November 20, 2007,
Dear Friends in Christ,
I have communicated to the Presiding Bishop my request to be released from my ordination vows and the obligations and responsibilities of a member of the House of Bishops. I have taken this step in order to be received into the Catholic Church. Through a long season of prayer and reflection Marcie and I have come to believe this is the leading of the Holy Spirit and God’s call to us for the next chapter of our lives. We are grateful to our brother in Christ, the Most Rev. Robert N. Lynch, the Bishop of St. Petersburg, for his openness to our request and for his prayerful support.
I was blessed to grow up in a Christian home where I was given the gift of a deep love for the Lord Jesus Christ and a reverence for God’s revelation of his love and redemptive purpose in the Word written, as well as the Word made Flesh. I was blessed to be brought into the family of the Episcopal Church 40 years ago. I have a deep love for the sacramental life, most especially the Eucharistic sacrifice through which God continues to pour his grace into our lives in the Word that needs no words.
I will be forever grateful for the opportunities I had to serve this faith community as a deacon and priest. I am most grateful for the opportunity you, the people of the Diocese of Southwest Florida, gave me to serve as your bishop and to participate in the life of the Anglican Communion. You made it possible for me to share in the mission of God that can never be bound by geographical or political barriers.
I believe God is now calling us to continue our ministry to serve in the healing of the visible Body of Christ in the world. I am convinced our Lord’s deepest desire is for the unity of the Church.
Marcie and I will never have the words to express to you the depth of our gratitude for the support you gave us during my medical leave and for the joyous celebration of the ministry you allowed us to share with you that brings to a close my ordained ministry in the Episcopal Church. We will pray for the continued health and vitality of the Diocese of Southwest Florida.
The following prayer by Thomas Merton speaks more eloquently than we can find possible at this moment. Marcie and I have experienced an abundance of God’s grace throughout our lives, and we continue to trust God in the future, which continues to unfold for us:
My Lord God, I have no idea where I am going. I do not see the road ahead of me. I cannot know for certain where it will end. Nor do I really know myself and the fact that I think I am following your will does not mean that I am actually doing so. But I believe that the desire to please you does in fact please you. And I hope I have that desire in all that I am doing. I hope that I will never do anything apart from that desire. And I know that if I do this you will lead me by the right road, though I may know nothing about it. Therefore I will trust you always though I may seem to be lost and in the shadow of death. I will not fear, for you are ever with me, and you will never leave me to face my perils alone.
Bishop Lipscomb served on the General Board of Examining Chaplains when I served on the Board’s staff, and I have great respect for him. I wish him ease of conscience and grace as he follows our Lord.
May the Lord continue to bless Bishop Lipscomb as he makes these tough decision and continue to reveal Himself more each day to His servant.
Although I have chosen to call myself “New Reformation Advocate,” I can’t help admiring Bp. Lipscomb for having the courage to follow his convictions, despite the cost and the misunderstanding and criticism it will inevitably bring him. May we all be so daring and resolute. And I just LOVE that quote from Thomas Merton!
David Handy+
No, no division here. All is well. We’re holding onto our truths lightly.
Another domino falls. I look around to see where I am in the arrangement of the remaining ones.
Godspeed Bishop Lipscomb. May you have “the peace that passes understanding.”
I wish Bishop Lipscomb all the best as he grows in the Lord.
[i] Comment to be reviewed by Kendall. [/i]
A most gracious letter. I pray Godspeed to Bp. Lipscomb as he enters into this new stage of Christ’s service. May he go from strength to strength in this life and in the life to come.
William Tighe is vehement about women’s ordination. Fine. Let him state his point in civil language or even argue it. But to speak of “the vice of WO” crosses the line of edifying discourse. If I were an elf, I would threaten him with banishment if he can’t control his fingers as he types.
[i] The comment is under review by our host. [/i]
I find that coment by Mr. Tighe very offensive. Please elves ….
[i] Done. [/i]
I concur with #9 and #10. “Unwisdom” or even “uncatholicity” would make the point as well as “vice” (though they would not rhyme).
On the wider point, these recent episcopal departures do speak to a sense of despair within the catholic party that there is a place for them anywhere in the Anglican family. It’s sad to think that the relevance of Keble and Pusey, and even of Charles Grafton, to Anglicanism may be coming to a close.
Sorry, Jim and saj, but it is amazing, isn’t it, that this is one deviation from the catholic faith we claim to hold to which its proponents will brook no dissent?
Delete my verse if you wish — but I will state bluntly (not to divert the topic, but since I have been reproached for it) that I think WO at least as great a “theological and ecclesiological vice” as SS. If it is the “official policy” of this blog that it is legitimate to characterize the latter as a “vice” (despite the fact that proponents of it post here with some regularity) but not the former, please inform me of that fact.
Whoa!!!!!! What a reaction from people about WO — I’m not sure that this is not a form of polity of political correctness that so often is the battle in secular world.
Folk “vice” has several definition, one people are probably reacting to as in ” 1.a. An evil, degrading, or immoral practice or habit. b. A serious moral failing. c. Wicked or evil conduct or habits; corruption.” but also it can mean “3.a. A slight personal failing; a foible. b. A flaw or an imperfection; a defect.”
Once Mark Harris made an offensive posting calling two acts “violent,” however instead of reacting I pulled my dictionary to see the subtle word play between the two connotations he was using.
It’s a word play and for defense of the English language I urge you to banter back in Shakespearian eloquence than call for the sensors. Language is a means of conveying an idea, but there is also a beauty in itself.
[i] This is NOT a thread about WO. Please return to the posted topic. [/i]
And another one gone and another gone, another one bites the dust!
KAR,
Thanks for the clarification. I certainly wouldn’t want censorship on the blog. If Professor Tighe offered the word in the sense you cite, then I can accept it. I would point out that our host is canon theologian for a diocese that does accept female ordinands.
Jeremy,
I too mourn the steady loss of “the ctholic party” from the Anglican family. What we will be left with will be much impoverished by its loss.
“wouldn’t want censorship on this blog” made me smile. Of course there’s censorship here, and some of the highest in right-of-center Anglo-blogosphere. That’s no big deal. We (most) all want the line drawn somewhere. What most of us ask, though, is for an open and consistent policy. I give T19 and its elves a B- in that regard. No big deal. They’ve bit off a big task in their censorship policy and they’re trying hard and doing OK.
As for WO, according Scripture, Tradition, IMNSHO Reason, and most Christians in the world today, it is indeed a vice. God have mercy on those who won’t even examine themselves in this regard, let alone those who insist on silencing, according to all the above, the teaching of God.
[i] Okay, folks. back to the original topic which is NOT WO.[/i]
#18 You’re right. I meant I wouldn’t want Professor Tighe’s perspective [b]on this issue[/b] silenced. I would rather he reframed his wording to make the same point.
[i] When we have a thread devoted to the WO issue, we welcome Dr. Tighe’s perspective on it. This is not that thread.[/i]
The issue is that TEC is now so deformed and devoid of truth that the likes of Bishops Steenson and Lipscomb feel compelled to cast adrift and seek shelter and succour from the Barque of Peter. Clearly the writing is on the wall for those who can read. ‘Mene Mene Tekel Upharsin’ is the word to our modern Belshazzar, Dr Schori.
I looked over this thread simply because I wanted to see what people said about +John. He and +Jeffery were two of the strongest in faith and practice of the Windsor Bishops…under great pressure they both stood for the truth, but have now come to realize that in the face of the slash and burn tactics of TEC, there will be no fair hearing or toleration for anything other than the post-Christian thinking of its General Convention–which is certainly not the thinking and faith of the Church.
But I must add that I have simply stopped posting here because T-19, although a good source for religious articles, posted in between its financial obsession (curious antithetical mix for a religious blog), has become as bad as and in line with the Episcopal Church in its totalitarian posture.
I just wonder why Kendall and his elves would make themselves the spiritual plumb line for civil discourse. The latest habit of simply not allowing comments if any TEC Bishop might be called to task takes the censorship cake…the last time I looked this was still the United States of America…and free discourse was to be cherished and protected.
