Another obvious question, at least to me, is what changes, if any, will there be in ECUSA’s direction following Schori’s departure?
And, will the court battles end? Who at 815, of the likes of Beers and Sauls, will retain their Schori-appointed positions?
Nearly everyone accepts there are huge numbers of Episcopalians who pray for the return of “the old days,” at least in some form. As the make-up of the HOB changes at glacial speed, what signs of hope are there to encourage these faithful? How vigorously will the Schori disciples fight to maintain their gains?
Of course, new brooms* can sweep clean. Is there likely to be a different brand of broom chosen to succeed Schori? Could it actually occur that a strong and lusty new vacuum cleaner might replace the broom?
*The use of the new broom metaphorl is in no way intended as a pejorative comment directed toward anyone.
“We should start with the very clear premise that the Church of England is a national church and should therefore ensure a Christian presence in every community.”
And who is going to pay for that, Mr Baldry? You and the bishops of the CofE have alienated the very Anglicans most able to establish thriving parishes - the conservative evangelicals. So you have no-one to blame but yourselves for the current predicament.
“The Church of England has approximately 16,000 churches, three-quarters of which are listed by English Heritage. Most of these church buildings are in rural areas. There are around 2,000 rural churches with weekly attendance lower than ten.”
In reality, that is the major motivation behind CofE’s concern about rural areas, is it not? The CofE is legally responsible for the upkeep of 10,000+ buildings, which it cannot let go because the government has heritage-listed them, and the government won’t change that for a number of reasons, not least that the lucrative British tourism industry needs such buildings. Yet without thriving congregations in those churches, they become a serious financial burden on the CofE.
A congregation not only maintains buildings through their tithes, but also through a great deal of voluntary labour. Small, usually elderly, congregations have little capacity to provide this.
So it comes back to establishing and maintaining congregations. Why alienate conservative evangelicals and Anglo-Catholics when these are the very people who have proven ability to establish and maintain viable congregations? Oh well, its the CofE’s choice, but they have no right to complain when they are forced to face the consequences of their own actions.
Excellent analysis Curmudgeon - many thanks.
Interesting that the liberal Mark Harris+ over at Preludium blog highlights how TEC is freezing or reducing funds for various ministries, including to marginal native ministries.
The obvious response that invites is: what could TEC have done for ministry over the last few years with the $40 million (or more) that it has spent on law suits?
At the beginning of “The Marriage of Figaro” the buffoonish villain Bartolo plots his legal case against Figaro: “equivocate and paraphrase and trap him in a legal maze.” A fair critique, perhaps, of the legal art as sometimes deployed?
Of course, in the end it is Bartolo himself, not Figaro, who is trapped in his legal maze. A fair critique of TEC’s legal effort.
“because they are called by God to witness to the truth”
And that includes the decision to donate time, talent, and hard work in the cause of those attacked by a false presentation of what PECUSA actually is and has been historically.
And in this cause, we count colleagues in the Global South with whom we work.
May this Lent purify and strengthen our faith in Christ Jesus.
It appears that lawyer Haley and, among others, I, have the same opinion about ECUSA’s next General Convention-
at the coming General Convention—watch them approve the next triennial budget without allowing any discussion (let alone itemization!) of more than $40 million in litigation costs. Watch 815 hide its head in the sand as it is presented with an order to pay still more millions of dollars to Bishop Lawrence’s diocese to reimburse it for its attorneys’ fees. Watch for the same thing to happen again in Texas. They must know what is coming, but they will not publicly acknowledge it.
Imitation, they say, is the sincerest form of flattery. I suspect that this story will find its way into one of my sermons!
“My basic point is that it is very hard for me to understand how so many obviously intelligent people [remain] in ECUSA - knowing full well that they do not, for whatever reason - cannot grasp a) what has happened; b) what is happening; and c) how short the odds are that such things will, under the current HOB, continue to happen.”
There are also people who remain in ECUSA, despite grasping full well what is happening, and despite having little hope of any real change to the leadership in the foreseeable future; yet they remain there because they are called by God to witness to the truth.
