This group believes the split may actually be a good thing, for group member Michael Gardner breaking away means saying goodbye to archaic thinking. Gardner says, “lets continue what the real tradition of the church not something that is 40 years old and hasn’t grown.” Other members of “Remain Episcopal” say they are offended by the misconceptions put forth by the San Joaquin Diocese. For example, Jan Dunlap, says the diocese often accuses the Episcopal Church of ignoring the Holy Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, which she says just isn’t true. Dunlap reminds the other side that “every episcopalian says the Nicene creed and were not crossing our fingers.”
“lets continue what the real tradition of the church not something that is 40 years old and hasn’t grown.”
This is clear Enlightenment thinking. Humans are improving every generation, new knowledge shows new directions, and old directions are to be discarded or at least suspect. We are evolving into the super race.
There is no place in that thinking for the Faith Once Delivered.
Gosh the Bible is well over a thousand years old – must be a real problem for these folks. I am nearly 40. Perhaps these folks are more in tune with the 70’s movie Logan’s Run.
“the Faith Once Delivered” is traditional knowledge. It’s important and the starting point in any Christian reflection. But knowledge is evolving, and we need to be open to development and new knowledge in order to grow. This is as true in theology as it is in science and philosophy.
Tradition (a changing, evolving reality) is important for the acquisition of knowledge, but traditionalism (the worship of the past) is death to the progression of knowledge.
TEC (and those who wish to remain) is aware of this. Sure, it isn’t pretty or comfortable when new theories (many which will prove to be weak) arise, but with ample criticism the stronger theories will eventually come to the forefront and TEC and society will benefit from this over time.
The myth (and strawman) that we progressives are all unitarian just won’t go away. Until a more robust theory of God presents itself, we are committed to the current theory (the trinity), even with its anomalies.
Knowledge is evolving and improving but human nature is not. We are still drawn to the same sins today as people were 2,000 years ago. While we better understand what drives same sex attraction (or think we do) that does not change the fact that the behavior is still sin. We may better understand adultery, but the behavior is still sin.
What most of us orthodox, bible thumping fundamentalists object to is a complete redefinition of the nature of sin, and redefining of behavior that was once pretty universally considered sinful, into something that now must be blessed, just because the current secular culture has changed.
RE: Virgil in Tacoma’s post:
Q.E.D.
Why even waste time, effort, and money on a church if Virgil’s postulation is correct. Why bother unless your church has beautiful music, happy fellowship, or some other reason to attend. A church with no roots in the past cannot stand against the storms of irrelevancy and, like a tree with a weak root system, will certainly blow down. I started to quote John15:1, but decided that Virgil’s vision of new enlightenment is too far from my vision of the Christian Faith which has strong, deep roots in Jesus Christ as God revealed and His admonitions of the way to stand against the storms of life.
As my sig indicates, I am an old man and have seen and experienced too many life-problems that new enlightenment fails to help with, so I am sticking with my Savior who is “the true vine.â€
Kendall, this is an opportune time to thank you regularly featuring pieces that showcase views from (what many here would call) “the dark side.”
[blockquote]Jan Dunlap, says the diocese often accuses the Episcopal Church of ignoring the Holy Trinity of Father, Son and Holy Spirit, which she says just isn’t true.[/blockquote]
That is probably true in the narrowest sense. There are still plenty of TEC parishes that are faithful to the Trinity. The thing is, there are plenty that are not and nothing is done about them. Others deny the divinity of Christ altogether, and again, nothing is done. As good money is crowded out by bad, so is good theology supplanted by bad. TEC is just fine with either.
[blockquote]
not something that is 40 years old and hasn’t grown.
[/blockquote]
The real irony is that this comment was spoken by someone who wants to remain in TEC.
Let’s see….2007-1967=40 years. And then, what are the non-growth stats for TEC? I think our moderate/liberal TEC bishop admitted based on the latest figures that TEC was in systematic decline.
TEC is LITERALLY the institution that is trying to push something that is 40 years old and which is not growing. I wonder if these folks know ironic their statements are.
#4…Our knowledge of ethics is also evolving.
#6…Tradition is indeed important. We must have roots in order to sustain ourselves and to provide meaning. We just need to realize that tradition is also evolving and changing. It’s when we forget this that we stop growing in our knowledge of God and his will.
Virgil, “Tradition is important,” but I was not writing about tradition, but Biblical (for most of us) Truth. If we depend on Tradition, you might have some reasons to change it willy-nilly, but I was writing about Biblical Truth as handed down to us from the Apostles themselves. As for me, I will take my beliefs from those who were with Christ, not those two thousand years later who believe their religion can change every few years to accomodate social experimentation.