Maybe that I fought in a war for these rights makes me a little more sensitive than people who hid out in seminary or graduate school in those years, but none the less, it is a founding principle and one of the things for which we give thanks on Thanksgiving Day.
Whatever the merits or faults of Dr Tighe’s manner of expressing himself, surely noting that Bp Lipscomb was once a supporter of the ordination of women is [b]not[/b] off-topic. The topic at hand is that Bp Lipscomb is leaving one Christian communion for another, going from a Church body in which the ordination of women is accepted and celebrated, to a Church body which has definitively (indeed, all but infallibly) rejected it. Surely this is a major difference wherein Bp Lipscomb has either changed his views or chosen to submit to the authority of the Roman Church. How can that possibly be “off-topic”?
There is a marked allergy to the whole question of the ordination of women, not only here at T19, but in the reasserter blogosphere generally. It is always deemed “off-topic,” even when (as in this case) there is every reason to believe that it is relevant. One can hardly keep from wondering why the subject is so toxic.
[i] Frankly, Chris, there aren’t enough of us ‘on duty’ to monitor the thread. I was hoping to not need to close comments. I pray you’ll self-monitor.
If, not, I’ll need to close comments. [/i].
–Elf Lady
The significant element in Lipscomb’s departure is that good people continue to leave ECUSA in [i]two[/i] directions, towards the Evangelical and towards the Roman.
Since the Oxford Movement (1840) these two streams have broadly defined the Anglican experience, and the growing out-migration in both directions demonstrates rather cogently that there is really not much of substance remaining in the centre of ECUSA, save for a sort of politically-correct unitarian universalism, with candles and vestments.
That, and a vengeful, litigious lust for power within the leadership, enabled and supported by stagnant, habitual apathy in the pews.
I just do not understand how somebody demands a comment with a point of view they can’t stand get reviewed, and, boom! it’s deleted. Do we all get that privilege? If so, I find #10 and all comments calling for censorship offensive, and I request the elves delete and review them.
“On the wider point, these recent episcopal departures do speak to a sense of despair within the catholic party that there is a place for them anywhere in the Anglican family.”
As someone who certainly and unequivocally identifies himself with the catholic party and sees the Oxford Movement as a great advance in Anglicanism I agree totally with this statement.
I am happy for the good bishop, may God bless him and guide him. One of the reasons I left non-denom evangelicalism to become an Anglican was the promise that here we found the best of the Reformation and Catholic traditions. But it is turning out that we have, at least in the USA, the worst of the traditions.
I will sorely miss Bishop Lipscomb’s witness within TEC. I hope that he will at some point help quell speculation by addressing particular issues of why he felt called to make this move. This particular call cannot have been a simple vocation, and though today may not be the right time, it would be helpful to hear how the present conflicts have or haven’t contributed to his decision. God bless you, John.
[blockquote]The significant element in Lipscomb’s departure is that good people continue to leave ECUSA in two directions, towards the Evangelical and towards the Roman.[/blockquote]
It should be noted that there have also been significant departures for Eastern Orthodoxy.
As for Prof. Tighe’s comment, it was deleted by the time I read it, so I cannot comment on its overall tone. However, would anyone object if, say, the kind of eating and drinking characterized by St Paul as an abuse of the eucharist was called a ‘vice’? And if there are sins of the intellect, could not, say, Arianism be termed a ‘vice’? If it were me, I would probably have chose the more neutral ‘error’, but then I am terminally nice, and there are times (though this may not be one of them) when that is not the best attitude to adopt.
No, this thread is not about the ‘ordination’ of women [i]per se[/i], and I have no intention of pursuing arguments on its virtues or . . . or, well, ‘vices’. But it is, I think, relevant to point out that either Bishop Lipscomb thinks he can advance the cause of the ordination of women in the Roman Catholic Church, in which case he is being intellectually dishonest–and I do NOT believe that to be the case–or, much more likely, he has, by accepting the Roman understanding of authority, come to the conclusion that he was wrong about a lot more than just SSBs. And that is a point surely worth making.
I’m sorry to say, but I agree with Fr. Armstrong in #22. I don’t mind the financial threads, though I only occasionally post in them, but the number of threads that are declared off-limits to comment have has soared as of late while the policing of those that do allow comments is making them uninteresting.
It’s your blog, Kendall, you do with it what you will. But actions still have consequences.
[Off topic…]
Oh, please. Dear Kendall+ and merry Elves. Thank you for all you do in providing this blog, which in my opinion second to none.
With all due repsect, Fr. Armstrong’s remarks are ridiculous in this case. If one doesn’t like the editorial tone of a blog, one is free to participate in another, or start one’s one. This is not censorship, and not what he fought for (as much as I appreciate that he fought.)
[i]The issue is that TEC is now so deformed and devoid of truth that the likes of Bishops Steenson and Lipscomb feel compelled to cast adrift and seek shelter and succour from the Barque of Peter.[/i]
I truly hope this is not the reason for Bp. Lipscomb’s entry into the Catholic Church. First, TEC is not “devoid” of truth, at least in an absolute sense. The leadership is working on it, but good and faithful people do remain.
Second, to become Catholic is to state that “I believe all that the Catholic Church teaches to be revealed by God”, or words to that effect. To become Catholic is to affirm, publically, that the Catholic Church is that Church founded by Jesus through the apostles, in which the Church of Christ subsists, whole and entire. It is simply not enough to be fed up with Anglicanism (or fed up with anything, for that matter), but one must be seeking that Light which Anglicanism often reflects, but which one must find dwells in the Catholic Church.
Or not. If one doesn’t believe and find these things to be true, then stay Anglican in some form or another. It’s healthier for your soul, the people are generally nicer, and the music is MUCH nicer.
[blockquote]Or not. If one doesn’t believe and find these things to be true, then stay Anglican in some form or another. It’s healthier for your soul, the people are generally nicer, and the music is MUCH nicer. [/blockquote]
I hope I’m reading you right here. You’re saying that “if one doesn’t believe and find these things to be true” then coming into full communion with Rome would be “unhealthy for your soul”, correct?
If so, I would agree. One shouldn’t be drawn to the Catholic Church as a negative choice (I hate my last church, so I’m going Papist!) but as a positive (I believe and profess that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ upon Peter, etc).
Also, one CAN become Catholic and retain some of what is best in Anglicanism: http://www.anglicanuse.org ; http://www.bookofdivineworship.com
It is fair to ask if it is all connected. I think that is Prof. Tighe’s point. Anything that has led to the present mess is a vice. Frankly, I think it has little to do with WO and much to do with ordained hippies of any sex.
[*Pout*] I was going off topic talking about the wonder poetry of language not WO, I at least want to be scolded for the proper offense :p
This is quite a journey for John Lipscomb – from son of a Baptist Minister, to Episcopal priest & bishop, and now to lay person in the Catholic Church. I envy his step from “leadership” to worker bee … God’s blessings will certainly go with him.
Dave
This blog is a wonderful source of information and Canon Harmon can certainly operate it as he pleases. That said, I’ve largely stopped visiting because of the policy of censoring almost any comment that questions women’s ordination. It’s always “off topic,” even when it’s not.
I fear that Anglican realignment is dead on arrival if WO-supporting conservatives can’t even stand to consider that gender-neutral ordination might have had something to do with gender-neutral marriage… Plus ça change….
Well, Godspeed to Bp. Lipscomb. I hope he finds “home” in Rome.
What he won’t find in American Roman Catholicism is the absence of the heterodoxy so prevalent now in TEC. [Read Donna Steichen’s “Ungodly Rage” as a study in the religious schools’ manifestation of ARC problems] In many, many parishes now, lay administrators handle most of the parish’s administration and a good bit of the pastoral care (due to priest shortage). In some, women distribute the communion pre-consecrated by the traveling priest. As for the theology, even a true-believer like the excellent Fr. Richard Neuhaus (editor of “First Things”, a splendid periodical) has admitted how problematic the ARC’s teaching and practice are in our time. With all of its warts (and they are many!), I love and will continue to serve within the leprous bride known as the Anglican Way of being Christian. For those whose consciences require moving to Rome, I say God bless you, and hope you thrive in your discipleship. All of our sad divisions will one day be forgotten as Christ the King returns for His Bride, the CHURCH.