The Lord calls his faithful people to serve him in different ways. He has called many out to ACNA and the Holy Spirit is working mightily through them. Others are called to witness in different churches, even ECUSA and some other churches where the leadership has gone right off the rails.
That is essentially what the Global South Primates were saying in their communique a few years ago where they recognised the faithful brethren within ECUSA, and they wrote the communique in full knowledge of the apostasy of TEC and with no particular hope that it would change in the immediate future.
“One small example, and most of us can come up with similar ones: our friends who, acknowledging what’s been going on in ECUSA since Dean Pike, have stayed in the local Episcopal church, after joining our ACNA parish, and then leaving, because “our parents were married there”.”
Luke, you are within your rights to critique people with those beliefs.
My difficulty is that you don’t seem to acknowledge that there are also people who stay in ECUSA for other reasons, in particular, people who fully acknowledge the problems with it, but stay because they believe that they are called by God to remain there as a witness to the truth.
By golly, Jacobs nails it.
I apologize for not grasping the meaning of “those in ECUSA who have chosen Not To Care.”
Since I lack the awareness of them, I’m afraid I don’t get your point.
God bless the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth, Bishop Iker and their legal team.
Golly, what is Bishop High on? Does nothing phase them? Do they really believe this stuff they pump out?
Praise the Lord!
RE: “What changes are likely to occur because of “courageous curiosity?”
Enough for some of those of us in TEC to proceed forward. And not enough for the embittered.
RE: “is now hopefully contented in their new ecclesial home . . . “
“The “historical polity’ to which you refer is plainly not supported by the facts. It’s not what courts are deciding.”
See TX ruling.
The amicus brief filed in TX, argued for by counsel, and operative in the decisions rendered explained the historical polity of the church in respect of diocesan association. (AS Haley helpfully provides you a primer at his web site).
The judges have recognized that this polity explicates no hierarchical claim on property and the so-called Dennis Canon implies a trust but does not effect one according to TX law.
This is why where dioceses are plaintiffs, the decisions tilt in favor of them vis-à-vis the ‘national church.’ Illinois, TX and SC have all so ruled. SJ is pending.
RE: “Sarah, you make far too great a reach.”
Not at all. You just don’t like the application of your proposition—people who stay in organizations or entities led by corrupt, bullying, lying hucksters obviously don’t care—to other entities or organizations beyond TEC.
Actually, they interviewed both sides and quote each fairly equally.
RE: “In our tiny ACNA parish, we don’t worry about such things as the filioque clause, or WO, because they are not relevant to our efforts to look after our own - the parents with incarcerated druggie sons, the illnesses, the penury - not poverty - the penury, some of us face. . . . We get down in the trenches. We look after our own, because Jesus taught us to do so. We look at the Church in black and white. We know folks don’t accept everyone’s viewpoints, but, most of the time, in our daily efforts to be guided by the Holy Spirit, those viewpoints are too esoteric to be worried over.”
It is striking how very very similar those propositions and decisions are to those in TEC who have chosen Not To Care. The wording is almost identical.
Now, to ward off the appeal.
Hi, MichaelA -
Many of the points under discussion are obviously seen from different viewpoints, held by persons with varying degrees of awareness and/or knowledge. People’s views are colored by so many things.
I am the first to acknowledge that there are many from the former DioLex (KY), including me, who, despite all biblical instructions to the contrary, still hold bitterness about the way we were treated under Stacy Sauls…to see him then move on to a high-paid job in NYC adds more gall to the sour wine.
We well understand that few other diocesans are the equivalent of Sauls, of course, but the facts are plain - they have accepted Schori’s statement that Jesus is only one way to Glory. If they disagree with her, why have they stayed in her church, accepting without demur, her actions, practices, and beliefs?
My basic point is that it is very hard for me to understand how so many obviously intelligent people in ECUSA - knowing full well that they do not, for whatever reason - cannot grasp a) what has happened; b) what is happening; and c) how short the odds are that such things will, under the current HOB, continue to happen. It is just beyond me. And, as stated elsewhere, these include very, very close personal life-long friends, of over 8 decades of friendship.