Of course the advantage with Virgil’s view is if you don’t like what God is doing today you can wait until he changes his mind or corrects his mistakes in a couple of years to catch up with what you wanted to do anyway.
As a member of the Diocese of SJ, I feel the “liberals” in the diocese are really moderates. Our diocese has been so conservative for so long, that some of the bizarre stories of the rest of the church have not been heard. These people are in for a real shock when the truly progressive part of the church comes to visit. My opionion.
The advantage of Virgil’s view is that it recognizes that we are not perfect receptacles of God’s revelation and that we must from time to time amend the truth claims we make utilizing our spiritual and norming sources.
#11…The truth propositions we deduce from scripture are as subject to amendment as those deduced from tradition. In fact, it would be more accurate to say that our truth claims are deduced from scripture seen through the lenses of tradition using reason to help focus and refine our traditions.
#13…I would think that the “moderates” in SJ are aware of the reasons given for the split. And if they are still willing to remain in TEC, then they are able to accommodate variances or agree with the establishment.
Oldman [#11] writes: “… I will take my beliefs from those who were with Christ….”
We know about the (putative) beliefs of some of Jesus’ followers. It’d be useful to hear the witness of other folks who reportedly followed the Teacher as well, such as the influential Nicodemus and Joseph of Arimathea; the wealthy Lazarus; and other friends and admirers. The record of the early church says essentially nothing about these people — suggesting perhaps that they didn’t buy the claims made by the Twelve.
So Oldman, it seems you’re faced with a decision about just which people who were with Christ you want to take your beliefs from.
[/3. Virgil in Tacoma wrote: “’the Faith Once Delivered’ is traditional knowledge. It’s important and the starting point in any Christian reflection. But knowledge is evolving, and we need to be open to development and new knowledge in order to grow. This is as true in theology as it is in science and philosophy.â€]
The problem with the concept of the evolution of knowledge is that it doesn’t take into account the law of entropy, and thus sees all knowledge as a derived progression of the previous knowledge thru human reason rather than the addition of knowledge to the general pool by a divine revelation. Since true knowledge never violates its own laws and dictates, and since the New Covenant is an everlasting covenant, never to be replaced or reformed as was the former covenant by the better covenant, there can be no evolution of knowledge outside the constraints and boundaries of the “Faith Once Deliveredâ€. That is the essence of what “a more sure word of prophecy†characterizes. Therefore, the “Faith Once Delivered†must always be received and responded to first by faith, that is why it is referred to as the “Faithâ€, rather than the reason, “once deliveredâ€.
Ah, DC good solid speculation. Maybe green aliens planted the story?
[14. Virgil in Tacoma wrote:
The advantage of Virgil’s view is that it recognizes that we are not perfect receptacles of God’s revelation and that we must from time to time amend the truth claims we make utilizing our spiritual and norming sources.
#11…The truth propositions we deduce from scripture are as subject to amendment as those deduced from tradition. In fact, it would be more accurate to say that our truth claims are deduced from scripture seen through the lenses of tradition using reason to help focus and refine our traditions. ]
The traditions spoken of by #11, that are used as interpretive lenses, have been agreed upon for nearly 1800 years by the church catholic as being the creeds beginning with Irenaeus’ Rule of Faith and perfected in the Nicene Creed. When the Creeds (traditions) began to be said with crossed fingers behind the back, the departure from the traditional “spiritual and norming sources†began, and if you follow the trajectory, it leads directly away from Jesus as the (particular) Savior and Lord of us (the general).
If the truth from the scriptures evolves, why not the “truth” from the canons. I am happy to tell everyone that God has revealed that the interpretation TEC has on its canons concerning property is incorrect – all the property of TEC really belongs to me. I will sell it to you real cheap, 5 cents on the dollar!
Thanks Brother Michael and Jafer. You make this oldman happy enough to enjoy my dinner, say my evening prayers, and sleep in the knowledge that all I have learned about my Lord Jesus Christ during my almost seventy-nine years in life and fifty in the Episcopal Church was not a bunch of jumbled, everchanging truths.
Both churches in SJ — the one that’s part of the Southern Cone and the one that’s part of TEC — will be poorer for the other’s departure. Gardner would be better off being in relationship with you lot; you would be better off being in relationship with him. The reasserters cannot say to the reappraisers “I have no need of you” (or vice versa) without both sides spinning off in impoverished directions. I suppose it may be necessary in some circumstances (though not in my opinion in this one), just as amputation is necessary in some circumstances, but there are costs even so. And one of the costs is that only talking to people who agree with you is guaranteed to close out part of the conversation God intends to draw you and the others into. There was a time in my life when I thought the doctrine of the Trinity was goofy medieval philosophy; thank God I was able to stay in the church, say the creeds, and ripen.