Elf-girl, why so touchy about WO? It was the poison that has resulted in all the abominations TEC now suffers.
flabellum,
You have answered your own question:
[i]It was the poison that has resulted in all the abominations TEC now suffers.[/i]
This statement is precisely that which must not be uttered on this weblog.
[Off topic…]
Again, I’m here to defend the Elves. My own impression is not that the WO issue is uniformly off-topic, but that the commenters have a history of turning the thread from debate to diatribe, in unhelpful ways. As a former elf in an unrelated forum with its own favorite hobby horse topics, I recognize the wisdom of the immortal words of Barney Fife: “Nip it in the bud, Andy!”
Overblown generalizations about the fortitude of our host and helpers is no way to win their trust that we’re ready to behave as adults. JMHO.
Though I would have wished that comments on Bishop Lipscomb’s going to Rome had not degenerated into the squabble about women’s ordination, the fact remains that in the Episcopal Church women’s ordination was linked early on to the gay agenda in the Church. And if one believes Quean Lutibelle (Louie Crew), Integrity consciously and deliberately supported women’s ordination because it would make their cause more palatable. Dr. Crew wrote this about in an article he posted on his website quite a while back. The fact that several of the Philadelphia 11 later “came out” confirms that the rationale and tactics for the ordination of women and the rationale and tactics for the acceptance of the gay agenda were to follow parallel tracks. The surrender of the 1976 General Convention to a fait accomplis only advanced the cause of “gay rights” and the “blessing of same sex unions”, to say nothing of the consecration of a man who repudiated his marriage vows to follow his passion. I wish Bishop Lipscomb well and I do pray that God will abundantly bless him and his wife as they take this step. It’s a decision that to some of us looks more and more appealing each day the lawsuits continue, the heresies flourish, and the Episcopal Church spins further into chaos.
I don’t know Bishop Liscomb so can’t comment but to hope that he finds in his new church what will build him up in his faith.
Rome has authorised new rites, relaxed strongly held rules and extended a generous welcome. The RC Church authorities have been nothing like as tardy as ours to seek out, support and keep good bishops and Christians. Our loss and our shame.
Chris Molter –
You understand me correctly. Of course, I would say the same for any change a Christian might make: believe in where you are going. That prayer of Thomas Merton’s is a favorite of mine as well, but a reasonable level of intellectual and moral confidence is necessary if the decision is to have integrity.
Now, I would say that being fed up is certainly a good reason to start looking, but can’t be the basis for a conversion.
Was the poison women’s ordination [i]per se[/i] — which has at least some theological and biblical basis albeit debatable by well-meaning believers — or was it the decision by GC 2000 to [i]force[/i] WO on diocese opposed to it? Forced … in direct contravention to fervent promises offered back in ’76
The core difficulties arising from Robinson were that a) there was no long and detailed debate on the theology alleged to support it, and b) it was obvious after GC 2000 that ECUSA would eventually force such things on any dioceses opposed to it.
Bishops, like all people, are capable of growing and changing their minds. I know that people who knew me about 2 months before Gene Robinson’s consecration probably would have thought me slightly sympathetic toward gay issues, or at least neutral. However, an event like his consecration done against the will of the AC is enough cause the scales to fall off the eyes. I was reluctantly supportive of WO until around March 2004 when I began to ponder what got the Episcopal church to this point in time, and I could no longer consider myself “catholic” and still support WO. I joined the Roman Catholic Church in August 2004. Basically, within a year’s period I changed a lot, so it is possible, and I assume this is the case with Bp. Lipscomb. I am not trying to be off topic here, but simply to point out that people change, and often it takes crazy situations like the ones in ECUSA lately to make people think hard about a variety of issues.
[i]It’s a word play and for defense of the English language I urge you to banter back in Shakespearian eloquence than call for the sensors.[/i]
Certainly. Calls for sensors are followed by calls for shields, then phasers, and then somebody loses an eye.
Stuart: I’ve read Ungodly Rage, too. It’s quite creepy and depressing.
It’s also, what? 20 years old?
The situation has improved dramatically since then. And even back then, the situation was not as bad as that book might have led one to believe. The crazed pagan feminunzis were not literally everywhere.
The thing is…the trend in Catholicism right now is overwhelmingly positive—toward greater liturgical reverence, toward grass-roots affirmation of orthodoxy. The greying hippies are retiring and/or dying off, and the young seminarians, priests, and sisters succeeding them are rock-solid orthodox. IOW, the Catholic trend is in the right direction. The Piskie trend, from what I can see, is in the wrong tradition. There’s the rub.
Respectfully,
Diane
On Topic: A nice letter for those remaining – any thoughts as to the specific meaning of: “…to continue our ministry to serve in the healing of the visible Body of Christ in the world. I am convinced our Lord’s deepest desire is for the unity of the Church.”
Off Topic: Just what is what is wrong with censers? or bells for that matter?
😉
Congratulations to the ever eloquent Professor Tighe! Can anyone imagine a history of the Third Reich which tiptoed all around the topic of the holocaust? The timidity of the so-called “Reasserters” on you-know-what topic is ludicrous, but serves to show that the difference between Reasserter and Reappraiser is only one of degree (and that a shrinking degree).
I wish +Lipscomb every blessing as he moves to Rome. However, it is the bishops of their diocese who are best able to provide protection for reasserter congregations and are also best able to enable parishes
to leave ECUSA. Therefore I question his timing and would wish that he had delayed his departure for the sake of the many reasserters in his diocese. Does he feel he cannot help them or does he feel so driven or called to leave, that this is not on his conscience.
I am convinced our Lord’s deepest desire is for the unity of the Church.
Hmm. I would think the *deepest* desire would be the righteousness/correctness of the church.
But perhaps this is just a little hyperbole under the circumstances.
This entire thing is unfolding on a different level. SW Florida has been a second spiritual home for me for 25 years, specifically St. John in Naples. Their two pastors, whom I knew reasonably well, officiated at my father’s memorial back in ’02. Both have moved on, one to retirement and the other to a pastorate elsewhere, and St John has had an interim pastor for something over a year.
They must select a replacement. How do they find the right man (person)? I don’t know. I do know, however, that one of their worship leaders left to form his own evangelical congregation, and most of St John’s young families left with him.
This has to have been duplicated across the country, repeatedly, but with little notice because it occurs one parish at a time. At St John, Naples, two solid priests (both of whom I saw at ‘Plano’ in ’03) are now gone. The worship leader is gone, and several dozen young families with him. Bishop Lipscomb has decamped for Rome.
KJS and her minions at 815 are simply fooling themselves if they continue in their refusal to recognise the haemorrhage. It’s real, it’s deep, and it’s widespread. But even if they recognised it they could not stanch the bleeding, because to do so would be in contradiction to everything they believe, even to the point of their deeply-held sense of personal identity as “inclusive.”
Ugh. This elf just signed on after a long day of meetings. I’ve not been online since before most of our readers were awake, so this is my first time even seeing the thread.
At this point it feels like we’re damned if we do / damned if we don’t. And it’s thanksgiving and I have friends to see and goodies to cook, as does elflady who has been trying to rein in the chaos here earlier today.
All, please stay on topic, be charitable, and perhaps give up the blog warfare for Thanksgiving?
This elf is headed off to start peeling apples… and elflady is up to her elbows in stuffing and butternut squash. Basically we’re offline for the next 24 hours.
Wishing a blessed Thanksgiving to all our American readers.
–elfgirl
Read about Thanksgiving and the Pilgrims here. It’s a story rarely taught in public schools now.
http://www.mayflowerhistory.com/History/history.php
–Elf Lady
I must defend the elves. They are trying to keep the thread on topic. However, maybe they should set up a forum on WO so we can go into it with hammer and tongs.
Of course, from the Commonwealth of Virginia comes another little known aspect to Thanksgiving.
http://www.virginia.org/site/features.asp?featureid=50
😉
I have great affection of Bishop and Mrs. Lipscomb and will pray for them as they enter into the next phase of their service to God.
Elves, Mayflower? that late comer?
Everyone knows that the first recorded “Thanksgiving” in what became the USA was in 1549 in the Palo Duro Canyon in what is now the TX panhandle by the priest chaplain of Hernan Coronado on their finally finding forage, water and game!