This has nothing to do with the Seitz-raised issues of WO, or the filioque clause, such that ACNA faces. It has to do with recognizing how the devil has been, and still is, at work so very successfully.
In our tiny ACNA parish, we don’t worry about such things as the filioque clause, or WO, because they are not relevant to our efforts to look after our own - the parents with incarcerated druggie sons, the illnesses, the penury - not poverty - the penury, some of us face.
Those of us who were/are able to attend such ACNA meetings as last June’s where the God-blessed ++Foley Beach was chosen and took office, or last summer’s Int’l Diocese gathering under +Bill Atwood, simply glory in God’s work made manifest by so many clergy and lay persons.
We get down in the trenches. We look after our own, because Jesus taught us to do so. We look at the Church in black and white. We know folks don’t accept everyone’s viewpoints, but, most of the time, in our daily efforts to be guided by the Holy Spirit, those viewpoints are too esoteric to be worried over.
And, as Jesus also taught us, where we are not welcomed, we shake the dust off our sandals, and move on. There is work to be done. It doesn’t happen until one’s attention has been grabbed.
Will those still in ECUSA ever have their attention grabbed? I hope God’s parade of glory does not pass them by.
What a terribly unbalanced article.
Thanks be to God!
Praise the Lord all you his people!
Sarah, you make far too great a reach. And, your example of us remaining in our country when dissatisfied with aspects of our gov’t just doesn’t work.
One small example, and most of us can come up with similar ones: our friends who, acknowledging what’s been going on in ECUSA since Dean Pike, have stayed in the local Episcopal church, after joining our ACNA parish, and then leaving, because “our parents were married there.”
News now posted publicly. Praise God.
RE: “The easiest thing in the world to do when you don’t wish to give serious thought to a questioner is to simply brush him off.”
Yes—and as you have been extensively answered by numerous people [including me] over the *years* that you have commented here, it’s pretty clear that the person who’s not interested in “serious thought” is not your old respondents. So . . . briefly and occasionally asserting otherwise, where I find the time and energy, to the same assertions you’ve made over the years is the better and more efficient response and accomplishes just what I wish to accomplish.
RE: “Luke clearly holds an opinion different to yours Sarah, but that doesn’t make it trolling.”
I agree—and that is not why I call what he does on every single thread remotely connected to TEC “trolling.”
Beyond the trolling, he’s also pitching a false and dangerous proposition—that there is even a bare correlation between “not caring” and people remaining within an organization led by corrupt, bullying, lying frauds.
The obvious exhibit A for the falseness of that proposition is that most of the politically conservative commenters here at T19 remain citizens of the United States.
And there are hundreds of other smaller entities and organizations within our country that we can also use as further demonstrations of the falseness of that premise that people who remain in institutions led by thuggish hucksters must, therefore, not care.
I have really enjoyed watching Trinity over the years—when they left I admired their organization and structure greatly—they treated it like an already-formed entity, and I remember how carefully they did their rector search process.
Apparently good news coming in from Ft Worth.
Michael, I’m very grateful to you for your posts, both in allowing me to present my views, and for your erudition in your points made.
I do not believe I’ve ever stated here or anywhere that I think that everyone in ECUSA is heathen. It is very hard for me, however, to accept that those still there who do not recognize what ECUSA leadership has done to a once-proud, if somewhat stuffy church in adopting a new gospel, have not taken the time to clear their minds and open their eyes.
Sarah, you’ll have to define “trolling” for me; the only sense in which I’m familiar with how that term is used is in fishing.
The easiest thing in the world to do when you don’t wish to give serious thought to a questioner is to simply brush him off. That scarcely seems worthy of you.
Well, I’ll tell you. Unlike Cain, I do have a feeling about being my brother’s keeper.
And, whilst there’s a faint sniff in your post and others recently of “Why don’t you mind your own business?” I think T1:9 has room for all of us.
I care what happens in ECUSA for several reasons.
The “historical polity’ to which you refer is plainly not supported by the facts. It’s not what courts are deciding, it’s what they are recognizing in how Schori, Beers, et al have vigorously twisted history.
