“Bishop Iker is the one that brought on the crisis.”
All by himself, huh? No help from Edmund Browning, Frank Griswold, Kate Schori, the HOB, the General Convention or anybody else. They are all as pure as the driven snow!
Yeah. I buy that … and I’ll sell a bridge in NYC pretty cheap, too.
[blockquote] Neither Bishop Spong nor James Pike represents the center of the Episcopal Church [/blockquote]
And I guess Via Media thinks they are the middle road? I think not!
Every Bishop voting to depose Bishop Duncan have more that violated their oath by joing in apostacy.
Any Bishop who renounces Christ ala Jack Spong should have been excommunicated, not celebrated.
Any clergy in an active homosexual relationship of any kind have violated their ordination oath. So, when are you pew sitter sycophants of hers going to bring her up on charges of denying Christ, abuse of power, failure to uphol fiduciary responsabilites, and bringing strange teachings to her flock?
They listened to glowing reports of the effectiveness of the small indaba groups that replaced the rancorous and divisive legislative promulgations of previous meetings, returning the Lambeth Conference to the kind of fellowship, prayer, and mutual learning arena for which it was originally intended
Well, thank God for that! We wouldn’t want rare gatherings of the Princes of the Church making decisions or addressing threats to the faith or anything.
The Book of Common Prayer (September 1979) says on page 513, Ordination: Bishop: “When the reading of the testimonials is ended, the Presiding Bishop requires the following promise from the Bishop-elect” “In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, I, N.N., chosen Bishop of the Church in N., solemnly declare that I do believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, and to contain all things necessary to salvation; and I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of The Episcopal Church.”
Exactly. And what is the Bishop to do when conforming to one of these requirements (Scripture) causes a violation of the other (Church)? Awfully convenient to ignore that. At least in the ’28 Version there was clarity about defending the Church from strange doctrine. If what we’ve been dealing with in TEC ain’t strange, I don’t know what is.
Father Woodward says, “This is not all about sex and human sexuality. It is about our understanding of the sacramental nature of all of life. When that kind of understanding and faith gets squeezed into codes and rules, it is no longer faith.
On target again. How about we just tell everybody in the pews that rules are for dummies? That God has no vision for us, no mission, no guidelines, nothing that has any value after 100 generations of Christians suffered martyrdom for the Gospels, let’s just go ahead and throw it all out. This sounds like an argument from my 11 year old, except even she is smart enough to know rules are important.
Neither Bishop Spong nor James Pike represents the center of the Episcopal Church, nor does their teaching represent a replacement for the Catechism of the Episcopal Church.
When, oh when, will the leadership TEC, who take it upon themselves to remove Bishops who disagree with them on one side of an argument, understand that TOLERANCE = APPROVAL. It has always been so. If you are in authority, and you tolerate misbehavior, you have given license for all to believe that YOU believe the same thing. Failing to take down Spong and Pike has opened the Pandora’s box we are dealing with now.
The best thing to do when the opposition starts speaking in ‘party-line’ words, phrases, sentences and paragraph is to determine just how they are trying to advance toward their organizational objectives with their ‘party-line.’
Don’t trust their utterances or writings, they have destroyed the ‘bridge of trust’ through their past actions.
Don’t try to believe that they are ‘acting in good faith,’ appearances of ‘good faith’ are, to them, just a means of faciltating their efforts to achieve their organizational objectives.
The time for ‘talk’ with the revisionists is over. They won’t change and they won’t permit those who oppose their objectives to exist within ECUSA. Their ultimate objective is total victory and in what they perceive as a ‘contest of ideology,’ those who hold to “…the Faith once given…” must be either silenced or driven from ECUSA.
Odd stuff… another example of how we no longer speak the same language. I was particularly intrigued by the observation on General Convention — the notion that Bishop Iker thinks he knows better than all those brilliant lay and clerical deputies and bishops. The bizarre thing about this critique is that it only works if The Episcopal Church isThe Catholic Church, and that General Convention has existed in unbroken continuity from Pentecost to now. Because any other view — any view that is actually Christian and thus has some sort of vaguely ecumenical conscience — would wonder at why the General Convention thinks that it knows better than two millennia plus millions of contemporary Christians.
Fort Worth ain’t perfect, and there are certainly good questions that can be asked about this realignment business (I’ve asked them myself), but this kind of criticism only has weight if you are either terribly ignorant or terribly convinced of the rightness of the Progressive Cause.
Greetings…
This liberal who wrote this is a jackass and a liar. Bishop Iker did not bring on this mess. It is the fault of the liberals who started this bullcrap with women’s ordination in 1976. [Points finger at the respondent—->] It is your fault sir and the fault of the liberals in who you support that has done this. You sir and the rest of the liberals do not want to be held accountable to God for the sick sin you have brought the church into.
Are you ready to be held accountable to God for leading Christians in this Church to Hell? Get ready sir for your judgement day is coming. You will be joining the rest of the HOB and the PB in Hell for what you have done. And what you have done is blasphemed against the Holy Ghost. You did not do this by accident. You blasphemed on purpose. There is no forgiveness in sin against The Holy Ghost.