[i] And is that history taught in the public schools? [/i]
[B][I]What he won’t find in American Roman Catholicism is the absence of the heterodoxy so prevalent now in TEC. [Read Donna Steichen’s “Ungodly Rage†as a study in the religious schools’ manifestation of ARC problems] In many, many parishes now, lay administrators handle most of the parish’s administration and a good bit of the pastoral care (due to priest shortage). [/I][/B]
I would be hardpressed to find a Catholic who is not willing to admit that Rome has had a rough time in the last 40 years… That said, when issues of dissident and problematic theology and praxis come up, it can still – thank you Catechism & Canon Law – be sniffed out and called what it is – dissident.
They in fact have all the same voices for WO, SSO, pro-contraception, pro-abortion voices. Given the size of the American Catholic Church – 60M+ – I dare say they have MORE voices for it. But the voices never are afforded the legitimacy of “a possible valid expression”…. In TEC, it is all up for grabs, with any number of parties being proponents of things that 4 decades ago would have been off the charts…
On this side of the Tiber, we aren’t heresy free… we are just free to still call it heresy.
Bp. Lipscomb let us down. Not by going to Rome (which his conscience may require) but by failing to provide strong, effectual leadership while he had the opportunity and duty to lead. He did not, for example, lead his diocese into the Anglican Communion Network. Indeed, he seemed to keep his distance from the strong Network bishops (as distinguished from the fuzzy Windsor bishops). He voiced eloquent but ineffectual dissents.
In sum, Bp. Lipscomb seems as bishop to have stayed within his personal comfort zone. Now he washes his hands of the results. If matters in the Anglican Communion have deteriorated to the point that he believes he must leave for Rome, why didn’t he do and say more while he had the power, pulpit, and duty to do so?
I don’t see much discussion about one very pertinent aspect of this. I know my timeline and numbers are quite poor but I believe this is the fifth bishop thus year to leave the denomination. Bishops mind you! Men who devoted their careers to Christ through the expression of Anglicanism. I believe that three or four of these men were recent retirees to boot. One might easily presume that their retirements were in part guided by their conclusions about TEC. Has anyone tracked the number of priests leaving for other shores? I’m talking about the RCC, the OC or the Reformation, not AMIA, CANA or other Anglican bodies. I am not disappointed or saddened at their departure but rather amazed by what it says about TEC.
Losing someone like Bishop Lipscomb is a great loss to the Episcopal Church. But as has been pointed out in a number of comments, the Catholic Church in America is riddled with heretics and dissidents. Thus, the orthodox witness of so many Episcopalians of integrity “swimming the Tiber” is welcomed by many of us Catholics who are tired of the gray-haired hippie types trying to promote heresy within Catholic precincts. It is amazing how many Modernist Catholics do not realize what stooges and agents for the anti-Christian secular media they have become. One need only look at all the news stories of the Women-Priest ceremonies in which the women were described as if somehow they were now ordained Catholic priests. Was there a single secular media news outlet that did not use fraudulent language in its coverage of the story??? And compare all the coverage “Women-priests” has gotten from the secular media to the pittance of coverage major conversions to the Catholic Church from the Evangelical academic world and Episcopal leadership has garnered.
The secular news media is no longer in the news business– much of it is in the propaganda and brainwash business on behalf of all liberal causes–political, environmental, religious,…whatever. And, unfortunately, there are millions of Americans who will not look elsewhere for their information or at least another view of things.
Some who comment here and at Stand Firm have, I believe, neglected an important aspect of this. Bp. Lipscomb has Parkinson’s disease. Parkinson’s takes awhile to develop, and one of the problems it presents is that argumentation, antagonism, disputes, cause excess adrenalin in the system which leads to shaking, sometimes uncontrollable shaking, long before a diagnosis has been made or even sought. This leads to a tendency to avoid conflict. A person with Parkinson’s is not your best choice for a knight in shining armor to take on 815. I rejoice that he is finding a home in Rome, and that he and his wife will find the kind of spiritual enrichment and support that is readily available there, but hard to find now in TEC.
The best comment I’ve seen about Bp. Lipscomb is this: [i]Bishop Lipscombe has let down everybody he has ever ministered to or taught. He has insulted all those who have looked to him in the past for guidance and pastoral care. He may not be doing this lightly but he is doing it. The tragedy is, his tragedy is, that after letting down so many people, he is not going to find what he is looking for. They never do because it’s not there.[/i]
Well said, MP.
Tsk, Tsk!
Revamundo – I give you credit for leaving out the part “Basically, I’m saying that, whatever his personal views were, the honourable thing was to shut up and put up. For goodness sake, the rest of us, in all aspects of our life, do it all the while. He is nothing better than an ecclesiastical adulterer. He is like an unfaithful husband seeking excuses for his infidelity.”
Aside from offering the musings of MadPriest can you explicate why this rant so resonates with you?
Do you share in the feelings of this cad that people should just stay where they are, put up and shut up? That he is undeserving to collect his pension for his labors?
I rather like how MadMinister calls the Catholic Church “The Italian Church” or “that denomination”… Not because I agree, but because it is just plain honest truth-in-advertising when bigots wear it on their sleeve in a fashion we can all easily identify right away.
“The tragedy is, his tragedy is, that after letting down so many people, he is not going to find what he is looking for. They never do because it’s not there.”
Ho, hum; John Henry Newman, +Levi Silliman Ives, Ronald Knox, +Frederick Joseph Kinsman, +Graham Leonard, David Mills, +Jeffrey Steenson and numerous others would disagree; and I certainly prefer their testimony to the ravings of a “mad priest.” And, then, consider the quality and beliefs of those who have gone “the other way.” The comparison is fatal.
Wow — it’s like for Revamundo and Mad Priest it’s a personal insult.
It must hurt for them to have their worldview utterly repudiated by a bishop who would rather not be a bishop at all than serve in the Episcopal church.
As much as some reasserters gnash their teeth over this, just think about what it says to the Presiding Bishop and the likes of Mad Priest and Revamundo.
The difference is that the Presiding Bishop is smooth and smart enough to cover her vexation at this public repudiation with some kind words.
Mad Priest and Revamundo . . . not so much. ; > )
[i]he is not going to find what he is looking for. [/i]
I did. And some things I didn’t know I was looking for.
[i]They never do because it’s not there. [/i]
Let me second Dr. Tighe’s “Ho,hum”.
Well, yes, I think they do take it as a personal insult.
References to “the Italian Church” or “that denomination” in ill humor remind me of Lewis in Screwtape on the assertion “I’m as good as you.”
I am curious. It seems that in the past there must have been other bishops who have left the Episcopal Church for RC or Orthodox waters. It is difficult given the climate (it’s snowing here in Chicago 🙂 ) not to completely link it to the current unpleasantness. Anyone know whether this has happened before? I’m thinking particularly seated bishops, not the retired ones…
Blessings,
Catharine Phillips
William Tighe has noted that “Bishop Kinsman of Delaware who, after he resigned as bishop and became a Catholic in 1919, spent the remaining 25+ years of his life as Professor of Church History at the Catholic University of America”
I believe there was also an PECUSA bishop in SC who did similar – I could be wrong.
Catharine,
Levi Silliman Ives (1797-1867), Bishop of North Carolina 1831-1852, resigned in 1852 to become a Catholic; he was subsequently Prof. of Homiletics at St. Joseph’s Seminary in New York City. (His wife, a daughter of the famous PECUSA Bishop of New York, John Henry Hobart [d. 1830] converted with him.)
Frederick Joseph Kinsman (1866-1944), Bishop of Delaware 1908-1919, resigned in 1919 to become a Catholic; he was subsequently Professor of Church History at The Catholic University of America.
Ives explained and justified his conversion in his *The Trials of a Mind in its Progress to the Catholic Faith* (1853), Kinsman in his *Salve Mater* (Longmans, Green & Co., 1920).
