Blog Homepage
Members: Login | Register
Click here if you're having trouble getting registered.
| July 2008 | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| S | M | T | W | T | F | S |
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | ||
| 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 |
| 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 |
| 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 |
| 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 | ||
click on a date to see all the day's entries
About TitusOneNine
Old Titusonenine site (Jan04-May07)Kendall's Bio
Kendall's e-mail (replace -at- with @)
"Elves" e-mail (blog admin)
A free floating commentary on culture, politics, economics, and religion based on a passionate commitment to the truth and a desire graciously to refute that which is contrary to it….
"He must hold firm to the sure word as taught, so that he may be able to give instruction in sound doctrine and also to confute those who contradict it."
--Titus 1:9, Revised Standard Version
Blog Tips & Info
Info to help you learn your way around the new blog, and posts where you can report problems or offer suggestions
Mobile-friendly view (blog headlines): Click HerePrint-friendly view of all articles: Click Here
Recent Comments Page:
Click Here
Registration & Login Help
Blog Tips Series
Categories
The above list is limited to "parent" categories. To see the entire category index and select specific sub-categories, click on "Full Category Index"
Full Category Index
Monthly Archives
July, 2008
June, 2008
May, 2008
April, 2008
March, 2008
February, 2008
January, 2008
December, 2007
November, 2007
October, 2007
September, 2007
August, 2007
July, 2007
June, 2007
May, 2007

Anglican / Episcopal RSS Feed
©2008 Kendall S. Harmon. All rights reserved.
TitusOneNine Links Page
I. Anglican / Episcopal Resources & Links
1. Important Documents
documents are in chronological order, most recent first
Also, don't miss:
2. Websites & Blogs
A. Official websites
B. Anglican / Episcopal News
C. Anglican / Episcopal Blogs
By no means exhaustive. Let us know what we've missed
Previous versions of Titusonenine:
NORTH AMERICAN ANGLICANS:
Reasserters' Blogs:
Reappraisers' Blogs
INTERNATIONAL ANGLICAN BLOGS & BLOGGERS
BLOGGING BISHOPS (US & Overseas)
II. General Resources & Links
YET more links coming soon...! including Non-Anglican links
Jim Rosenthal describes himself as an "ardent Anglican," "a faithful catholic" and a "prayerful ... but not too pious ... bureaucrat." In fact, this gregarious, cheerful, hail-fellow-well-met who left the Episcopal Diocese of Chicago 18 years ago to become director of communications for the Anglican Communion, is far more than that, and his friends -- many of them in high places -- will tell you so.
"He is an incarnation of the bonds of affection of the Anglican Communion," says Bishop Peter Lee of the Episcopal Diocese of Virginia.
"He interprets the church to the world and the world to the church," says former Presiding Bishop Frank T. Griswold.
Read it all.
Filed under: * Anglican - Episcopal * Culture-Watch Media

|
2. Peter A. Mitchell wrote:
I can’t even tell you how much this sounds like the kind of garble I heard at Virginia Seminary in the early 90’s. July 27, 7:59 am | [comment link] |
|
3. The Gordian wrote:
"Rosenthal, 56, will be a “distinctive deacon,” which is the British term for a permanent deacon.” Why isn’t he being priested? July 27, 8:15 am | [comment link] |
|
4. Brian from T19 wrote:
Gordian The permanent Diaconate is a choice that some are called to. July 27, 8:34 am | [comment link] |
|
5. The Gordian wrote:
The only permanent deacons I’ve heard of are married Catholic men in the US (who obviously can’t be priested) and Anglican women who don’t agree with women priests. Why would a male Anglican deacon not be priested? He can serve much more widely than a deacon. Is there an impediment to a man being priested? A male deacon is really no different from a lay reader in his ministry. July 27, 8:39 am | [comment link] |
|
6. KAR wrote:
Gordian—That is how you understand things, however in tradition there is a difference big between deacon and a LEM (lay reader is a very poor example). It is a license to participate in areas of the service, official recognition to serve the congregation in all ways except in the actual sacraments, thus a priest in all way sans two. If I’m called, I’d prefer to be a permanent deacon, there are elements I’m not sure about the full fledge deal in terms of piety but also responsibility. It’s an ordination but not the tricker parts (Anglo-Catholic understand so high view of the call and sacraments). In one sense, that says something very positive about Jim Rosenthall, aside from my cynicism, who knows, maybe I’ve at times written off folks the Lord has not ... we can hope and pray. July 27, 8:54 am | [comment link] |
|
7. Charles wrote:
I know of several male, liberal, Episcopal deacons that felt called to the diaconate and have no intention of becoming priests. There are at least 10 in my diocese. I assume this is common across the country… July 27, 9:20 am | [comment link] |
|
8. Philip Snyder (Dallas) wrote:
Gordian,
As a deacon, I am actually more effective in my ministry than I would be as a priest (another reason that I believe I am not called to the priesthood). I have a full time job that enables me to interpret to the church the needs of the world without fear of losing my job because of what I say. That is actually rather freeing. The recovery of the diaconate as a distinct order is a good thing for the Church. We have lost our prophetic voice to society (as witnessed by the issues of the day where the Church is being co-opted by society). It is the Deacon’s ministry to speak prophetically (in terms of what is happening and what God is doing) to the Church and to the world.