+Stonewall
This is the kind of poorly thought out “reasoning” that we have heard many times from Tom Woodward. My question is why in the world in Tom Woodward speaking for any part of Fort Worth?
There are so many flaws in this “response”, it is hard to know where to start or even to know if one should start:
“They listened to the going ons of a vibrant, healthy church.” Yeah, the fastest declining denomination last year with this year promising to be much, much worse is [i]vibrant and healthy.[/i]
Is Bp Iker unprepared to conform to the (new) doctrine and discipline of the TEO? Hardly. When he is deposed by Ms Schori, I am sure that he will abide by their decision.
Before Bishop Iker made any vow as a bishop, he was ordained as a deacon and a priest. I believe he was ordained a priest using the ’79 ordinal which asks: “Will you be loyal to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ [b]as this church has received them[/b]?” (emphasis mine) Bishop Iker, in renewing his own baptismal covenant promised to “continue in the Apostles teaching and fellowship.”
Can Tom Woodward (or anyone else) please tell me where, in the received doctrine, we are to bless what God calls “sin?” Can anyone show me where homosexual sex is blessed by God?
Honestly, when I read this the first time, I thought it was a joke – like Bishop Chane’s “letter to the homeless”.
It was not until I googled John S Morgan that I began to really see this as a big bad “joke” – like the To Set Our Hope on Christ response of the Episcopal Church to the Windsor Report.
Lord have mercy!
Because any other view—any view that is actually Christian and thus has some sort of vaguely ecumenical conscience—would wonder at why the General Convention thinks that it knows better than two millennia plus millions of contemporary Christians.
I have wondered this quite a lot, actually. As for Spong and Pike – how much longer before they’re the conservative right?
Here was a real doozie: “We have liberals, moderates and conservatives and everything in between, all celebrating a common faith. May we never be reduced to commonality.” The first sentence is a denial of reality. As for the second sentence- “I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.” (1 Cor. 1:10)
it is the panicky response by a liberal who is suddenly realising that their misuided belief that orthodox chrisitans will put up with anything so long as change is done bit by bit might actually be wrong.
The notion that faithfulness to ECUSA is more important than faithfulness to scripture is honestly hilarious! Who DO these liberals think they are? Follow me blind they say….
…if people just put up with it one can imagine a lay person sayinf to another ‘one more thing and I am off’ as an active and bisexual bishop waves incense at a statue of Buddha…
“Bishop Iker is the one that brought on the crisis.”
All by himself, huh? No help from Edmund Browning, Frank Griswold, Kate Schori, the HOB, the General Convention or anybody else. They are all as pure as the driven snow!
Yeah. I buy that … and I’ll sell a bridge in NYC pretty cheap, too.
[blockquote] Neither Bishop Spong nor James Pike represents the center of the Episcopal Church [/blockquote]
And I guess Via Media thinks they are the middle road? I think not!
Every Bishop voting to depose Bishop Duncan have more that violated their oath by joing in apostacy.
Any Bishop who renounces Christ ala Jack Spong should have been excommunicated, not celebrated.
Any clergy in an active homosexual relationship of any kind have violated their ordination oath. So, when are you pew sitter sycophants of hers going to bring her up on charges of denying Christ, abuse of power, failure to uphol fiduciary responsabilites, and bringing strange teachings to her flock?
Well, thank God for that! We wouldn’t want rare gatherings of the Princes of the Church making decisions or addressing threats to the faith or anything.
Exactly. And what is the Bishop to do when conforming to one of these requirements (Scripture) causes a violation of the other (Church)? Awfully convenient to ignore that. At least in the ’28 Version there was clarity about defending the Church from strange doctrine. If what we’ve been dealing with in TEC ain’t strange, I don’t know what is.
On target again. How about we just tell everybody in the pews that rules are for dummies? That God has no vision for us, no mission, no guidelines, nothing that has any value after 100 generations of Christians suffered martyrdom for the Gospels, let’s just go ahead and throw it all out. This sounds like an argument from my 11 year old, except even she is smart enough to know rules are important.
When, oh when, will the leadership TEC, who take it upon themselves to remove Bishops who disagree with them on one side of an argument, understand that TOLERANCE = APPROVAL. It has always been so. If you are in authority, and you tolerate misbehavior, you have given license for all to believe that YOU believe the same thing. Failing to take down Spong and Pike has opened the Pandora’s box we are dealing with now.
That’s enough for now….KTF!…mrb
The best thing to do when the opposition starts speaking in ‘party-line’ words, phrases, sentences and paragraph is to determine just how they are trying to advance toward their organizational objectives with their ‘party-line.’
Don’t trust their utterances or writings, they have destroyed the ‘bridge of trust’ through their past actions.
Don’t try to believe that they are ‘acting in good faith,’ appearances of ‘good faith’ are, to them, just a means of faciltating their efforts to achieve their organizational objectives.
