You see my dear candidates, it is not that easy to be an Episcopalian. My God, even our first American bishop was refused ordination by the British because he was not going to pledge allegiance to crazy king George that Americans had just defeated in our Independence War!
God bless those Scottish Jacobites who in Aberdeen, Scotland, dared to make a crack in the Anglican Communion and consecrated our first bishop, Samuel Seabury, against the will of the powers to be at the time. That’s how the light got in and we were able to have our first American bishop.
It didn’t take long for the Brits to realize that we were here to stay, and that we were not anymore the Church of England but the Episcopal Church of these United States of America.
Now, I know that you want to be confirmed and received by me this morning, but I want to make sure you know that we really mean for you to keep the promises that you are about to make.
We really mean it when we ask you to reaffirm your renunciation of evil and to commit to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
Yes, my beloved candidates and all of you present this morning in this Cathedral, you need to be aware that we really mean it when we ask all of you if you are willing to persevere in resisting evil and also if you are willing to love your neighbor as yourself.
Not some neighbors but all neighbors. Not just those who talk like you, or cook like you, or vote like you, or pray like you, or those whose affections God has wired different from yours. We really mean all.
I also want to be sure that you know the consequences of responding to the last question of the Baptismal Covenant with, “I will, with God’s help.” It’s important, because with the condition of the world we live in today, it could really make a difference for good.
That final question is going to be this:
Will you strive for justice and peace among all people? Will you?
Will you respect the dignity of every human being? Will you really do that?
Do you realize how many cracks we will have to make to be able to achieve this?
I have to admit that if I say that I believe that we must strive for peace, then I must chisel hard and make a crack at that boulder of war brought to our nation through lies and deceit. A boulder of war that brushes aside the death of over 3,000 American youngsters and now insists on a surge that will only increase the number of those killed.
If I am to declare that I must strive for justice, then I must be willing to say stop the embargo against the people of Cuba. It has failed and it only punishes the poor and the weak and not those in power in that island.
If I believe in resisting evil, then I must do something to stop the exploitation of farmworkers taking place today in Immokalee, Florida.
I must also be willing to look at immigration issues with the eyes of the one who insisted in proclaiming that we must love our neighbors as ourselves.
There are other churches in our country where blacks and Hispanics are kept away. There are quite a few other churches out there where gays and lesbians are bashed and considered evil, where war is praised and encouraged, where women are kept in their place, churches where cracks are not allowed to happen. This Cathedral is not one of them.
Now if you really insist on becoming an Episcopalian, then welcome to this church and help us to make sure that we keep some of our cracks. It’s important–you see, that’s how the light gets in.
Rousing stuff, in its way. I realise there are other ways. Personally, I am convinced this is the Way.
God bless those Scottish Jacobites who in Aberdeen, Scotland, dared to make a crack in the Anglican Communion and consecrated our first bishop, Samuel Seabury, against the will of the powers to be at the time. That’s how the light got in and we were able to have our first American bishop.
Gasp! You mean the Episcopal Church had it’s first bishops consecrated by Bishops who crossed provincial boundaries WITHOUT ecclesiastical approval from the bishop in charge of the province? And he approves of it?
“Yes, my beloved candidates and all of you present this morning in this Cathedral, you need to be aware that we really mean it when we ask all of you if you are willing to persevere in resisting evil and also if you are willing to love your neighbor as yourself.
Not some neighbors but all neighbors. Not just those who talk like you, or cook like you, or vote like you, or pray like you, or those whose affections God has wired different from yours. We really mean all.”
To love those neighbors whose “affections” are “wired different from” mine requires me to tell them: “no, it’s not ok.” To do otherwise is to lead them into a false sense of security in their own sinfulness. I would hope my neighbors would love me enough to not leave me wallowing in my sin, but help lift me out of it.
I also noticed that Bp Frade’s allusion to homosexuality is broad enough to include a variety of folks whose “affections” differ from mine, such as pedophiles, zoophiles, and necrophiles. Of course, he is right that we must love those neighbors as well, but does that mean we must AFFIRM their “wiring” as ok?
I sure love my loud mouthed college room mate.
