You can find the audio here, it may be listened to directly or downloaded as an MP3 file.
You can find the audio here, it may be listened to directly or downloaded as an MP3 file.
Among its many excellent features and discussion of TEC issues relating to General Convention, this is a great presentation on the meaning of marriage. Thank you.
Kendall mentions the inspiring story of Roberston McQuilkin. For those unfamiliar with it, you can read about it in [url=http://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2004/februaryweb-only/2-9-11.0.html]Christinity Today[/url] or hear it in his own words in this short You Tube [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f6pX1phIqug]video[/url].
“We have no future in the Episcopal Church, as a Diocese.”
Thank you for that honesty, Father Kendall! So what is the reason why Dio SC is continuing to stay in TEC?
* hoping that the Second Coming will occur, and it won’t matter?
* hoping that a majority of the revisionist leadership of TEC will miraculously hear the Holy Spirit, and will therefore stop pushing their anti-Christian agenda?
* some other reason, not disclosed outside of the current leadership of the Dio SC?
I apologize if I sound flip or confrontational, but being in an ACNA church that was persecuted by the TEC Diocese, our parish’s leadership and nearly 100% of our parishioners felt that following Christianity was more important than keeping our building and our foundation monies. Unlike South Carolina, we did not have the good fortune to have a state supreme court that applied traditional legal principles of trust law. I genuinely still do not understand Dio SC’s continued membership in TEC, especially because one day Bp Lawrence (God bless him!) and faithful priests such as yourself *will* be replaced.
RE: “So what is the reason why Dio SC is continuing to stay in TEC?”
Why would they leave? I don’t see any reason. Christians and Jews/Hebrews throughout history have been in corrupt, heretical, incompetent organizations and not only survived but thrived.
RE: “our parish’s leadership and nearly 100% of our parishioners felt that following Christianity was more important than keeping our building and our foundation monies. . . . ”
Well obviously if Sophy and others don’t believe that you can “follow Christianity” while being in a corrupt organization than certainly they must needs leave [although I’d think their theological foundations would be quite different from mine and others].
But clearly the Diocese of South Carolina thinks it’s well able to follow Christianity while remaining in TEC.
RE: “I genuinely still do not understand Dio SC’s continued membership in TEC . . . ”
It looks pretty simple to me — and I can only speak for me, not the Diocese of South Carolina.
1) I’m well able to live and grow in the Christian faith within a corrupt heretical larger organization.
2) I’m an Anglican.
3) I see no sane, functional, healthy entity to join even if I believed that I needed to leave; rather I see something quite the opposite and growing more so. Why on earth would I wish to leave one insane unhealthy dysfunctional place to join another? That reminds me of the people who left The Episcopal Church — and joined another mainline church. Talk about frying pans and fireplaces!
4) Since I don’t grant that it’s a theological necessity to leave or intrinsically immoral to stay in a larger corrupt organization, I’d need to be clearly called elsewhere by God — and I haven’t been.
5) All of the above being the case, and given that God has blessed me greatly in the faith over the past really hard years in TEC, I’d need to go join a non-Anglican entity and that would be very sad — it’s something that I definitely don’t *want* to do and since I don’t see the need either, then I’m very content — more than content, happy — right here in TEC.
RE: “especially because one day Bp Lawrence (God bless him!) and faithful priests such as yourself *will* be replaced.”
Ah, more prophecy, which we are treated to every time an orthodox TEC diocese has a bishop election. ; > ) . . . “The election of Bishop XYZ is the Very Last Time that an orthodox bishop will be elected or approved in TEC!!!”
Though we disagree on secular politics, Sarah about sums it up for me. I would add that I also feel a certain filial duty to TEC. There are simply too many good, loving people in TEC who are still open to the Gospel. I am simply not willing to sever communion with them and abandon them to their fate.
I certainly compliment Kendall for laying out the situation in such clear terms. I for one am not so sure the passage of the CWB resolutions is a foregone conclusion. I understand my own bishop (no arch-traditionalist he) has expressed reservations. TEC has made the baptismal rite the be all and end all of church membership. They’re using the last of its vows as the primary justification for SSBs. I’ve heard there is even a proposal to abolish Confirmation as a prerequisite for office holding and ordination on the grounds that Baptism is the sole theologically justified initiation into full membership (Confirmation would be retained as an optional rite of passage). How then can we undercut Baptism by allowing Communion without it? I suspect the resolution for “studying it further” will pass, but it would not surprise me if more than a few revisionists oppose any further movement on these grounds. We’ve already seen some liberal (glbt affirming) Anglo-Catholic parishes, like Christ Church, New Haven, express their displeasure. They may not be alone. I admit I am probably being too optimistic. Our bishops and deputies have raised having their cake and eating it too to a high art.
[blockquote] “I genuinely still do not understand Dio SC’s continued membership in TEC, especially because one day Bp Lawrence (God bless him!) and faithful priests such as yourself *will* be replaced.” [/blockquote]
Let me state first that, unlike Sarah, I do not see anything particularly dysfunctional in ACNA, especially viewed in the light of western Anglican churches generally over the past century. Just my perspective.
But Sophy, even so, I still don’t understand why your quote above gives a reason for Dio South Carolina (or its denizens) to leave TEC?
I agree that one day it is possible that TEC might somehow intervene to cause the bishop and clergy of Dio SC to be replaced with ultra-liberals. Personally I think that is pretty unlikely – I can expand on why I think that if required – but yes, it is possible. It is also possible that could happen to an ACNA dicoese, unlikely as that may seem. Either way, surely that is just something that the faithful clergy and people of the relevant diocese will have to deal with, when and if it happens?