1. I have good friends who are still in ECUSA, who have not yet grasped what has happened to their church. I care about them as good souls.
2. For those in ECUSA who know exactly what has happened, and continues to happen, I still have hopes that the miracle that we read in Acts 9: 18 will occur over and over again.
3. And, then, again, there’s Jesus’ instruction clearly related in Matthew 28: 19; surely, you will acknowledge this is applicable to those still in ECUSA?
I don’t see where it is your task to tell me what mine is.
And, now, having given you honest answers to your questions and points, how about you giving me honest answers to my questions above:
1. Asking very seriously, what truthful and clear answers or explanations does anyone think “courageous curiosity” is likely to elicit?
2. What changes are likely to occur because of “courageous curiosity?”
I await your responses.
MichaelA, central Raleigh is a very liberal area, and it is no surprise to see that reflected in the comments. The N&O summarizes why HT people left as primarily over gay issues, but neither the article nor the brief interview with the Rev. Yates emphasizes fidelity to the Bible. It’s not a surprise that the N&O wouldn’t emphasize that. I know many HT parishioners and can testify that Scripture is a major focus there.
What a pretty church and full of light. How encouraging.
Hi Luke, I do not think you are bitter, and I think you have every right to comment on this thread.
Where I don’t agree with you is where you write: “Only those left in ECUSA have a problem, and they are burdened with many, because they have chosen to ignore the Gospel.” Now, in the case of most of the leadership of TEC this is accurate, but there are many others in TEC who remain faithful within an apostate church and it is wrong to suggest that those who are faithful are ignoring the gospel simply because they remain in a church with heretical leadership. I expand on this more fully on this thread: http://www.kendallharmon.net/t19/index.php/t19/article/59087/
Another point to consider for those tempted to think that everyone in TEC is heathen: When the Global South (20 provinces, i.e. more than half of the Anglican Communion, the vast majority of whom are orthodox in their theology) met in 2010, they issued a communique which excoriated TEC for its heresy, apostasy and lack of integrity. And fair enough too. But it is as well to remember ALL of what they wrote. Note the first sentence of paragraph 19:
“18. Some of our Provinces are already in a state of broken and impaired Communion with The Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada. Their continued refusal to honor the many requests made of them by the various meetings of the Primates throughout the Windsor Process have brought discredit to our witness and we urge the Archbishop of Canterbury to implement the recommended actions. In light of the above, this Fourth South-to-South Encounter encourages our various Provinces to reconsider their communion relationships with The Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada until it becomes clear that there is genuine repentance.
19. We were pleased to welcome two Communion Partner bishops from The Episcopal Church USA (TEC) and acknowledge that with them there are many within TEC who do not accept their church’s innovations. We assure them of our loving and prayerful support. We are grateful that the recently formed Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) is a faithful expression of Anglicanism. We welcomed them as partners in the Gospel and our hope is that all provinces will be in full communion with the clergy and people of the ACNA and the Communion Partners.”
If the faithful Anglican Primates can acknowledge that there are “many within TEC who do not accept their church’s innovations”, and if they can assure those faithful within TEC of “our loving and prayerful support”, then surely we can do no less?
I tend to agree with Sarah on this one. For someone who has left and is now hopefully contented in their new ecclesial home, why would you care what challenges face those wanting to defend the historical polity of TEC? If there are victories on this score in TX, SC, Illinois, it is because effort has been successfully exerted to persuade judges of TEC’s actual polity, against those who want to manipulate it.
But your job now is to create and live within a new polity, and to strive for its successful articulation of the faith, embracing WO, those who oppose it, A-C and evangelical alike. Should there be a filioque clause.etc. There is work enough to busy you on your own coal face.
Lenten best wishes.
Luke clearly holds an opinion different to yours Sarah, but that doesn’t make it trolling.
As it happens its different to mine also. Luke: Has it occurred to you that some of God’s people may be called to remain in ECUSA, just as others have been called to leave?
