“We met intentionally in New Orleans, as an act of solidarity with the people of Louisiana and the Mississippi Gulf coast, so that we might represent the prayers and concern of the whole church, and offer a small contribution to the rebuilding effort,” Jefferts Schori said in her opening remarks of the one-hour webcast, anchored by the Rev. Jan Nunley, executive editor of Episcopal Life Media. “We were told that 100,000 housing units were lost during Katrina and its aftermath, displacing nearly 250,000 people. Of those housing units, only about 4,000 have been made habitable once again.”
Many of the bishops, their spouses, “as well as a number of our Anglican Communion visitors,” Jefferts Schori said, “participated in various rebuilding efforts on one day of meeting.”
“We pounded nails, placed dry wall, distributed sandwiches, and listened to the stories of despair and hope,” she said. “Faith communities, including the Episcopal Church, are the backbone of ongoing relief and rebuilding efforts, and it appears that their primary role will continue to be vital.”
She described the first part of the meeting as “an opportunity for the bishops to hear from our Anglican Communion visitors, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, and to share our own joys and concerns with them.”
There is nothing good that can be said about this woman. No outcasts whatever their theology? This is a church? This woman is poison. This is is obvious, one wonders why Kendall didn’t close this for comments. Larry
Is the implicit accusation then that those bigoted and backwards African churches are oppressive and take delight in labeling those who don’t conform to their standards as “outcasts”?
She’s coming from the academic world. Whaddya want? Of [i]course[/i] she’ll be petty, nasty, totally ‘inclusive,’ highly politicised, and absolutely sure of her own elitism and utter rectitude.
[blockquote]You cannot continue to give preference to one without slighting another, for selection implies rejection. You despise, therefore, those whom you thus reject; for in your rejection of them, it is plain you have no dread of giving them offence. (Tertullian, [i]Apology[/i], 13)[/blockquote]
The concept of an “all-inclusive” church is simply unrealistic.
I think she’s telling us to love our enemies. Of course, she’s not the first to say that.
It’s a difficult lesson, to be sure, and I certainly fail it, but I see I’m not the only one.
Her only concept of ‘outcasts’ are those who:
choose to accept Jesus the Christ as THE WAY to God,
who recognise the need for repentance and amendment of life as conditions to attain His Will,
who identify themselves as ‘conservative or orthodox’ Anglicans and Anglo-catholics,
who hold Scripture as divinely inspired and relevant in today’s world system,
and who actually believe that there IS a heaven and a hell, and desire to attain the first rather than the second.
I have just counted myself ‘out’.
I guess that this must mean that I’m an outcast, doesn’t it? If so, then I’ll wear that label proudly for all to see!
right…tell me about it
[url=http://babybluecafe.blogspot.com/2007/10/attempt-at-blogging-pbs-webcast.html]Baby Blue[/url] tried to blog this webcast. How the English language is evolving! I am not quite sure what it means to “blog a webcast” actually entails. Anyway, she couldn’t stomach the entire webcast and gave up.
If you want to see a true Christian leader, one who is not ashamed of the Gospel, go to Anglican TV and see the interview of [url=http://www.anglicantv.org/blog/index.cfm/2007/10/18/Anglican-Report-with-Bp-Minns-in-Google-Video-Format ]Bp Minns[/url].
The phrase “There will be no outcasts†is just a buzz phrase that makes wonderful headlines and gets many inches in the secular-progressive press. Anybody with the “brains of a fishing worm†should realize that and dig deeper into what she wants us to hear.
I think she is really saying to me that I must accept the gay agenda or leave and is that not casting me out?
My beloved church is dying, not only because of +KJS but also because so many Bishops, Priests, and Theology Professors are taking up her cry for the meaningless idea of inclusiveness.
Let’s talk about our Lord’s agenda, not the GLBT’s or any agenda, except the Gospel of Jesus Christ, then decide what our Lord wants each of us to do.
How can TEC leadership meaningfully, or honestly, call it “inclusion” when they know that their efforts to include one group will precipitate the conscientious withdrawal or nonparticipation of another group?
#4 –“The concept of an “all-inclusive†church is simply unrealistic.”
So is “love your neighbors as yourself.”
That’s why we’ve been given grace.
Marie Antoinette plays shepherdess for a day. They did this for what — a couple hours? So this would be the equivalent of building, say, half a bathroom? I mean, without the plumbing?
How many of the people of Lousiana and the Mississippi Gulf know they exist much less that they were meeting in New Orleans? Can we say “delusions of grandeur?”
How can TEC leadership meaningfully, or honestly, call it “inclusion†when they know that their efforts to include one group will precipitate the conscientious withdrawal or nonparticipation of another group?
Because these “conscientious objectors” exclude themselves by removing themselves from the group. Reasserters routinely cry out that they are not included, but they don’t choose to be.