In any case, what about the explicit statements of the orthodox Primates on this issue? The Global South welcomed +Lawrence and +Howe of TEC to their great meeting in Singapore in April 2010. They invited them to share Holy Communion with them, just as they invited your ++Duncan (and indeed, he presided). Afterwards, the Global South Primates issued a communique which included this:
[blockquote] “19. We were pleased to welcome two Communion Partner bishops from The Episcopal Church USA (TEC) and acknowledge that with them there are many within TEC who do not accept their church’s innovations. We assure them of our loving and prayerful support. We are grateful that the recently formed Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) is a faithful expression of Anglicanism. We welcomed them as partners in the Gospel and our hope is that all provinces will be in full communion with the clergy and people of the ACNA and the Communion Partners.” [/blockquote]
Twenty Primates of the Anglican Communion issued that statement (including all the Gafcon Primates) and I have never heard that any of them have resiled from it.
If orthodox Primates don’t think faithful believers have to leave TEC, then why should you or I think it?
Concur with Sarah. I am content to be in an imperfect church since my membership would ruin a perfect church. I believe I am being faithful by remaining in TEC. In DSC the problems with TEC are known but there is no obsession with them. DSC stays on message with the gospel.
Wow, talk about being jumped on! (well, I knew I would be 🙂 ) Sarah, I know your reasons – you voice them at StandFirm all the time (and you are not so fortunate as Father Kendall, being in the Upper Dio SC). I wanted to hear from Father Kendall.
I’m sure righteous people wondered why Dietrich Bonhoffer chose to stay within the clutches of Nazi Germany and fight, though he probably foresaw (please, don’t accuse me of “prophecy” here) the great likelihood that he would suffer on this Earth as a result. I (and you, who are not Father Kendall) can only guess (prophecy?) as to his reasons. He is a wise and Godly man – I wanted to hear from him.
RE: “and you are not so fortunate as Father Kendall, being in the Upper Dio SC . . . ”
Very true — if I lived in the lower diocese I’d never even give a thought to the larger TEC, frankly and I’d be far far far less likely to wish to leave than I am now.
Maybe God will call me down to The Holy City, and I can retire in a happy oblivion, conscious of and keeping up with the idiocy and heresy of the larger TEC but happy in a fantastic diocese. ; > )
Surely God is calling me to the coast!!!
I fully respect those who choose to stay within TEC, but their reasons for doing so are mostly “I” centered. My reasons for leaving TEC had not so much to do with how the many innovations affected me, but rather what example I was setting for my children and future grandchildren. If grandpa was an Episcopalian it must be OK…
I have a cousin, living in another state, who is an avowed athiest. If he were to confide in me that he was feeling led to re-examine his convictions, there is no way I could recommend an Episcopal church. This is because I would have to visit that specific church personally to see what was being taught there.
RE: ” . . . but their reasons for doing so are mostly “I†centered.”
Yes, because believing that it’s not God’s will to leave TEC is all about “me.” ; > )
RE: ” . . . but rather what example I was setting for my children and future grandchildren.”
Yes — “flee, children and grandchildren, whenever the bad guys look like they’re taking over or winning!” ; > )
Kidding of course . . . because if God’s called someone to leave TEC or if somebody believes that it’s intrinsically immoral to stay in a corrupt organization then they should go. But the whole “setting an example” thingy cuts both ways.
I want my loved ones to see “Athanasius against the world, then.” And one is well able to set a great example for kids and friends when one stays in TEC. Gives a great opportunity to carefully explain to people what’s wrong with TEC’s leadership, what the nature of the Gospel is, and why it’s important to resist such lies whenever and wherever one finds oneself.
“Gives a great opportunity to carefully explain to people what’s wrong with TEC’s leadership, what the nature of the Gospel is…”
So, would you recommend that a seeker go to an Episcopal church in a revisionist parish in a revisionist diocese to learn what the nature of the Gospel is?
Not at all. But then of course, I would not recommend that a seeker go to ANY random church of ANY entity [and that includes ACNA] to “learn what the nature of the Gospel is” . . . so your criteria are for me dull and void.
My recommendations to seekers are highly specific, localized, and connected with individual relationships with which I can attempt to connect them. They may include 1) TEC, 2) Baptists, 3) independent churches, 4) Methodists, 5) PCA, 6) EPC, 7) ACNA, and any number of other entities.
I would *never* simply wholesale recommend a seeker to some random unknown congregation of whatever entity.
Ideally, a seeker needs to first have a one-to-one relationship with another Christian.
Ralph M wrote:
[blockquote] “I fully respect those who choose to stay within TEC, but their reasons for doing so are mostly “I†centered.” [/blockquote]
I am just curious as to how you know that?
Furthermore, are you including in this those who stay in TEC because they agree with its direction, or are you just referring to those who stay in TEC but do not agree with its direction? After all, it is the latter group to whom the Primates of the Global South were referring in their statement issued in April 2010 (see quote in my #5 above).
[blockquote] I would *never* simply wholesale recommend a seeker to some random unknown congregation of whatever entity.
Ideally, a seeker needs to first have a one-to-one relationship with another Christian. [/blockquote]
Very wise words.
[blockquote] “He is a wise and Godly man – I wanted to hear from him.” [/blockquote]
Sophy, of course it is legitimate to ask a question, but surely the answer is obvious anyway:
If the Global South Primates and the leadership of ACNA all agree that it is legitimate for Canon Harmon to remain in TEC, why would he have to justify anything?
I may be a member of TEC, disagree with national or diocesan policies and still remain firm in my faith, free of the innovations that flow from apostate leadership. I can be secure and remain whatever my reasons. That is what I mean by “I” centered.
However, if somebody sees me as a person to be emulated (for example, a grandchild) then my actions and associations are an influence on that person. When we are a member of a group, we are assumed to share the views and values of the group. Except for the “orthodox” dioceses and churches in TEC, it’s a risky place for impressionable people.