Did anyone think to ask Jan Dunlap which parts of the Nicene Creed (or any other creed, for that matter) Vicki isn’t reciting these days? When she gets that answer from Vicki, will she make the rounds of the HOB with the same question?
One thinks that if the members of the HOB were asked to cut out the parts they didn’t agree with, you would end up with less than even “I believe.”
#1 — True, and more succinctly, darkness has no tolerance for light.
Gawd bless us…ev’ryone:
[blockquote] God rest ye merry episkapoi
Let nothing you dismay;
For Stacey Sauls our counselor
Says our Canons are OK
To save our real estate intact
From bigots gone astray
O titles of real estate and joy,
Real estate and joy
O titles of real estate and joy.
In San Joaquin, we worry,
The blessed loot is gone;
But not within our governance
and blessed Polity
To which our Mother Schori
Did nothing take in scorn
O titles of real estate and joy,
Real estate and joy
O titles of real estate and joy.
From Lexington Kentucky
A blessed lawyer came;
And unto certain progressives
Brought tidings of the same;
How that it was a Canon born
Dennis Canon by Name
O titles of real estate and joy,
Real estate and joy
O titles of real estate and joy.
“Fear not then,†said the Bishop Sauls,
“Let nothing you affright,
This day is born a theory
A cause of action bright
To free all those who trust in it
From Duncan’s power and might.â€
O titles of real estate and joy,
Real estate and joy
O titles of real estate and joy.
The bishops at those tidings
Rejoiced much in the mind
And taught their flocks a-thing or two
Of zen and Buddhist monks;
And syncretism straightaway
The gospel to avoid.
O titles of real estate and joy,
Real estate and joy
O titles of real estate and joy.
Now to Polity sing praises,
All you within this place,
And with progressive personhood,
We will all embrace
This holy tide of real estate,
All others we shall sue.
O titles of real estate and joy,
Real estate and joy
O titles of real estate and joy.[/blockquote]
Thanks to [url=http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/8341/#157712 ]”tired” at SF[/url] for spreading a little Christmas cheer!
To Stacy Sauls (and to Bp Howard of Northern Florida who tried to evict an Anglican congregation in Advent):
[i]But what did Scrooge care? It was the very thing he liked. To edge his way along the crowded paths of life, warning all human sympathy to keep its distance, was what the knowing ones call ‘nuts’ to Scrooge.[/i]
[blockquote] Dunlap reminds the other side that “every episcopalian says the Nicene creed and were not crossing our fingers.”[/blockquote]
This is simply not true. In many TEC parishes the creed is now optional. And more than a few clergy and even bishops have publicly admitted to “crossing their fingers” or simply going silent during parts they don’t agree with.
MarkP,
I am simply a member of the diocese and did not attend convention. My opinion is that no one in the diocese wanted to see this break. Some may have wanted the separation from 815 for various reasons, but no one wanted to see those in our “family” separated. My opinion above is that those who want to remain are in for several reality checks. 1) How to pay bills? (non of the “remain” parishes are very large (ASA <100)) 2) GC2009 will likely be a liberal agenda free-for-all. I am not sure if they are prepared for that. They like the concept of "inclusion", but will everyone in the pews agree when they see it first hand. I use the term "inclusion" to mean the full LGBT agenda in a new BCP. They will have no choice about SSBs, unconventional prayers and new interpretations of the Bible. Then what do they do?
usma87, you’re right in saying that none of us really wanted this separation. Unfortunately, there really wasn’t much choice open to us. I was a delegate from St Alban’s Church in Los Banos, and after we voted to align with the Province of the Southern Cone, I felt as if a huge load had been lifted from our shoulders and we had gotten a breath of fresh air……even though there was no jubilation evident.
Believe me, usma87, I am not looking forward to what this does to my church — it isn’t just the idea of schism I regret, it’s the effect of schism on us who remain. You’re analysis is pretty close to mine. Me, I’m a moderate liberal on the issue of gay people in the life of TEC (though I’m a moderate conservative on some other theological issues) — my personal opinions are somewhat to the left, but I’m glad the church takes a long view and doesn’t move as quickly as I might. What this means is that, if the loyal opposition throws in the towel and decamps, I will probably agree with the first couple of things general convention does; after that, not so much. I don’t look forward to that reality, though I’m not tempted to go with the departing churches, because I believe you will face the same problem from the other side — how will you avoid becoming a sort of “Episcopal Church, Missouri Synod” or Southern Baptist Conference of the Anglican Communion? Your leaders are all self-professed conservatives (and not just socially and theologically — look back at the archives here to see how strong the identity is with conservative american politics). We’re both the poorer, at least for us with “moderate” as part of our self identification.