Godfrey Goodman (1583-1656), Bishop of Gloucester in the Church of England from 1626, became a Catholic shortly before his death. Graham Leonard, Bishop of London from 1981 to 1991, became a Catholic in 1994, after his retirement. Richard Rutt, bishop of Leicester from 1979 to 1991, became a Catholic in 1995. Two English Anglican suffragan bishops, John Klyberg of Fulham and Conrad Meyer of Dorchester, both became Catholics in that year as well, and I think that they both resigned to do so.
I published this article in 1998:
http://touchstonemag.com/archives/article.php?id=12-05-046-b
on these and related matters,
POSTSCRIPT:
No bishop of the Anglican Communion has ever become Orthodox, I think (although Bishop Rutt of Leicester’s becoming a Catholic rather than an Orthodox in 1995 was a surprise to many, as he had previously been Patron of the very Orthodoxophile “Anglo-Orthodox Society”), but one Continuing Anglican bishop has: Robert Waggener, a bishop of the Anglican Province of Christ the King and later of the Diocese of the Holy Cross, became Orthodox about a year ago and is currently pastor of a Western-Rite Antiochian Orthodox parish in Alabama.
However, there are Anglican converts who became Orthodox bishops, e.g. Kallistos Ware himself.
“However, there are Anglican converts who became Orthodox bishops, e.g. Kallistos Ware himself. “
+KALISTOS professed Orthodoxy in 1958 at the age of 24 and was ordained a priest in 1966. He was never an Anglican clergyman.
I would wager that for many, the experience of Anglican ecclesiology has been such that they have an aversion to the EO praxis of autocephalous polyarchy with fears perhaps more real than imagined.
I meant “more imagined than real” (IOW the TOTAL OPPOSITE of what I actually typed. Sigh… is the turkey ready yet? I am hungry!)
asimplesinner (don’t want to acronymize that!): imho genuine Anglican ecclesiology (vs episcopalian democracy) actually welcomes an Orthodox theological praxis. You’re correct that the major stumbling block they have to deal with is multiple jurisdictions. However, they have the same faith.
We in tec can’t say either any longer.
Oh you guys crack me up. Especially Sarah. Hope you all have/had a happy Thanksgiving. If you catch a cold be thankful for [url=http://www.puffs.com/en_US/pages/products_plus_with_vicks.shtml]Puffs Plus w/ the scent of Vicks[/url] the best tissues ever.
It is no personal insult to me when people leave. Frankly, at this point, I’ll be glad when you’re all gone and off doing what you feel you need to do. Go in peace to love and serve the Lord. Just don’t be thieves as you walk out the door. Bye now! Take care!
RE: “It is no personal insult to me when people leave.”
Yeh.
We can tell.
; > )
; > *
love ya Sarah bye bye now!
Re #76: I never said that Kallistos Ware was ever an Anglican clergyman. However, I have known, and know of, quite a few Anglican clergy who converted to Orthodoxy. They just haven’t become bishops (the marriage thing gets in the way).
Sarah–This Bye bye has the feeling of the SNL routine with the airline flight attendants who really didn’t give a cr@p: “B’ bye”
As Bishop Lipscomb’s chaplain for the last 8 years (and his friend) I am very grateful for the many positive responses on this thread. Surely there could have been several different type of responses from an announcement like this, especially from a Bishop who spent a great deal of his episcopate working on reconciliation within the Episcopal Church, but most of the responses have been understanding and supportive.
As many of you know, Bishop Lipscomb has been afflicted by Parkinson ’s disease since 2002. He added malaria to that on a trip to Africa in 2005. He continued to function as a Diocesan bishop serving his diocese and the wider Episcopal Church while on serious medication, and many practically sleepless nights. Despite his illness he always appeared strong for the people of the diocese, and only in two instances did we have to cancel a visitation at the last minute because of his health. After he recognized the need to provide for a successor and called for that at a diocesan convention, the Episcopal House of bishops decided to take a 1 year moratorium on the consecration of new bishops. That delayed the election of his replacement by a year and further aggravated his health situation. He never complained about it and despite his doctor’s recommendation to end his activity, he continued to care for the people of Southwest Florida, as best he could under his physical condition. Finally in December of 2006 he could not continue, as his doctor made it very clear that he had to go on a medical leave of absence. Since then he has been gradually regaining an acceptable level of health. During this period of recovery he has been in serious discernment about God’s continuing call on his life in the years ahead, resulting in this announcement. He has been faithful and that is all that is required from anyone of us. May God continue to bless John and Marcie in the years ahead.
The Rev. Canon Gary Cartwright
My family is considering converting to catholicism. We left our Episcopal church 3 weeks ago. At this point we have no church home or even a denomination. The Eucharist is very important to us and it is difficult to find a church that has our orthodox beliefs and offers the liturgical service and Holy Communion. We attended a Lutheran (Mo Synod) church, one of the few choices in our neighborhood, for Thanksgiving eve service. There were 9 people in church aside form our family. We were immediately spotted as newcomers at the door and although we explained we were christians who just left the Episcopal church we were told we could not receive Holy Communion until we were educated on the beliefs and the liturgy. What was funny was that my me and my family seemed to be the only ones present that knew the liturgy and could properly respond aloud. Even my 4 year old daughter, after “The Lord be with you”, belted out, “And also with you,” which semed to echo loudly in the almost empty church.
The minister stood up and looked at all 12 of us and said, “Here is the Lord’s table.” He looked uncomfortable when he made eye contact with us after saying that. Everyone proceeded to the alter while we remained. While they had their backs turned to us I started to daydream and in my daydream Jesus turned around from the alter and recognized us and called us by name. He said, “Why aren’t you up here?” I shrugged and he said, “You should be up here.” Then the folks turned back and headed back to their pews. We will keep searching.
I called the local Catholic church last week. I knew communion would be an issue and that wasn’t why I called. I asked if they had a nursery class for my daughter. The answer was she had to be registered. I said what if we just want to visit a few times, could she join the other children. The answer was no, she has to be registered and committed or we could all go sit in the cry room. No communion, no participation with the other children for my kids. We will keep searching.
We miss the liturgy, we miss communion. I know eventually we will find our path but for now the words of Rev Wm Law helps…..This pearl of eternity is the church of God within Thee, where alone thou can worship God in spirit and truth. For everyday will be Sunday to thee and wherever thou goes, thou will have a priest, a church and an alter.”
For those who are searching, I wish everyone the best in their journey to find their new church home.
mochurchhome –
Typically, Catholic churches don’t have nurseries: it’s expected that families will be together at the Mass. If the young ones get restless, that’s ok. If you can’t settle them down, take them out for a minute. I’m an old bachelor and a fussy kid doesn’t bother me a bit. Actually, it’s the grandparents I know who get fussy about the fussy kids. But they can just get over it. 🙂
I’m sympathetic to the children’s class problem. Our religious education programs are modeled more on day school than Sunday school and that doesn’t, in my opinion, allow for all needs. Some parishes don’t even have classes on Sunday, again, expecting that to be a family day. Our religious ed director is a friend of mine and we’ve had some discussions on the subject. She has gotten harder core about not allowing late registrations, but that is mostly aimed at negligence among current parishioners.
In any case, your family will be in my prayers. It’s a hard time for you, I know.
Nochurchhome,
http://irishanddangerous.blogspot.com/2007/10/why-cant-non-catholics-receive.html
Nochurchhome,
I am sorry if you did not feel welcomed at your local Missouri Synod Lutheran parish. But while we traditional Lutherans disagree with Roman Catholicism on some important teachings, we are agreed with them (and with the Eastern Orthodox) in confessing the Real Presence of the body and blood of the Saviour in the sacrament of the altar. Further, we believe receiving the sacrament at a Church’s altar is, in itself, a confession of the same faith that is taught by that Church. If a visitor is willing to make the same confession of faith that we do, he or she is welcome to commune at our altar.
You and your family are always welcome to worship at a Lutheran Church, and we would hope that you believe and confess the faith as we have received it. But communion in the sacraments is the result of that full agreement in the faith, not the means to achieve it.
nochurchhome–I hope you find a Catholic Church that is more welcoming than you have found so far from Lutherans and Catholics. However, one of the reasons the Catholic Church has not disintegrated as have some mainstream Protestant churches is the following of Tradition, firmly and loyally, by the Catholic Church. The restriction on non-members receiving communion in a Catholic Church is rooted in one of St. Paul’s letters. The Eastern Orthodox Churches which also go back to New Testament times also follow this Tradition. As for children, every Catholic parish handles family situations differently–from encouraging little children to be at Mass no matter how noisy, to providing “cry-rooms,” to providing baby-sitting services or kindergarten classes. Sometimes new “sign-ups” are not accepted in child-care programs because of agreements with those who volunteered to baby-sit but were afraid of being swamped by numbers they couldn’t safely handle.
