At this point, anybody needing a clever metaphor to make them comfortable leaving TEC probably has as many problems as the fictional “Dad” in the metaphor itself.

Indeed, CStan—and since I don’t need to feel comfortable leaving TEC, because I’m not leaving TEC, then you can consider that the metaphor is merely used in order to communicate with others who are reading the piece.

I like this metaphor - it’s almost a parable.  In fact, what makes it different is that it’s still unresolved.  I pray for a resolution that would read something like this:

When he came to his senses, he said, ‘How many of my family’s hired men have food to spare, and here I am starving to death! I will set out and go back to my family and say to them: I have sinned against heaven and against you. I am no longer worthy to be called your husband and father; make me like one of your hired men.’ So he got up and went to his family….

I am fearful, however, that the parable may end this way:

But when the king came in to see the guests, he noticed a man there who was not wearing wedding clothes. Friend,’ he asked, ‘how did you get in here without wedding clothes?’ The man was speechless.  Then the king told the attendants, ‘Tie him hand and foot, and throw him outside, into the darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.’

I pray that it is not too late to change - even the barren fig tree received one more year.  See Luke 13:6-9.  I long to celebrate and be glad, because this denomination was dead and is alive again; it was lost and is found.

And remember what the barren fig tree needed according to the vinedresser (well, in my reading of the passage, “The Vinedresser”), which was manure—not bs, but plenty of rich, vital, messy stuff the world has learned to shy away from, but that any steward of growing things knows is terribly useful . . . and in an arid land, utterly necessary.

Just don’t step in it.

The Church, from its very beginnings, was comprised of a dysfunctional family. My goodness, just look at the Apostles themselves—one of them betrayed Him, one of them denied Him and all but a few ran away when He was suffering out our salvation. The squabbles and factions continued with some believers saying they “belonged” to a number of the apostles and Paul trying to set them straight.

And these are the people who actually lived with Him, knew Him on Earth! He knew this and what was to come but He was patient, even as they argued about which ones would sit at His right hand and when asked they asked Him to castigate those not in their company who were healing and casting out demons in His name.

I certainly don’t want to minimize the struggles because they pain me, as well. But, perhaps, the struggles are part of His plan for our church and something we need to draw us closer to Him? Quite honestly, the only churches and groups that scare me are those who claim to have all of the answers and sit about self-satisfied.

I do not consider EcUSA the “dad”.  I consider it a felonious and unrepentant child for whom the parents never supplied discipline.

The kingdom of God has always been about the separation of wheat & chaff, tares & wheat, between the faithful and the unfaithful (ie, of Elijahs time), and most pointedly, as spoken by the LORD Himself: “...between him that serveth God, and him that serveth Him not.”
This is a process which, in TEC and the wider communion, has been many decades in the making. GAFCON and the resulting communique represents this process as it has come to us now; it is not, I’m sure, in its final form. I applaud them for this grand effort & achievement.
Separation of the faithful & apostates has been the MO of God from the beginning.
Noah & his family had to separate from the rest of the world. The people of God-such as they were, being Lot and his family-had to separate from Sodom & Gomorrah. Within the camp of Moses, the disobedient, the apostates, and the rebels were separated from the rest of the camp and destroyed. Through the likes of Elijah, Jehu, and others, the wicked were separated from the righteous in the kingdom of Israel until it was impossible to accomplish from within-Assyria & Babylon were brought in to finish the job.
In the church, the same things arose. The super apostles & gnostics & the jezebels of different stripes have been among and around from the days of the apostles until now, and the MO of God is the same-separate from them-and if they don’t repent, He will destroy them.
What we see in GAFCON and the communique is the initial separation. Its a good first step. My humble take? To the extent that these leaders actually hold to the tenets of the Holy Scriptures is the degree that they will experience success in their endeavors. That is the extent to which God will bless their efforts. “..But this is the one to whom I will look: he who is humble and contrite in spirit
and trembles at my word.” (Is. 66:2) My prayer is that they veer neither to the right hand or to the left of what is written.

The wives of the founders of Alcoholics Anonymous organized a similar program called Al-Anon which is based on the same 12 Steps. One of the tools of that program is called “Detachment with Love.”  One of the best booklets I have seen in dealing with another’s alcoholic behavior is “The Merry Go Round Called Denial,” written by an Episcopal priest. It says that the non-alcoholic moves from role to role in the relationship from Enabler to Victim to Persecutor to Enabler and so on. I think Sarah’s metaphor / parable is helpful and that an attitude of non-punitive disengagement from the addictive situation leads to health and serenity.

I have to admit to some concern about using 12 Step recovery language to describe this conflict. In the spirit of Al anon and AA it would be more appropriatete for Sarah to confess her own sins and the effect this conflict has had on her. Or as Al anon used to say ” that we had become crazier than the alcoholics themselves”.

I am sure that there are people on the other side of the issue that are using 12 step talk to justify their positions also. What I detect is a high level of moral superiority, a killer for any alcoholic or co dependent. Actually what we may be seeing is a debate between the morally superior ones! Time to Duck!

May we put the focus on ourselves.

Actually what we may be seeing is a debate between the morally superior ones! Time to Duck!

This statement isn’t, by any means, a passive agressive way of asserting your own moral superiority by differentiating yourself from the “morally superior ones”, is it?

It’s a bit of a catch 22, like demanding that no one make demands, or declaring that there is no truth, or refusing to tolerate intolerance.

Thanks Chris . . . but I believe that it means that the Village Idiot did not read the entire piece and that the metaphor is somewhat . . . vexing to him.  ; > )

Which is fine . . . he did not need to read the piece—it was not written for him.

I surrender and will passively move on. I thought the analogy was appropriate.

#12 The analogy was a good one, especially the entirely appropriate warning against “a high level of moral superiority, a killer for any alcoholic or co dependent” in #9.

I’m afraid it simply wasn’t well-received due to the venue

Thanks Plananoian, I just couldn’t help myself. Moral superiority is how I became the Village Idiot.