YBIC,
|
|
9. The Gordian wrote:
# 8 - these are all good things - but a priest in secular employment (I know several) could do all these things AND preside at the eucharist - which can be very useful in summer time especially. July 27, 10:20 am | [comment link] |
|
10. Philip Snyder (Dallas) wrote:
Gordian - a priest in secular employ is not fulfilling his/her vows as best he/she can. “Will you undertake to be a faithful pastor to all whom you are called to server, laboring together with them and with your fellow ministers to build up the family of Christ?” (BCP p. 532). A priest in secular employ is not being a faithful pastor and should be the exception rather than the rule. A deacon in secular employ should be the rule rather than the exception. There is a lot more to the priesthood than celebrating the Eucharist - just as there is a lot more to the diaconate than proclaiming the Gospel, setting the table and giving the dismissal - or are you advocating two orders (Bishop and Priest-deacon) rather than the traditional three?
YBIC,
|
|
11. The Lakeland Two wrote:
#9 - and we’ve seen the disaster for the paristh when a priest’s “call” is divided from the parish and the “other” job. Hat’s off to Phil. We particually loved that he listened to God in his call. May others be so led. July 27, 10:27 am | [comment link] |
|
12. KAR wrote:
#10 Philip Snyder --There I’ll differ from you. It like sneering at a street preacher. A priest in the secular work force may have farther reach than one in full time ministry. St. Paul talked theory as he supported himself. One should glorify God where ever they find themselves and seek to be where God has called them. A working pastor was one who really help give me a real Biblical foundation and he has something NO other priest in full time ministry seem to have for me *TIME*. I can respect your opinion & it’s common as in not that unusual, but the Lord can call us to secular employment for His reasons. The rest of #10 and #8 I fully concur. July 27, 10:34 am | [comment link] |
|
13. The Gordian wrote:
# 10: following Lightfoot on Philippians (and Beckwith in ‘Elders in Every City’) I don’t believe there is a real distinction between presbuteroi and episkopoi. I look upon the episcopacy as the senior presbyterate. Did Paul fulfill his apostleship despite having to work with his hands? July 27, 10:35 am | [comment link] |
|
14. Philip Snyder (Dallas) wrote:
KAR and Gordian. I should have been more specific. A priest should not go into the priesthood “double minded” where (s)he intends to work full time in secular employ and pastor a church. There is a difference if the priest is working to support his family while building a church, but with the goal of building the congregation such that they will need a full time priest. Likewise, after a time of congregational ministry, it may be necessary for a priest to move into secular employ for a season - that is best handled between the priest and the bishop. I still don’t think a priest should be ordained with the assumption that (s)he will be in secular employ on a regular basis. Gordian, if the “two” orders are Bishop-Priest and Deacon, what do you do with the deacon or are you now advocating one order - Bishop-Priest without deacons or with only transitional deacons? The development of distinction between the Presbyter-Bishop of the NT times and the distinct offices of Bishop, priest, and deacon that is in full flower by the middle of the third century is an interesting read. Perhaps you could check out Ignatius and Hippolytus on the subject?
YBIC,
|
|
15. KAR wrote:
A priest should not go into the priesthood “double minded” AMEN!!! That I’d concur, nothing wrong being undecided for a time, but that’s exactly where lay ministry is helpful, but huge difference in tent making and money making (the general drive for business success).