The time for ‘talk’ with the revisionists is over. They won’t change and they won’t permit those who oppose their objectives to exist within ECUSA. Their ultimate objective is total victory and in what they perceive as a ‘contest of ideology,’ those who hold to “…the Faith once given…” must be either silenced or driven from ECUSA.
Odd stuff… another example of how we no longer speak the same language. I was particularly intrigued by the observation on General Convention — the notion that Bishop Iker thinks he knows better than all those brilliant lay and clerical deputies and bishops. The bizarre thing about this critique is that it only works if The Episcopal Church isThe Catholic Church, and that General Convention has existed in unbroken continuity from Pentecost to now. Because any other view — any view that is actually Christian and thus has some sort of vaguely ecumenical conscience — would wonder at why the General Convention thinks that it knows better than two millennia plus millions of contemporary Christians.
Fort Worth ain’t perfect, and there are certainly good questions that can be asked about this realignment business (I’ve asked them myself), but this kind of criticism only has weight if you are either terribly ignorant or terribly convinced of the rightness of the Progressive Cause.
[blockquote]Neither Bishop Spong nor James Pike represents the center of the Episcopal Church [/blockquote]
Yet.
“Neither Bishop Spong nor James Pike represents the center of the Episcopal Church”
No, but they’re close.
Center=Rotten to the Core.
HeeeHeeeeHeeee! They’re funny! Oh ….. its not supposed to be sick humor? Sorry.
AP+
Greetings…
This liberal who wrote this is a jackass and a liar. Bishop Iker did not bring on this mess. It is the fault of the liberals who started this bullcrap with women’s ordination in 1976. [Points finger at the respondent—->] It is your fault sir and the fault of the liberals in who you support that has done this. You sir and the rest of the liberals do not want to be held accountable to God for the sick sin you have brought the church into.
Are you ready to be held accountable to God for leading Christians in this Church to Hell? Get ready sir for your judgement day is coming. You will be joining the rest of the HOB and the PB in Hell for what you have done. And what you have done is blasphemed against the Holy Ghost. You did not do this by accident. You blasphemed on purpose. There is no forgiveness in sin against The Holy Ghost.
+Stonewall
“It is the fault of the liberals who started this bullcrap with women’s ordination in 1976.”
The truth, and nothing but the truth, if perhaps not the whole truth, in only 16 words. Well-spoken.
This is the kind of poorly thought out “reasoning” that we have heard many times from Tom Woodward. My question is why in the world in Tom Woodward speaking for any part of Fort Worth?
There are so many flaws in this “response”, it is hard to know where to start or even to know if one should start:
“They listened to the going ons of a vibrant, healthy church.” Yeah, the fastest declining denomination last year with this year promising to be much, much worse is [i]vibrant and healthy.[/i]
Is Bp Iker unprepared to conform to the (new) doctrine and discipline of the TEO? Hardly. When he is deposed by Ms Schori, I am sure that he will abide by their decision.
Et cetera, et cetera.
Before Bishop Iker made any vow as a bishop, he was ordained as a deacon and a priest. I believe he was ordained a priest using the ’79 ordinal which asks: “Will you be loyal to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ [b]as this church has received them[/b]?” (emphasis mine) Bishop Iker, in renewing his own baptismal covenant promised to “continue in the Apostles teaching and fellowship.”
Can Tom Woodward (or anyone else) please tell me where, in the received doctrine, we are to bless what God calls “sin?” Can anyone show me where homosexual sex is blessed by God?
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
Honestly, when I read this the first time, I thought it was a joke – like Bishop Chane’s “letter to the homeless”.
It was not until I googled John S Morgan that I began to really see this as a big bad “joke” – like the To Set Our Hope on Christ response of the Episcopal Church to the Windsor Report.
Lord have mercy!
Fr. Kingsley Jon-Ubabuco
Arlington, TX
Because any other view—any view that is actually Christian and thus has some sort of vaguely ecumenical conscience—would wonder at why the General Convention thinks that it knows better than two millennia plus millions of contemporary Christians.
I have wondered this quite a lot, actually. As for Spong and Pike – how much longer before they’re the conservative right?
Here was a real doozie: “We have liberals, moderates and conservatives and everything in between, all celebrating a common faith. May we never be reduced to commonality.” The first sentence is a denial of reality. As for the second sentence- “I appeal to you, brothers, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that all of you agree, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be united in the same mind and the same judgment.” (1 Cor. 1:10)
it is the panicky response by a liberal who is suddenly realising that their misuided belief that orthodox chrisitans will put up with anything so long as change is done bit by bit might actually be wrong.
The notion that faithfulness to ECUSA is more important than faithfulness to scripture is honestly hilarious! Who DO these liberals think they are? Follow me blind they say….
…if people just put up with it one can imagine a lay person sayinf to another ‘one more thing and I am off’ as an active and bisexual bishop waves incense at a statue of Buddha…
http://www.sbarnabas.com/blog