Sorry Brian. You wish that were true, but it simply is not. I, and others, have tried to continue in the councils of TEC and we have been shown the door more that once. The truth in TEC is all are welcome under the big tent (expect those whackoos who don’t agree with us–they never really belonged anyway; and those whackoo Africans will take them in anyway, and that’s where they belong; and I have nothing against the orthodox, but…).
#12: [url=http://www.vulcanhammer.org/?p=232]Grace to endure this (the link is to my response on my blog.)[/url]
“There will be no outcasts in this church”. And before too long, there will be no one else in this church, either.
#12, The Lord equips us with grace so can we love our neighbors as ourselves. He equips us with minds so we see can through dishonest and manipulative doubletalk about inclusion that’s not really inclusion.
#14, I think the key word is “conscientious”. We don’t “choose” the things that violate our conscience. Rather it is our conscience which convicts us whether we choose to listen to it or not. Conscientious objectors may choose exclusion, but they choose it because they feel bound by conscience and principle to do so, not because they simply want to be excluded.
#18, Yea, and the Lord equiped us with word processors so that we might proof read before we post. Mea culpa.
There are no outcasts as pecusa continues to marginalize conservatives. Look at who the liberals in charge appoint to committees, who they put up for bishop, who they exclude (yes exclude) from parish search processes. But the lie continues.
TonyinCNY, thanks for your #20 post. That is exactly what has occurred, and will continue to occur, in TEC. The ACC needs to show TEC the door. And SOON.
TEC these days proclaims a hodge-podge of Unitarian Universalist beliefs, dusted with New Ageism. It has been absorbed into the surrounding secular culture, and reflects that belief system. Those who wish to remain Anglican Christians need another Province.
She should have said that there are no “outcasts” as long as you bow down to the new, improved “TEC god for the Me Generation” at the “all-inclusive” table. Try not bowing down and expect an epistle from the TEC legal team.
How many houses could have been built or people fed for all of the costs of the New Orleans conference that accomplished nothing. And then the unemployed, who remained so while watching purple-clad amateurs pose for a photo op, might have been employed. And the conference could have.
And Brian, think carefully about what you said. Gays have been no more outcasts from TEC than those who chose to believe in Buddha, Allah, or no God. Reasserters are not the ones who changed TEC, deliberately to marginalize and exclude people.
Oop! (1st para.) … done by email and phone.
KJS said:
“The Prayer Book that we use now in this church acknowledges that companionship and assistance to the other partner in growing up into the full stature of Christ is really the aim of marriage, not reproduction.
If that’s the aim of marriage, then I’m married not only to my wife, but to my children and to anyone else whose growth in Christ concerns me deeply. I suppose this means priests are married to their congregations. Where does it stop?
[url=http://innocentdoves.blogspot.com/2007/10/aac-weekly-update-from-bishop-elect.html ]Bishop-elect Anderson hits the proverbial nail on the proverbial head[/url]:
[blockquote]Telling the truth is so much easier; you can remember what you said, and you can repeat it without fear that you haven’t quite got it right. When a person or an organization sets out to deceive it is not remarkable that along with deception goes confusion and controversy.[/blockquote]
Basically, the TEC uses code words for homosexual blessings, homosexual ordinations, lawsuits against the orthodox, etc. When someone uses the wrong “spin-tested” phrase, more chaos ensues. As I said before, if you go over to Anglican TV and listen to Bp Minns, you will see that he is relaxed and charming. He doesn’t worry about using the wrong spin word.
[blockquote]He who speaks on his own does so to gain honor for himself, but he who works for the honor of the one who sent him is a man of truth; there is nothing false about him.
John 7:18[/blockquote]
I will believe the PB really means ‘inclusive’ when she rubs shoulders with or invites NRA members, home-schoolers, Republicans, the John Birch Society and members of the Duke Lacrosse team. As it stands now, ‘inclusive’ is pretty exclusive – and excluding more each day.
See the quote in #25. TO separate marriage from childbearing is like separating agriculture from plantiing and harvesting. BUt the definition is important because (a) it gives us one more reason to stay as far away from this “church” as we can, and (b) should force us to look hard at our own definition of marriage and make sure that it is clear and coherent, that it is both theologically and culturally tenable. LM
The world consists of two groups of people. One day science will confirm this. They are the belly-button people and the head people.
The belly-button people never suffer from self-doubt. They [i]just know[/i] they are right from some source in their gut. The head people suffer from self-doubt and are capable of reflection. You can only have a conversation with a head person.
I do hope science soon confirms this obvious truth.
Bill Matz and others who have commented re: the financial cost of meeting in New Orleans (which could have been otherwise directed):
New Orleans depends heavily on tourism — tourism includes meetings and conferences. For the HOB to choose to meet in NOLA was indeed a sign of support for a city/region and people who are trying, bit by bit, to recover from the devastation of Katrina. Hotel employees, food service personnel, tourism employees all benefited. I would say that if the bishops need to meet in person (and e-mail/teleconference meetings just are not the same), NOLA was an excellent choice.