[*Insert tongue in cheek for off-topic quib that should not draw this thread off track*] I’m anglo-Cath in my heart of hearts ... so what’s this ”(s)he” business ??? |
|
16. The Gordian wrote:
#14: I’m kinda familiar with those later developments, as well as offices that existed for a while in the Roman empire, like the chorepiskopoi and exorcists. No, Ephesians 4.11 has a much more expansive view of ministry for ‘works of diakonia’. July 27, 11:03 am | [comment link] |
|
17. dwstroudmd wrote:
So, bivocational priests are lesser priests? Is that like a Lesser Feast or Fast? Paul was just such a secular priest as I recall- as were all the Apostles. Hmmmmmm. Have we come down that much into clericalism per se?
|
|
18. The Gordian wrote:
# 17: according to this account, more than 40 others were ordained on this occasion:
.... oh no, I’ve mentioned Hitler. The argument is lost. July 27, 11:36 am | [comment link] |
|
19. BabyBlue wrote:
Do these deacons vote at councils? In Virginia, the Bishop wanted to start having deacons (which is not done in Virginia - the laity do the deacons “jobs” and the deacons are transitional to the priesthood). Instead of the deacons attached to the parish, however, they would be directly attached to the Bishop - giving the Bishop direct oversight of the deacons (and bypassing the rectors). Politically it is a disaster because those deacons are not independent - they rely on the Bishop for employment and endorsement. It weakens the rectors and parishes by giving the Bishop direct control over sections of the clergy. I find it alarming and wonder if such a thing is going on in England to swell the liberal ranks. You don’t need permanent deacons if the laity are equipped - which is the point of the clergy, to equip the laity for ministry (not the other way around). I cannot tell you how much I oppose permanent deacons attached directly to Bishops. bb July 27, 12:30 pm | [comment link] |
|
20. libraryjim wrote:
Separate orders of deacons from Apostles is Scriptural, mentioned first in Acts. Stephen, the first martyr, was a deacon, not an apostle. July 27, 12:38 pm | [comment link] |
|
21. KAR wrote:
#19 BB - DioVA does not have such a thing as “permanent” deacon, it’s merely a step to full priesthood, that seems common in many diocese in TEC. As to their placement, that’s up to the cannons of each jurisdiction, I’d say generally “no” but unsure. CofE does has a much more centralized power in the episcopate than the US. On your other points—very Evangelical American ecclesiology. An equipped laity is not the only logic - both Ango-Caths or Rwandans have their own reasons. This is certainly an area where our position in Anglican thought (which stream) and geographically effects our opinion. July 27, 12:55 pm | [comment link] |
|
22. driver8 wrote:
There are very few permanent deacons in the CofE. In many parishes much of their liturgical role is carried out by Readers. There is no great demand from the HOB or laity for an enlarged permanent diaconate though a report seems to be written about it once a decade for discussion by General Synod and then shelved. I imagine, in those few places where there are permanent deacons they are responsible to the incumbent of the parish to which they are licensed. July 27, 12:59 pm | [comment link] |
|
23. Philip Snyder (Dallas) wrote:
BB - As a deacon, let me tell you how it’s done here in Dallas (to the best of my knowledge).
Most of our deacons in Dallas are non-stipendary. A few are employed by larger congregations or the Cathedral or Diocesan Office. On the whole, if a deacon is employed by a congregation, (s)he will be assigned to that congregation. Deacons are not there to spy on the rector or to report to the bishop on what a bad/good job the rector or clergy is doing. They are there to build up the body of Christ, to help raise up lay ministers and ministries and to help the priests be priests. A proper understanding of the roles of priest, deacon, and layperson in the life of the congregation is a big help. This is a problem with both priests and deacons. Too many priests (and laypeople) think that only priests are clergy. I’ve had a verger in my congregation talk about “The clergy and Phil” when discussing serving at the altar. Too many deacons see themselves as “Jr. Priests” and are all too ready to act authoritatively and to put themselves up as higher that they ought. They forget that their model is Jesus Christ, who is among us as one who serves.