May God be with you in your search for a new spiritual home.
No where in my post did I say we were or felt unwelcomed. The word welcome or unwelcomed can only be found in the replies from some folks who mostly were respectful but I do sense a bit of defensiveness. The purpose of my post was to relay my experiences and not to criticize other religions.
We have been “cradle epicopalians” for many generations and feel that our church has been stolen from us. “Progressive christianity” and “revisionism” is rampant in our church which goes against our traditional teachings. When we moved, due to a military career, we entered into a liberal diocese run by an iron fisted bishop with all liberal churches. I was amazed to hear teachings like….There is no passion. Jesus did not die for your sins. Jesus was passionate for social justice and died because of his passion when he challenged authority. No where in the book of Mark does it use such language as substitutionary sacrifice. My priest did not believe in our statement of faith and said she didn’t have to because of the change in the word of “I” to “we” in the Nicene Creed. She did not believe in the Holy Mysteries. I asked how she could prepare and admister communion if she did not believe in any of this….she said she didn’t have to and I should go back and read her ordination vows. She said it only states that she has to be loyal to our beliefs; which apparently absolves her from believing in them.
What became intolerable was the use of the pulpit to insult and disparage conservatives and their beliefs. We asked her to please stop the insults and the response was I can’t and I won’t. She explained she worked in a conservative diocese (Virginia) where the people tried to get her fired. From then on she carries an anger towards conservatives.
I read the letter online from Rev Robert Semes to Bishop Iker and although foul language wasn’t used, the sentiment at our local church was the same. Conservatives are not welcome and if you don’t like what we say here then do us a favor and leave. Finally, my husband resigned from the vestry, resigned as treasurer and me from the nursery and hostessing duties every other month and we left, following Schori’s instructions….leave property and money and just go. Not that we would have ever taken anything back, but it is the sentiment. Leave your tradition, who cares about your loyalty, attendance, finacial support, sweat equity….just leave. Everyday Schori takes resignations from a priest or bishop or receives news of dioceses that want to leave. There is no care or concern. It is about an agenda and what the majority in the US wants but a small # in the Anglican Communion want. Do it my way, or leave is the sentiment. And in the words of Gene Robinson, “We are meant to use the church for an agenda, God’s agenda, even if it means boldly risking its very existence.” And that is just what they did. They used our church and destroyed it. As much as I admire and respect the conservative Bishops, there is some blame there too. They allowed it to happen slowly over the years.
And now, my church as I know it, is gone. Conservative Episcopalian/Anglicans need to find where they will now fit. It is hard to find a place with orthodox beliefs and a liturgical service. Many places do not allow you to receive communion while the search is in process. Other churches lack the liturgy and Holy Communion that is important to Anglicans. So now what?
We live in an area where you can’t swing a dead cat without hitting a Mormon church. I can walk to 7 of them within a 2 mile radious of my home. My choices are extremely limited if not almost non-existent right now.
It is the Christmas season. We will miss church. There will be no advent study series, no communion, no christmas church activities, only what we do at home as a family. We will continue to visit and try other places, but we will be strangers or visitors who will not be able to fully participate or will be asked not to recieve Holy Communion. We will miss worshipping our way which was meaningful to us, especially this Christmas season.
” asked if they had a nursery class for my daughter. The answer was she had to be registered. I said what if we just want to visit a few times, could she join the other children. The answer was no, she has to be registered and committed or we could all go sit in the cry room. No communion, no participation with the other children for my kids. “
NoChurchHome – If you could consider for a moment the difficulty of the parish from their perspective, it might be easier to understand. I certainly would be VERY leery to take on responsibility for the child of visiting strangers.
It is wholly possible and (to me) understandable that a parish would say “You don’t know us, we don’t know you, we are not comfortable with you leaving your child here.”
To be sure, a four year old who knows the responses to the liturgy is probably well mannered, has all her shots, plays well with others and has two wonderful parents. But THEY don’t KNOW that. God forbid, maybe they had a sour experience with someone dropping a todler off and running off to Timbuktu. I sure hope not, but…
Pray about it some more (of course!) and maybe re-consider. If she did well in the Lutheran service, stands to reason she would do well in the Mass. Then per chance consider scheduling some time to talk with the parish priest. If you wish, I would be more than happy to correspond with you via e-mail – simply follow the link to my blog and email me there if you want.
Asimplesinner,
I really do appreciate or response, I’m not angry with you but with the situation and don’t mean any disrespect. I really don’t want to consider the parish’s perspective on why they require children to be registered. Honestly I do not care what their reasons are, whether valid or pehaps not really well thought out, it really doesn’t matter to me. I feel guilty enough pulling my child out of church. She had friends in the nursery, enjoyed going to church and would clap in the car on the drive over. She is a good sport and pretty well adaptable and although she asks sometimes if she will see so and so she doesn’t cry or fuss about being the new kid every week. I will try my best to not have my daughter suffer over church politics or the mess that adults make over things. If my husband and I are excluded from full participation then that is one thing. However, any church that will not allow my child to participate with the other children will simply not be an option for our family, regardless of the reason. I hope you understand how ridiculous it sounds to me that a church that would be concerned to care for a child who showed up for sunday school. I’ve taught sunday school before and it has never been an issue. Then again, we have not had the problem or concern of leaving our children under someone else’s care in church before. Yes, my daughter is well behaved, clean looking(not mangey) and has all her shots. We are looking for her to participate in sunday school for an hour, we are not dropping our dog off at the kennel for a week, lol.
It doesn’t mean that we will not consider Catholicism, it just means it will not be at our local catholic church. We are fortunate enough to live near a military base which happens to have a very personable and friendly Catholic priest on staff. I think our plan may be to go to the base chapel for Protestant services. There are many young families and a staffed nursery where my daughter will be included. We will be able to receive communion and the military deals with people coming and going frequently and are pretty good at accepting and acclimating people pretty well and quickly. We will have to give up our liturgical service, but something has to give. It will be a neutral service, as they group all protestant denominations together, with no politics and insulting remarks made from the pulpit which will be a welcome change. In the meantime, we have found an Anglican church 1.5 hours away where we will visit on occasion when we long for our old way of worshipping. We will also be meeting with the Catholic priest on base and begin to go through our process of discernment to see what path we should take.
If you are so inclined, please pray for us and all Anglicans who now have been kicked out of their churches and are searching for a place to go. Our church changed our beliefs and theology and turned their backs on us and left a half a million or more people displaced with no where to go. It would be nice for other churches to be understanding and welcoming during the time of the Anglican crisis.
nochurchhome
I am really sorry to hear of your story, and I don’t think it is the only one that affects all sides. The truth is in all this that we are losing people and failing as a church in our witness. I am CofE but am comfortable with Methodists and Baptists in England. Hope you find a good Christian community [and that is about people] to worship with and would hope that you will find that with the military.
God Bless.
[b]Our church changed our beliefs and theology and turned their backs on us and left a half a million or more people displaced with no where to go.[/b] People said the same thing when scripture, tradition and reason led to changes vis a vis slavery, high/low church, ordination of women, 1928/1979 BCP. The simple fact is some people just can not tolerate change of any kind. Especially change that somehow disruptes a feeling of “specialness.” Do I pity you, nochurchhome? More than you can imagine. Do I hope you find a church home soon. Absolutely.
You forgot the shellfish argument, Revamundo.
Revamundo, we all know change is an inevitable part of life. Yes, people have to tolerate some changes in their lifetime in order to exist and function in the world. However, that does not mean they have to change in the matters of their personal beliefs and how they see the world to fit your way. I have a problem with Bennison’s statement, ” the church wrote the bible and therefore can rewrite it.” That is simply a change that I will not accept. I will not accept the new version of christianity to suit the desires of society. My biggest heartburn is the changes made to our faith and doctrines, second the way the TEC has bullied their way around the Anglican communion to get their way. Do it my way, or else !!!!
