently before us), we are left with those bishops who make every effort to do what they can do, and to use what channels they do have, to attempt the challenge and the confrontation anyway.
Where as there are bishops who have not strongly challenged much of anything, +Ed Little has been just as strong in using private channels to confront the powers that be (and you and I would quickly agree on the top 2) as +John Howe has done the same publicly. I know he has been a strong and forceful personal advocate, to mostly no avail, and I hope not to the undermining of what influence he might otherwise still have had.
Rob, I would say the first charge of an orthodox bishop is to guard his diocese and make certain that heretics aren’t leading parishes. I don’t know how Bishop Little has fared there.
But one other task would be not to be the willing conservative token patsy to demonstrate TEC’s “inclusion” on little jaunts to Lambeth Palace to plead for Bishop Robinson. And in that latter task, Bishop Little has failed more than once.
Congratulations to Bishop Ed.
Without applying this bit of information to Bp. Ed one way or the other, I might point out that there were many orthodox bishops, later canonized even, who remained in steadfast communion with the Arians as well as with the orthodox with whom they agreed. St. Parthenius, the Bishop of Lampsacus (much venerated in the East), is one so remembered — the 17th-century Catholic historianTillemont was somewhat exercised by this seeming inconsistency, but finally noted that, after all, not every Christian leader has a vocation to spend their lives fighting over doctrine! Whether Tillemont is right or not, there are plenty who will agree with the sentiment. There is more than one way to “guard” the faith, and people like Parthenius seemed, in the eyes of those that followed him over the centuries, to have followed one such course in a fruitful fashion. (His relics, usually housed in Cyprus, went on a worldwide tour, I read somewhere, not long ago. Whether his peregrinating remains roused the faithful, I do not know. But — again without applying this to Bishop Ed! — many of us do more good when we are dead than when we are alive. Although, at least according to the logic of sainthood, that is only because of the good we done when we were alive… Ah; judging other Christians is a complicated thing, isn’t it. For it would appear as well that we are better judges when we are dead than when we are alive.)
RE: “Ah; judging other Christians is a complicated thing, isn’t it. For it would appear as well that we are better judges when we are dead than when we are alive.)”
How fortunate, then, that nobody here is “judging” Bishop Little, but rather criticizing his actions. Criticism and analysis is very different from judging.
Congratulations to Bishop Little from me, too.
The problem is that we are members of the Body of Christ and not of political parties. We seem to get the two confused. We may feel totally free to attack politicians and indulge in the sort of rhetoric and party spirit which bedevils government, although I would argue that, as Christians, we may be called to higher standards.
Bishop Little isn’t a politician. He was not “elected” in the sense that a politician is elected. His election was the response of the people of God to God’s choice.
Few who respond to this list know how bravely Bishop Little confronts those in authority, how often he speaks his mind, after prayer, to those whose policies and positions he feels to be at odds with mere Christianity as TEC has received the same. In so doing he doesn’t court publicity. Those of us who join him in mutual service know of his witness and that is all that matters. We also know something of the cost to him. Some of us may delight in hearing of those who enjoy the battle. The rest of us will simply pray for those leaders who walk humbly and who do not count the cost or heed the wound, although both cost and wound are real.
I certainly have been confused by Bishop Ed’s actions.
RE: “Few who respond to this list know how bravely Bishop Little confronts those in authority, how often he speaks his mind, after prayer, to those whose policies and positions he feels to be at odds with mere Christianity as TEC has received the same.”
I agree. That is why people can only respond to what actions and words are public — as it should be.
RE: “Some of us may delight in hearing of those who enjoy the battle.”
Some might.
RE: “The rest of us will simply pray for those leaders who walk humbly and who do not count the cost or heed the wound, although both cost and wound are real.”
And some of us will continue to comment about the actions of various public leaders who take public actions and make public statements, while others moan that such commenting and analysis is “attack” and “judging.”
By those standards, of course, four Mightily Cruel Anglican Commenters on this thread have “attacked” and “judged” the rest of us commenters by themselves offering up criticism, analysis, and negative comment about *our* statements on this thread.
How fortunate that those of us on the receiving end of such criticism don’t share those standards and name criticism as “attack” and “judging.”
Sarah in 9,
You are preaching to the choir.
Read my “stop what needs stopping” as inclusive of your stated priority for a bishop, i.e., “to guard his diocese and make certain that heretics aren’t leading parishes.”
But, then, you took what I said and went off in a different direction.
My point to David is that he didn’t define what he was complaining about regarding “a strong voice for orthodoxy”, and that surely it must be better defined than simply what is said in a press release. So I made the point that a bishop must walk the walk AND talk the talk to truly be a voice of orthodoxy. HOWEVER, if David wanted to stick with what gets said as a prime indicator, then it is important to place in teh record the kinds of private confrontational conversations Bp Little engaged in so that injustices would not carry on unchallenged.
And, my point should have been clear, if for that alone, I value his orthodoxy and his willingness to use his episcopacy for that purpose.
I am also willing to bet that he knows and regrets his failures in that same use of his episcopacy. I fear David’s comment as the only true chance for change for Ed would be for him to leave TECUSA altogether. If that is the case then he should just say it plainly as his argument, and not play some occultated “had high hopes for being a strong voice of orthodoxy” card as something else.
well, David, thanks a LOT for your first comment and getting us all hooked into a contrary mode rather than the celebrative thread the post was most likely meant for (this comment is playful sarcasm, and not intended as critical or judgmental, although the author does reserve the biblical right to judgment of those within the Body of Christ – not without – where deemed necessary).
And, +Ed, congratulations on being a witness within your episcopacy for ten years without drawing a deposition vote within the House of Bishops.
Oops.
Rob — I feel so attacked and judged by your comment #15. It is an indulging in the sort of rhetoric and party spirit which bedevils government. I would argue that you are held to a higher standard.
[just kidding]
; > )
Sarah,
RE: I would argue that you are held to a higher standard.
[just kidding]
You’re right. I am so sorry.
[just kidding]
:^}
[i] And now we will return to a POSITIVE discussion of the thread. [/i]
NOT KIDDING
-Elf