That I wasn’t denied a work study scholarship or also expelled was probably because I was an Anglo from N.Ind Conference of the Methodist Church at that time. They waited until after school was out to expel Leo and I only found him when I read about his and +Joe Doss’s arrest bringing in Mariel boat lift refugees. That’s my roomie! Google the story.
I found the Wesleyan sacramental, evangelical, charismatic and social justice emphasis missing in Methodism in ECUSA and came home. I disagree with him, like I do with many in TEC, but I sure love my sisters and brothers in Christ!
Adios. . .
Bob Maxwell+
“Some talk about the decrease in membership in our church as a symptom of our discussion on sexuality. But they forget to mention that the main exodus from our denomination was not because of Prayer Book changes or the ordination of women or the acceptance of gays and lesbians, but it was mainly due to the departure of white persons who refused to worship next to a black person . . .”
But those who left are happy and grateful to be in a church whose bishop is a black person? That makes about as much sense as Frade’s theology. I should say “theology,” since its elements are nothing but pure left-wing politics.
Shame he had to take God’s name in vain the 2nd sentence.
That was my thought exactly, Duke. What sort of Christian spirituality can a person have who blasphemes?
RE: “But they forget to mention that the main exodus from our denomination was not because of Prayer Book changes or the ordination of women or the acceptance of gays and lesbians, but it was mainly due to the departure of white persons who refused to worship next to a black person . . .â€
Oh wait — I thought the story was that “the Episcopal church was so united, so loving, so non-divisive, that we EVEN did not divide during the Civil War. See how much better we are than those horrible Baptists?”
; > )
I am a member of a parish in Bp. Frade’s diocese. I have heard or read a few other questionable or troubling sermons by +Frade, but I find this to be his most troubling sermon yet, especially the fact that it is a sermon on the occasion of CONFIRMATION. There is nothing here about Christ and the faith once delivered. It is instead all about Anglican / ECUSA politics. What a narrow view he offers those about to be confirmed in their faith, when he proclaims that he is offering breadth and openness and diversity. And how sad for these new confirmands to be given a message about the DESTRUCTION of the church instead of its building up.
Frade’s refrain seems to be: it’s great if the church is destroyed. It lets in more light. I challenge readers to find any similar teaching in Scripture. Yes, the Lord talks about tearing down that He might build up, especially if one has built on a foundation other than Christ, but that is the Lord’s work, not a deliberate attempt by men to create “cracks” in God’s church.
Note how he avoids much of the baptismal covenant. Where is the focus on one’s commitment to Christ as Lord and Savior and repentance from PERSONAL sin? Sigh.
I also was struck by the remarkable similarity between this and a sermon preached by former PB Frank Griswold, which Chris Johnson at MCJ did his usual fabulous job of fisking: http://themcj.com/1151
+Frade:
“Ring the bells that still can ring.
Forget your perfect offering.
There is a crack in everything.
That’s how the light gets in.â€
+Griswold:
As I read today’s Gospel I was put in mind of a Zen Buddhist haiku: “My storehouse having burnt down, nothing obscures the light of the moon.”
The Apostle Paul:
Could it be any clearer from Paul’s writings that apostolic authority is meant for the BUILDING up of the church? And yet here +Frade is boasting of helping to tear it down and crack it’s roof and walls.
Heaven help us.
As poorly as our national leaders have botched the situation in Iraq, I am sick to death of the attitude that somehow all military action is inherently evil. Peace is preferable to war; and no one hates war more than a military man/woman. But, Bp. Frade only has the right to say what he said because some 19 year old took a bullet for him somewhere between 1775 and June 12, 2007. If you can read this thank, a teacher. If you can read it in English, thank a Marine. And another thing–where did the nonsense about white flight in TEC come from? I think he flat slam made that one up. Plus, the only palce TEC is growing is in the South, particularly the I 20 an I 40 corridors.
The peak memberwship and ASA in ECUSA was post the 60-80’s period known as the Civil Rights Area when white flight did take place. US History wasn’t Leo’s strongest subject.
I see such leaders as God’s allowing judgment to begin with the household of God on this continent. Dr. Radner’s views in this area aren’t too popular, but he makes points that may prove to be real prophecy.