I wonder why the TEC doesn’t just leave the Anglican communion? Afterall it doesn’t agree nor abide by their decisions and it cost them so much money to be a member. I believe TEC donates about 70-80% of the money to the Anglican communion. What a money saver if they just left! Hmmm….they don’t want to leave because they want the platform, they want to reach the 77 million member body and shove their agenda down their throats. It is about using the church for their own agenda.
I noticed there was no mention of these issues or the intolerance being displayed in churches from your post and that you zeroed in on 1 sentence out of my 3 long posts. So now I will address what you really are dying to fight about and extract your claws over, the homosexuality issue. I’m sorry to disappoint you but this is all I can say…. one of my best friends and previous neighbor happens to be gay and lives with her partner. For years we spent every Christmas Eve with them, worshipped together with them and and have a solid friendship. Yes, I love them as friends and both gals are on my short list of folks to call when I have news of any kind to share. I appreciate their friendship and will never forget the days sipping ice tea at their kitchen counter over tears during a difficult time in my life. I turned to them again when I needed a very important reference letter written to complete my adoption. Yes, they are my true friends. I also have been there for them as 3 out of their 4 teenage children went nutso over the years from having difficulty accepting their mom and her partner. One unfortunately is still addicted to drugs, arrested several times and lives in a trailer with holes in the floor, so I’m told. I have seen the destruction it caused the children. I’m big enough to admit that I do not know the answers to everything and unlike Gene Robinson, I would never profess to know what God’s agenda is. I do the best I can and I follow my conscience.
Now I would suggest that you not waste your time and energy in pitying me but if you want to go right ahead. Will I find a church home? No doubt. Will it be in a couple of weeks or even months, probably not. It will probably be a year or maybe 2, but I have no doubt that God is with us and we will find our path. The Episcopal church….not so sure.
Peace.
[b]one of my best friends and previous neighbor happens to be gay and lives with her partner.[/b] Second time today I’ve seen the “oh but one of my best friends is gay” thing and again it reminds me of what I heard from conservatives during the civil rights movement, “oh, but I have black friends.” Of course, they were the janitors in their buildings or their “mammies” at home, but I digress. If indeed one of your “best friends” is gay, why are you stabbing her in the back repeatedly by denying her full inclusion in the church and in society? Some best friend you are.
Rev,
I know a computer can be impersonal so what I type I say in the most gentlest of tone. I would never want to stab my friend in the back and I would never want to hurt her or anyone.
I can tell you my friend has never asked me what I think of her lifestyle. It is something we never talk about. She knows I care about her, I would do anything to help her out and I value her friendship. She knows I am a christian and she has respected me enough to not ask my opinion. Or perhaps, she is comfortable enough with her lifestyle to not need my approval and so we respect each other and have been able to maintain a friendship. Yes, I am her friend and I accept her the way she is, I’m honored and happy to maintain a friendship with her but it doesn’t mean I have to agree with everything she does or says.
It is my belief that we all, or at least most of us have our crosses to bear in life. They come in various forms, sometimes mental illness, disabilities, deformities, alcoholism, disease, homosexuality etc. I don’t believe that one is more difficult to deal with than another. Speaking from experience, I find it easier and better to accept the cross with grace and not constantly fight it. I do believe in the verse that says for in my weakness I am strong. The crosses I’ve had in my life are what has drawn me closer to Jesus and now I can say I wouldn’t give them up and have learned to accept them.
I do believe in full inclusion in church but my definition is different. I believe my friend should be welcomed and encouraged to participate in church. She be given communion and treated with respect and dignity. Where I differ is that I do not believe that as long as she chooses her lifestyle she should be able to be an ordained priest or bishop.
If my daughter, when older, were to tell me she is gay it would be something I would accept. She would always be welcome in her/my home as well as her partner. I would never shut them out or turn my back on them. But, she would also have to understand that there will be tough times ahead that she will have to deal with. That is true for all of us no matter what cross we have to bear. I wouldn’t expect the whole world to change on account of my cross whether it was menatl illness issues, alcoholism, etc or a gay issue.
I will admit that I don’t know for certain if my way of viewing things is the correct way. I know Jesus loves my friend and all of us who fall short. What would he say about all this? All I can do is turn to the bible when trying to decide the right thing. This is a difficult arguement because the new teaching says the bible is 80% false or made up so it is no sense in debating it. But I believe in it. It’s what I have to help direct me in life. It gives me a standard to strive for. We will all fall short but it is what I try to do. In a crazy and evil world, Jesus and the bible are the only thing I can trust.
I didn’t leave the church when Gene Robinson was ordained. I didn’t agree with it, but I stayed. But what I’m most angry about is the teachings. I’m human and have doubts about things and I come to church to have my faith restored not to be torn down, not to add to any doubts. When my priest tells me she doesn’t believe in our creeds and the bible is bunk and Jesus didn’t die for anyone’s sins, I can’t help but to wonder why she is even a priest. She may be a good social activist or social worker but priest? I read about the woman who is a priest and a muslim at the same time and wonder what is going on in our church. Has everyone lost their mind? I’m angry at how this was all done—going against the decision of the anglican communion and then daring them to react while threatening the existence of the church. A priest and bishop are suppose to protect it. I’m angry at the nastiness and the portrayal of conservatives as being self-riteous pricks who hate woman and gays. I’m angry at the intolerance and the driven agenda to win at any cost. I’m angry at the vindictiveness of the lawsuits. I grieve my fallen church. I believe that many in leadership are not really christians at all.
I hope I didn’t say anything too offensive and was able to explain my pov. It is late so I may have hurried or stated things wrong. But my message is… I welcome and care about all. I choose my faith and to believe among all the uncertainty. I trust in the bible and believe it to be true. I make my decisions the best I can.
I like the prayer that Bishop Lipscomb closed with in his letter. When I was going through a difficult time I found a card with that same prayer by Merton and I have kept it in my wallet now for 15 years.
My favorite part of it is….”the fact that I think I’m following your will does not mean that I am. But I believe the desire to please you does in fact please you.” And that is the best I can do.
God Bless You.
[i]Where I differ is that I do not believe that as long as she chooses her lifestyle she should be able to be an ordained priest or bishop.[/i] So you have a life and she has a lifestyle? What did Jesus say exactly about your friend? Can you point to something in the gospel where Jesus would condemn your friend? Marginalize your friend?
[i]If my daughter, when older, were to tell me she is gay it would be something I would accept. She would always be welcome in her/my home as well as her partner.[/i] This is generous of you. I’m glad you wouldn’t be like many parents who’ve turned their backs on their children.
[i]I’m angry at the nastiness and the portrayal of conservatives as being self-riteous pricks who hate woman and gays. I’m angry at the intolerance and the driven agenda to win at any cost. I’m angry at the vindictiveness of the lawsuits.[/i] No one has portrayed conservatives like they have portrayed themselves. The nastiness, intolerance and driven agenda can be laid right at the feet of Iker and his ilk. This website is filled with the nastiest, snarkiest, meanest people I’ve encountered on the net or F2F. And why should you be surprised at all that TEC is willing to fight, legally if need be, to keep their own property? Would you expect legal help if someone broke into your home and stole your peoperty? Of course you would. Anyone, anywhere, any time is free to leave TEC. They are not free to steal anything on their way out the door.
I really do hope you find a place that will fit your views. Even more, I hope that along your spiritual path you learn what really matters. I don’t believe the “God Bless You” anymore than I believed your tiding of “peace” but I’m willing to give you benefit of the doubt. Go in peace to love and serve the Lord.
Re: #98,
“I believe my friend should be welcomed and encouraged to participate in church. She be given communion and treated with respect and dignity.”
Yes to sentence 1, no to sentence 2. She is living in an immoral lifestyle, and this, in the strictest sense of the term, “living in sin” and unrepentantly so. If you have thoughtfully and advisedly written your second sentence, you would never be at home in either the Catholic Church or the Lutheran Church-Missouri Synod, for both, despite their great differences in other respects, would not deem a person living in such a relationship “properly disposed” for the Sacrament.
