Sure. The Fed Chairman is “well-armed” to combat crisis. What does that mean? Well, for the “pro-business” republicans it means, when little companies go bankrupt, trusting in the wonders of the free market to weed out bad businesses. “Competition and innovation are the center of our system”, and all that. But when the big, favored businesses threaten to go belly up, it means providing them with “federal handouts” (i.e., taxes stolen from the aforesaid little businesses), allowing the big businesses to continue the anti-market practices that got them into the mess in the first place.
VA Anglican, Thank you for writing what I would have had great difficulty putting into words. I think the beasts in this story were not the dogs.
Katherine #1: “Like many conservative Anglicans, I am sick and tired of all this parsing of statements. Are not liberals also?”
This one is.
Interesting as a bit of intellectual history, but not all that enlightening. I think he makes to much of what he sees to be a disconnect in moderate (for lack of a better word) believers between private piety and public actions/opinions. I find less convincing than he does the idea that these moderate believers are conforming their beliefs to the values of secular society. Rather it may be the case that this is just a happy accident; although I think the reverse is more likely to be true. That what modern secular society values is just what certain groups of believers valued writ large; and that they have repeated the mistake of the Enlightenment and taken these values to be “Natural Law.”
Thank you, Bull St.; I’ll certainly agree that it is a discouraging time, but for everyone who loves Christ and his church. The balance between a liberal ascendancy in TECUSA and a conservative one globally means no one will be happy for long, especially if winner-take-all is our m.o.
I am always reminded of some sage advice a mentor priest of mine gave me a few years back. He said it in jest, but I think much truth is spoken in jest. He said, “I firmly believe there are more priests in hell than lawyers. At least the lawyers are doing their job.”
Just another hymn to looking for peace and satisfaction in this world where it cannot be found, though one drives from one end of it to the other and back again.
Re #1 Perhaps we are seeing an attempt to avoid “heterosexism” which is banned in some offices, that is, any reference to “family” as a male-female marriage that produces children as the norm for that term. Brave New World is here!
William (#43), I simply asked you if you honestly and truly consider that your current positions or thoughts could be wrong – how active are you in seeking God to show where you may be wrong. You didn’t answer my question, by the way. I’m not meaning to be condescending or accusatory, but I come across plenty of people who do not ask themselves, “Where am I wrong?” Do you believe that you know everything concerning God’s will right now, so that you are not wrong in your beliefs right now?
Many people in leadership positions of this Church hold theological perspectives that I do not agree with. However, of those that I’ve talked to, they do not deny Christ. Perhaps they do deny certain theological perspectives or interpretations of Scripture which I hold. Very few people have repudiated Jesus Christ - “denied Christ.” To think that a majority of Episcopalians have “denied Christ” is a fallacy. Some have, regrettably, and they do garner a lot of attention, don’t they? They do make great PR for those who are determined to win their battles, no matter the cost, don’t they?
The Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church doesn’t deny Christ - she claims Jesus as her savior (and I’ve heard those words come out of her mouth). She may well believe in Universalism (the theological perspective that all will be saved under Christ regardless of what path they chose to take because that is the finished work of Christ - which I disagree with, by the way), but that is different than “denying Christ.” To deny Christ means that you deny the person of Jesus the Christ and any allegiance to him or his Gospel, and the leadership of this Church does not do that even if they hold heterodox theological positions. Besides, she does not determine the official teachings of the Church in the expression of her theological opinions, regardless of the position she holds.
William, what form of the faith do you practice? From what you wrote, I assume you are not an Episcopalian. Have you ever been? I’m asking to better understand what your perspective. To me, right now, I cannot say whether I think you understand this Church and its polity or not.
Ah thanks Jeffri. Must need more coffee this a.m.
Jennie, I would love to know more about your VBS. My tiny little church needs to do some form of outreach. In the past, we have partnered with the Catholic church and the Presbyterian church, and could do so again, if we had the right idea.
Check the links. Essays are posted for each candidate. There will also soon be video interviews with each.