YBIC,
|
|
24. AnglicanCasuist wrote:
I’m enjoying the conversation. I appreciate the practical problems of the diaconate under discussion, but the witness of an ordained servant minister (maybe someone with a day-job in hospice, or who pushes the vestry hard for money for outreach) in the Liturgy is powerful. I think there is only one priesthood, which belongs to Christ, and all the baptized (the laity, laos = people) have a share. Very early in the Church the apostles transferred their oversight (episcope) to other leaders, now recognized as the historic episcopate (or the order of bishop). The presbyterate (elder, local leader), was synonymous with ‘bishop’, and later developed as apostolic delegates of the Bishop. The diaconate (server, waiter) is an early order of ministry, which was incorporated as a transition from the lay order to the presbyterate, and then later was recovered in the 20th century as a separate and distinct order of ministry which could be maintained permanently. I like to think of the orders of ministry in Christ’s Church operating under an inverted hierarchy (an arrangement quite subversive of the world’s order):
The One God - at the very top.
The issue of ‘Jr. Priests’ is serious, but if the diaconate is reserved for those who demonstrate special gifts for servant ministry, it can be minimized. July 27, 3:51 pm | [comment link] |
|
25. Philip Snyder (Dallas) wrote:
Not to hijack the thread, but I see diaconal ministry as a three fold ministry itself. You can see the three aspects of the deacon’s ministry in his/her role in the liturgy.
Second, deacons are prophetic voices as they interpret the hopes, needs, and concerns of the world to the Church. We see this in the prayers of the People, which deacons are supposed to be connected with. While the prayers are often read by the laity, deacons are supposed to have a large role in preparing them. Third, deacons are angelic messengers. We see this most pointedly in the Great Vigil as the deacon sings the Exsultet calling heaven, earth, and the Church to rejoice in Christ’s resurrection. We also see the angelic messenger in the deacon’s proclaimation of the Gospel.
YBIC,
|
|
26. AnglicanCasuist wrote:
Phil, A triad does not the Trinity make. God’s Rule, Christ’s New Creation, The Holy Spirit’s Witness. Now, there is a threesome that represents the Trinity! I’m not sure the three orders of ordained ministry or your three aspects of the diaconate are that helpful in teaching the Trinity. Or maybe I’m missing something. July 27, 5:03 pm | [comment link] |
|
27. Philip Snyder (Dallas) wrote:
AC(#26) - I didn’t mention the Trinity at all. The tri-fold aspects of diaconal ministry are three functions in the same person, not three persons in one being. If I were to compare the three-fold aspects to the Trinity, I would be guilty of modalism. I wasn’t trying to teach the Trinity by using the aspects of diaconal ministry. It is interesting how often the number 3 comes up in theology, though.
YBIC,
|
|
28. AnglicanCasuist wrote:
Phil, The point I was making is that your “tri-fold aspects of diaconal ministry” are contrived not actual, as are the three orders of ministry. The laity is an order too, which has just as much a share in Christ’s priesthood as the other orders. The reason three is important is because of the Trinity, otherwise its regular occurrence is not particularly interesting, but rather a superstition.
And if I (or you) were to describe how your ministry manifested or symbolized
it would not make you a modalist. It would show that you are a Christian. July 28, 5:54 am | [comment link] |
|
29. PadreWayne wrote:
Philip Snyder: Your comments here are splendid. Blessings on your ministry(ies)!
|
|
30. PadreWayne wrote:
And before you ask, of course it is the calling of every single Christian to proclaim the Gospel. The Deacon, however, like the Priest, has a specific and intentional order to do this. And yes, Deacons are traditionally under the jurisdiction of the diocesan Bishop. They may act in accord with the Rector of a parish, but ultimately, they answer to the Bishop. July 28, 9:40 am | [comment link] |
|
31. Philip Snyder (Dallas) wrote:
PadreWayne,
YBIC,
|
|
32. PadreWayne wrote:
Phil: You’re welcome, my brother.
|
Next entry (above): U.S. Officials Voice Frustrations With Saudis’ Role in Iraq
Previous entry (below): Church Times: Another gang attack on Nigerian bishop’s family
Return to blog homepage
Return to Mobile view (headlines)

Wow, that explains a lot. So Bishop Lee and Jim Rosenthall are chummy? Very interesting. The quote tells us more about Bishop Lee then it does Jim Rosenthall. The incarnation of the bonds of affection of the Anglican Communion? I don’t suppose Bishop Lee was trying to be ironic?
bb
July 27, 7:06 am | [comment link]