The scriptures don’t always show God’s people being called to leave a congregation or assembly just because the leadership has gone bad. Elijah was called by God to differentiate himself and separate from the rulership of Ahab over Israel, but Obadiah was called by God to remain within Ahab’s rulership and work for his people there. While Elijah cried a public witness against Ahab and Jezebel then fled to the wilderness, Obadiah was called to remain:
“Now the famine was severe in Samaria, and Ahab had summoned Obadiah, his palace administrator. (Obadiah was a devout believer in the Lord. While Jezebel was killing off the Lord’s prophets, Obadiah had taken a hundred prophets and hidden them in two caves, fifty in each, and had supplied them with food and water.)” [1 Kings 18:2-4]
The example of Naaman the Syrian is even more extreme - he was given God’s permission to enter a pagan temple and take part in idolatrous worship:
““If you will not,” said Naaman, “please let me, your servant, be given as much earth as a pair of mules can carry, for your servant will never again make burnt offerings and sacrifices to any other god but the Lord. But may the Lord forgive your servant for this one thing: When my master enters the temple of Rimmon to bow down and he is leaning on my arm and I have to bow there also—when I bow down in the temple of Rimmon, may the Lord forgive your servant for this.”
“Go in peace,” Elisha said.” [2 Kings 5:17-19]
There can be a temptation when we are called upon to separate to think that we are the only ones, to cry out to God as Elijah did:
“Then a voice said to him, “What are you doing here, Elijah?”
He replied, “I have been very zealous for the Lord God Almighty. The Israelites have rejected your covenant, torn down your altars, and put your prophets to death with the sword. I am the only one left, and now they are trying to kill me too”.” [1 Kings 19:13-14]
The Lord informs Elijah that he wasn’t the only one - there were 7,000 others that he didn’t know about (verse 18). The difference between 1 and 7,000 is pretty major!
So we also need to allow for the fact that there are witnesses in places that are not necessarily apparent to us.
And, asking very seriously, what truthful and clear answers or explanations does anyone think “courageous curiosity” is likely to elicit?
What changes are likely to occur because of “courageous curiosity?”
This article is a great witness - the erection of the building causes media interest, and in so doing the journos have to give a summary of why this church separated from ECUSA.
It was interesting to read some of the critical comments - clearly people in the community are being confronted by the existence of this church, which is another good thing.
Most of all, its heartening to see a church being built instead of being closed down or sold to Muslims!
RE: “If truly seen, or cared about, they would no longer be in ECUSA.”
False, of course.
And trolling again I see.
This is going to be a beautiful building, and it is indeed the first downtown in fifty years. Many of Holy Trinity’s members came out of downtown Episcopal parishes. Outside of downtown, there are two ACNA-affiliated parishes in buildings they bought and remodeled for church use, and a traditionalist parish (REC) also building a chapel, to be completed soon. God’s people are at work in Raleigh.
“My, how far we have fallen. And yet, so few from that camp seem to see it or care.”
If truly seen, or cared about, they would no longer be in ECUSA.
Great to hear about this!
Looks like John Yates III is a chip off the old block.
Courageous curiosity about any number of things is in order: litigation funding, role of PB as metropolitan, ‘mandatory’ giving, the historical polity of TEC, etc.
Those in General Convention this summer who wish to respond to the Marriage Task Force may do best to follow the intentions of the first Book of Common Prayer in America: “The Preface states that it is the general aim of the Church ‘in these different reviews and alterations ... to do that which, according to her best understanding, might most tend to the preservation of peace and unity in the church; the procuring of reverence, and the exciting of piety and devotion in the worship of God; and the cutting off occasion, from them that seek occasion, of cavil or quarrel against her liturgy.’ “
My, how far we have fallen. And yet, so few from that camp seem to see it or care.
“Islamophobia” is an invented term which presumably means “irrational fear of Islam.” If that is what Obama thinks he needs to combat, he doesn’t understand the situation at all. Pretending that ISIS is not Islamic merely makes him look ill-informed.
” Fighting, though, is off-limits.” (for women)
Unless they need her to be a suicide bomber.
Barnabas has lost credibility by not immediately accepting Sookhdeo’s resignation as Director.
I’m afraid, Jeff #2, that the wagons seem to be circling. I hope I am wrong.
Return to blog homepage
Return to Mobile view (headlines)