Nick (48)—I’ll withdraw the “spin” word, but not take up your offer of “ignorance.” Look at what you just wrote and compare with comment 43. In 48 you admit that Christ Church is on “the right side of the center,” necessarily referring to a larger center outside the parish. In 43 you said Bob Dannals has held the center of the parish. You are correct that the big center at Christ Church (Greenville, SC) is conservative. Since the initial reactions by the Vestry to the consecration of V. Gene Robinson that you cited, Bob has pushed his powers as Rector to strengthen and support the reappraiser leaders in Christ Church so that leading reasserters are mighty discouraged. Maybe you don’t know these people.
It will be interesting to hear from Bob in Dallas as events unfold the rest of this year. Expect him to support moves to stay loyal to TECusa no matter what.
Interesting how the bios almost totally avoid mentioning family, except for a comment about the Rev. Kissinger’s daughter. Nothing about spouses or other children.
Perhaps progressives think that family matters are irrelevant to qualifications for a bishop, but the NT would suggest otherwise (1 Tim 3; Titus 1)
I hope something will be published by the candidates in their own words, essays or Q&A;. These bios don’t really give much info on their theology, etc.
To TonyinCNY and Harvey,
You are correct in your appeals to Scripture. I agree wholeheartedly that it would be nice if Christians could settle their differences without lawyers and judges getting involved. However, we live in an imperfect world and the church attracts all sorts and conditions of sinners and evil people with agendas, personality disorders, etc…, which in certain cases makes the Scriptural ideal impossible. This is especially true where there is a huge power differential such as in a relationship between a Diocese and a Parish, a Bishop and Priest, and a Rector and Assistant. I have experience in the last example - I am victim of “Rector abuse.” While it was occurring, I attempted to resolve the problem in a Christian way. My attempts occurred over several months, but in every case he was unwilling to play by “Jesus’ rules.” In his case, power over humility prevailed in his life and he eventually fired me, ripped my son out of the parish’s Episcopal School, forbade my family from attending any more parish functions, and threw us out of the Rectory. For many reasons, my wife and I decided not to sue him, but instead secular lawyers (one Jewish and one Christian) worked together to negotiate a settlement out of court. Again, I would like to think that God’s family (especially those who are Orthodox Anglicans) could work things out without lawyers and judges, but in certain cases it is an unfortunate necessity.
For myself, Harvey, certainly. I already sometimes pay out-of-season prices for produce from Mexico and Central America. And I clean my own house. It is the current illegal status of these people which allows their exploitation. They’re making more than they do at home, so they come. With actual border security in place, we could admit workers for whom there are jobs, prevent the entry of criminals, terrorists, and people with infectious diseases, and better police the conditions in which guest laborers work. What’s unreasonable about that?
What I took away from “On the Road” was not its purposelessness, but its yearning and hunger.
Why is it that so many of you on this thread always seem to assume that music stopped in the 1700’s? First, the traditionalists in the Anglican Church in the 1700 and 1800’s were aghast at the modern innovations of the Wesleys and Watt, etc. Second, it is entirely possible to worship God without being mauldin and cranky. Try going to an AME or CME church sometime. Finally, so many of you want to refer to the Bible when making comments here—so go read Psalm 150 and report back to the group. There are many worship styles, and no one is requiring any of you to participate; but don’t assume that someone who has joy at singing the name of Jesus is only interested in theatre; not to mention, what in the world is more theatrical than a really high church service, with venerartion of the host, smells, bells, costumes, candles, etc., etc., etc.?
A great book, On the Road. “Who moans for man?”
If all the so-called “orthodox” churches and dioceses in TEC revolted tomorrow, it would run out of suing funds rather quickly. If they don’t, the continued orthodox inaction will allow TEC to attack these churches indefinitely, and at its leisure. Sanguinely, patiently, and confidently.
Are we ready to stop wasting food and and willing to pay the higher price that will result if we use only US laborers. If there is money to be made with illegal labor the problem will always be with us.
Yes, on further thought, she is separating herself from her son to create a sob story. And, of course, the news media is lapping it right up.