David K. yes, I noted that +Frade gives absolutely no evidence to support his statement about white flight. But then, this is the bishop who denies official diocesan parochial report data. He insists our diocese is growing and that the data showing decline is inaccurate. He has not been able to produce any more accurate data to back up his claim. But in his mind our diocese MUST be growing, whether or not there is data to prove it.
Here’s the diocesan chart:
http://12.0.101.92/reports/PR_ChartsDemo/exports/ParishRPT_612200731733PM.pdf
Here’s the link to +Frade’s past comments about diocesan statistics
http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=12581#comment-503787
(I know that commenter personally. It’s not me. He has several times heard +Frade make similar remarks. According to +Frade, the parochial data is just wrong.)
” The most evident mark of God’s anger, and the most terrible castigation He can inflict upon the world, is manifest when He permits His people to fall into the hands of a clergy who are more in name than in deed, priests who practice the cruelty of ravening wolves rather than the charity and affection of devoted shepherds. They abandon the things of God to devote themselves to the things of the world and, in their saintly calling of holiness, they spend their time in profane and worldly pursuits. When God permits such things, it is a very positive proof that He is thoroughly angry with His people and is visiting His most dreadful wrath upon them.” —-Saint John Eudes
#12 Karen. Thanks. It is especially interesting data since I know personally of clergy who never cull their rolls, and simply guesstimate (ie make up) weekly ASA numbers. Anecdotally, a 3.5% reported decline probably represents UNDER reporting. #13 Paula. I don’t know who St. John Eudes is but that’s an amazing quote.
The bishop’s use of the race card would be disgusting if it weren’t so absurd.
David,
A brief biography of St. John Eudes can be found at
http://www.catholic.org/saints/saint.php?saint_id=357
Except for the losses post-WO and post-2003, the decline in TEC is probably just attrition: a failure to replace the dying and individual drop-outs normal to any body. Perhaps the public spectacle of bishops telling whoppers contributes to that attrition.
Wow. This man essentially said that he welcomes only liberal democrats for confirmation. I would have gotten up and walked out if I had been a candidate even at age 11.
Since when post 1968 have leftists believed in American exceptionalism. They say that patriotism is the last refuge of scandrels.
Greg, actually yes, you are correct about that. But it took me 3 reads to actually notice those two lines in the text. The rest of it really overwhelmed that part of the sermon. So I stand corrected, but still think the larger point about the sermon having the wrong focus stands.
There is a significant group of liberal evangelicals in both TEC, COE and ACan. Jim Wallis of Sojourners has like minded brothers and sisters everywhere. And, as I understand the numbers, most of the Global South clergy are sacramental, evangelical and many charismatic and almost all are socialists.
Where we find the great gulf between TEC’s liberals and the GS is the TEC reapraisers are mostly not basing their lives on scriptural revelation and a personal relationship with the Father, the incarnate, virgin born and resurrected Son and the Holy Spirit. Their authority is reason, observation and a new revelation beyond that of Scripture given by the Holy Spirit. Sounds like Montanism to me.
+Leo, as Greg and Karen saw in his sermon, believes in a relationship with Jesus and the renunciation of evil. The definition of good and evil that he holds is, I believe, the flaw in his thinking. It is not defined according to Gods revealed truth.
It is not a good sermon for Confirmation or Trinity Sunday and they weren’t being confirmed into the Episcopal Church.
This part is good—and quite at variance with the cheap-grace theology of many ECUSA reappraisers:
“I want to make sure you know that we really mean for you to keep the promises that you are about to make. We really mean it when we ask you to reaffirm your renunciation of evil and to commit to our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.”
First, I am not at all convinced that the Scottish Episcopal Church at Seabury’s consecration were supporters of the Romish Jacobite pretender. Second, George III was one of the better kings of England, which might be damnation by faint praise, but none the less his stewardship of the kingdom and empire saw remarkable imperial, social, and economic progress. Whose ministers defeated Napolean? Whose generals conquered India? Whose reign saw the foundations laid of the first industrial economy?
That being said, America was his big error and went hand in hand with the tide of empire elsewhere. People aren’t perfect and kings are cut from the same cloth as commoners.
These historical ruminations make Frade’s analogs very suspect for me, and erode the values of his conclusions.