Rev,
I’m sorry if the word lifestyle was offensive to you. I didn’t realize that it wasn’t an appropriate term or perhaps wasn’t politically correct. I have an adopted daughter and have been extensively educated on politically acceptable terminology and can cringe when I hear folks from outside the adoption community make politically incorrect statements or use outdated terminology. I understand they do not mean things negatively half the time, they just don’t know.
I’m so sorry your parents have turned from you. I truly am.
This divide has indeed been very nasty and again I’m sorry you have encountered personal meaness. I don’t support that. I’m not sure if you are in a conservative diocese or not. I’m a conservative residing in a liberal diocese and I have definately felt the animosity from that side. I was told by the priest that I was a conservative in her church, in her diocese and in her territory and was basically in enemy territory. I was told to leave if I didn’t like what was going on. So I can understand that if perhaps you are living in a conservative diocese as a liberal (I’m only using these labels for the sake of simplicity) then you have probably experienced the same nastiness and unwelcoming attitude.
I’m sorry to hear you do not believe my Peace and God Bless. I mean it with all sincerity. I don’t want to fight with you or hurt you in any way. I recently logged on a couple of days ago to vent my experiences and anger and sadness. This was my first experience with posting, in fact I’m still trying to figure out how I got to Titusonenine?? I logged in at Stand firm and looked for my post and chalked it off as being lost in cyberspace until my mailbox became full and directed me here…lol….Then my post appeared on this site probably in the middle of a totally different conversation, oh well, I’m not too tech savvy. Anyway, the last thing I would want to do is further someone else’s pain. I am sorry you are hurting so bad, and Revamundo, I will keep you in my prayers and hope that your family can be reconciled. I do send you my love and peace and prayers, with all sincerity.
[i]I’m so sorry your parents have turned from you. I truly am.
This divide has indeed been very nasty and again I’m sorry you have encountered personal meaness. [/i] You are making some wild assumptions. Really wild considering you don’t me AT ALL.
[i]I am sorry you are hurting so bad, and Revamundo, I will keep you in my prayers and hope that your family can be reconciled. [/i] Now this is a great example of conservative “meanness.” Laughable but typical. All sugar-coated and wrapped in (false) good intention lies an insult born from false assumption.
There is no sincerity in you madam. None. You know nothing and you use your lack of knowledge to try and harm others. Try again. If you are sincere try to find out who I am and why I believe as I do instead of making wild assumptions and acting on lies. Shame.
Wait…I’ve had 10 deep breaths now and I wish to apologize. I don’t know if you have any sincerity or not which is why I wanted to give you the benefit of the doubt. You do assume much which is not true but again, giving you the benefit of the doubt, maybe you’re just the type of person who lives their life based in assumption.
We all fall short of what we wish to be, which with all my heart and soul I know for me is to become the person God created me to be. I think that desire is implanted in every soul and encoded in every bit of DNA. We were created in the image of God and in our bumbling, stumbling way we try to become that true image instead of what we see through a mirror darkly. Some of us work towards that goal by practicing radical inclusion and radical hospitality and radical love. Jesus is my example of those traits. He never hesitated to include all the outcasts of his time. Some of us work towards that goal by practicing purity, living to the letter of the law and excluding – casting out – any who don’t meet those standards.
Seems we’re all guilty of the same sin though…we really, really don’t want to be with those we consider other. Not pure enough or too pure…we’re all making a judgement on each other instead of focusing on what is truly important. I know I will miss the conservative voice in my church when it is gone. I will miss those discussions (some heated) where I can stop and say, “you have a point there.” Or a conservative can say, “I see what you mean about the teachings to the Pharisees.” Instead of the church being Christ’s image on earth – a place of refuge, solace, growth and learning – it grows more and more like the fractured factions that Jesus spoke to 2000 yrs ago. No wonder people are staying away in droves.
My apologies.
Rev, I’m sorry. I misread your post.
While hanging christmas lights on my bushes today, I spent a couple of hours today wondering what the heck I said that was so bad it had you hyperventilating.
I scanned back and in post #99 you wrote, “I’m glad you wouldn’t be like many parents who’ve turned their backs on their children.”
I read it as I’m glad you wouldn’t be like my parents……
I’m guilty of not reading your post carefully. I didn’t make an assumption about you. When I posted my message it was because I thought you had told me your parents had turned their back on you. My mistake was a misread.
I’m sorry.
Tis okay nochurch. I read this earlier today and thought of you:
[i]I concur [with former Presiding Bishop Browning’s statement that there will be no outcasts], and I challenge each one of us to consider who it is we would most like to be rid of,” she said. “That person, my friends, is the image of Christ in our midst. There will be no outcasts in this church, whether because of sexual orientation or [b]theological perspective[/b]. God has given us to each other, to love and to learn from each other. May God bless each and every part of this body.[/i]
Revamundo just doesn’t get it, Nochurchhome. He does not realize what it is like to sit in a church where the opposite of one’s faith is being continually preached. Why stay there???? My sympathies, because I’ve been there, and left. The whole point of church is to affirm Christian beliefs and disciple us, connect us with God, our creator and our savior, and nurture us in the faith. If the whole family is not being nurtured, then the church is failing. A church that preaches a false doctrine is anathema. One should not support it nor participate in it. I pray the military chaplain will be able to help you. Whether a bishop responsible for many souls, or a parent responsible for a growing family, there’s only so much heresy one can put up with.
[i]Revamundo just doesn’t get it, Nochurchhome. He does not realize what it is like to sit in a church where the opposite of one’s faith is being continually preached. [/i] Really Ann R? And how would you know that? You don’t. Instead you just assume that this has all been a merry time for me (just as you assume I am male…which may or may not be true.) You don’t know beans about what I’ve had to listen to. The point is though, if we just continue to fracture then more and more we are just like the Scribes & Pharisees & Samaritans that Jesus came to minister to in the first place. We will continue to cast each other out and call each other names like Heretic! Apostate! SINNER!!!! Go ahead Ann…throw the first stone. Tell God who you want to kick out of His church. Be judge, jury and executioner. Is that your style? If so, carry on. Reaping and sowing can be a real bitch ya know.
Ann you write well and sensibly.
Watching this interchange from afar for a few days has lead me to the conclusion that RevA. (1) Finds it insulting that Lipscombe would leave, (2) finds it annoying that someone would not share his/her view on the rightness of RevA’s thinking on same-sex sexuality up to and including marriage and ordination…
IOW, “Don’t leave, and tolerate my take on tolerence!”
Really the irony of an Anglican taking the stand of Pope Clement VII (Don’t you leave the communion!) and Henry VIII (follow my thinking on marital issues) all at the same time is alternately impressive, sad, fun, and telling.
For someone who demands we all be so tolerant of change, Revamundo needs to learn to tolerate that a whole lot of folks are going to be changing churches. On the bright site RevA, you won. As the “intolerant” leave what opposition is left? Even sweeter still, when fellas like +Lipscombe leave in this fashion (as opposed to +Iker) they leave you all the great buildings!
zzzzzZZZZZzzzzz did you say something new ASimpleSinner? Thought not. Ironically, I really don’t want the conservative voice to schism off into schism land. [b]…they leave you all the great buildings[/b] The church is not the buildings in case you didn’t know. It is still theft to take property (like Iker intends) that doesn’t belong to you. What I really think should happen is those of you who can do nothing but complain and whine go in peace to love and serve the Lord. Be on about the ministry instead of casting stones and cloaking up in self righteousness. Me win? Ha! We all lose.
One other thing Simple…John Lipscomb retired in Sept. so he had no control of any property. Do facts stand in the way of your reasoning?
[i] This is becoming a bit mean-spirited. Please lighten up or we’ll close the thread. [/i]
-Elf Lady
“One other thing Simple…John Lipscomb retired in Sept. so he had no control of any property. Do facts stand in the way of your reasoning? “ No they don’t.
Go back and READ what I wrote, your highness.
“Even sweeter still, when fellas like +Lipscombe leave in this fashion… they leave you all the great buildings! “
Does the actual reading what is actually written stand in the way of your diatribes?
[i]COMMENTS ARE CLOSED. [/i]