Saint Paul warned Christians about taking any religious issue to a civil court (this includes the ecusa). I wonder what is going to happen when it runs out of its suing funds?
Political compromise often leads to contradictory statements and muddled law. Figuring out what a law means often is a task of trying to understand what the compromises were trying to accomplish.
There are times when parsing a matter enables us to find the kernal of truth to which we can all agree and remain in unity. Unfortunately, that isn’t the case here. People are seeking loopholes, either to enact their homosexualist agenda, or protect against it. The sad fact is that the Canadian Anglican church has create a monster which is likely to devour them.
I believe the muddle to be contrived. While the Canadian church may decide that same-sex blessings are not a matter of core doctrine, that in no way suggests that the church authorizes such liturgies, even if there were liturgies to approve! But again, as I keep saying, we are here in part because we wandered into the blessing business without ever saying what we mean by “blessing”.
Before the Tractarians, Anglican priests seldom if ever blessed anything except at the conclusion of a liturgy. It was just before the Second World War that TEC authorized a “Book of Offices” the predecessor of the Book of Occasional Services. Anglo-Catholics had various unofficial manuals and even a blessing of space ships. Virginians blessed hounds! There came to be items which only bishops might bless, such as chalices and patens and various oils. Yet all along, one supposes in typical Anglican fashion, no word on what is supposed to happen when one blesses tadpoles or purificators; a theology of blessing.
One wonders who latched on to the idea that perhaps “blessing” same-sex couples, using a form not unlike matrimony would go over better than attempting to marry them. I have yet to read an explanation about what is claimed to happen when a couple are “blessed” as opposed to what happens when they are “married”. It all sounds rather like the business that one cannot marry a couple but one may bless their civil marriage later!
Certainly the teaching of our church on matrimony remains clear, and is taught in the words of the marriage rite and in the catechism. As yet GC has not sanctioned or permitted same-sex blessings and how could it when we have no idea what we mean by “blessing” in the first place?
Bonds deserves our contempt because he lied and there are many besides Costas who know this. When I think that he might be headed for the Hall of Fame, I shudder. This is so American: Do the very worst things you want, as long as you play to celebrity, you are home free. LM
Dead wrong, #6. Read Sci Am. I am astonished that we can go on fretting about adiophora and TEC when these issues above are real, present, continuing and, for the church, unanswerable.
We are worried about how many angels on the head of a Schori when she is merely the topmost member of a dying body. But this! Gene spliciing has already put human genes in living animals. Do they become is some sense human? And when such gene additions increase in number, scope and effect, is the dog, the mouse, partly human? When we make artificial life, we become God, do we not? And it WILL be made. And when we set that artificial life on its evolutionary path just to see what becomes of it….....what then are we? I am amazed and frightened that we continue to scuffle in the dust when the scientists are posing new flights of creation for which mankind has not the faintiest preparation and for which Christianity is has no answers. Wake up, Anglicans, and see the real world coming at you! Larry
My son just graduated from Colby and is headed back to China in a few weeks. Just wait, Kendall. There are worse shocks coming. Oy vey. Larry
The muddle, the cacaphony is the point. Since Scripture here has been set aside, there is only one recourse, civil and/or canon law. These can not make lasting distinctions in matters of faith and morals because there is no “constitution” from which all standards are derived. Absent such a standard, no question can be resolved. FOr the liberal cause, this is the best possible case because those parishes who favor the liberal cause cnnot be stopped, punished, regulated or isolated. That being the case, the practices they wish to continue will go on and on until time gives them the sanction they could not otherwise obtain. This is called tradition, and is one reason why tradition is a weak and faulty cord to bind any belief set together.
Like many conservative Anglicans, I am sick and tired of all this parsing of statements. Are not liberals also? Why define what the meaning of “is” is, as Dr. Harmon says, to stay in a communion which rejects their innovations? If they genuinely have the courage of their convictions, they should say so and be done with it.
She could have taken her son with her to Mexico, could she not? Does Mexico prohibit the entry of U.S.-born children of Mexican parents? If not, then this excuse about “avoiding separation” is nonsense.
The Scottish Church will not follow suit. Their primate, Idris Jones, is a revisionist.
I should say while the mom was in the U.S. illegally.
It should be obvious by this point: pecusa doesn’t care about what Scripture says about human sexuality, so why would we expect them to care what Scripture says about lawsuits?
The real problem in this story is that the family was rewarded for their law-breaking by giving the son born in the U.S. (while they were in the U.S. illegally) citizenship. That is a reward that should have been abolished years ago.
Is it purposelessnes that people really want?
Occasionally . . . it helps question our purposes and reasserts the truth that not everything we do must have a concious meaning. Most things, yest, but on occasion to wander aimlessly is a necessary corrective to the burden of purpose.
I thought the part that was posted visibly *sounded* positive and temperate, but when I saw the source, all the old red flags started going up. But if *you* commend it, Bob (#3), I’ll take a closer look.
This is to be expected of the Scottish ACN, which was formed (and named) partly after the example of the United States ACN.
What would be real (and welcome) news would be the Scottish church itself declaring support for the draft covenant.
What a lovely big campus - and how fit one will get going round it.
Wish her well.
He should do a year working for the SPCA and be barred from professional sports. He may be God’s creature, but this is evil, and he should not be held up as someone who is admired by anyone.
Why are home mortgage interest rates not going down? Doesn’t make sense.
I appreciate very much what you’ve written, I suppose because I have been thinking and praying and saying these very things for quite a while. But you’ve managed to put it all into one essay, and give contemporary validity especially among “reasserters” by including your observations of Acbp Fearon. That is well done.
Since I have been thinking about this for awhile, though, there is one aspect of biblical theology that I would include, especially considering the lessons for this past Sunday. There is this aspect of “fire” (which appears in the Jeremiah and the Luke lessons) which relates to God’s power. I take it to be a reference to one of the workings of the Holy Spirit. Paul makes this reference, as you are aware, when he ties together the proclamation of the Good News with signs and wonders (of God’s power). So while at the same time redefining (or perhaps better, reminding us) what peace is and what power can be, there must be the validating ministry that comes from laying on of hands to see God’s redemptive work powerfully manifested in healings, miracles, etc., etc. So then we can say there IS a power, God’s power to show who He is and that He loves us, versus the political and social power manufactured for and by human beings.
How would you add that into your essay thoughts and direction?
There seems to be a lot of folk who would like to make a church in their own image…
Like Thomas Cranmer?
Alice - Sorry for my snap reaction to your comment. Would you agree, though, in part at least, with what I said? Thx.
I read someplace that the birth of a child is God saying there’s still hope for the human race. At the same time, it seems the folks that are the most vehemently anti-Christ-ian tend to go along with the anti-child folderol as well. Could we be having a crisis in original thought?
<a >r.e., G.l.i* </a>
*God’s little idiot!
She’ll be up in our neck of the woods. Wooster is a nice place (if you like Ohio).
I’m with you, Kendall. Where does the time go??
I’m with you, RickW and DietofWorms. There seems to be a lot of folk who would like to make a church in their own image…
Themedia has analyzed this crisis with it typical sweeping genralizations. While many subptime borrowers face payment increases from the 2/28 or 3/27 loans, those increases pale by comparison to the increases facing some of the “good credi” borrowers who foolishly took Option ARMs. In extreme cases they can be facing new payments triple their current payment.
The subprime loan, properly utilized, served a valuable purpose. It allowed borrowers with credit issues to get interim financing while they cleaned up their credit. If they failed to follow through, they are now paying the price. However, I have many clients who got 30-year fixed “subprime” loans at rates as low as 4.5%.
Subprime loans are no more to blame for the crisis than that saws are to blame for people getting cut.
There is no story here. Today was quite calm. The 10-year note moved only 3.9 basis points. The movement at the short end of the yield curve merely reflects the increased likelihood of a cut in the federal funds rate after the cut in the discount rate lst week.
Return to blog homepage
Return to Mobile view (headlines)