Archive for the ‘Uncategorized’ Category

The Fraudulent Letter

Sunday, May 16th, 2010
Fraudulent Letter to Moravian Ministers

Fraudulent Letter to Moravian Ministers

Fraudulent and Deceptive Mailing

Thursday, May 13th, 2010

I was appalled to receive a mailing this week  (authored by someone clearly opposed to the Episcopal Full Communion) which was fraudulently designed to appear as if it was from the Rt. Rev. Wayne Burkette.  It was faked up and cobbled together on Provincial Elders’ Conference Stationery.  The return addresses on the envelopes were from various churches.  Some presented the return address of the PEC.  These were apparently mailed to every Moravian Church in the area.

This letter quoted Romans 1:18-32 and challenged readers to consider that passage when considering the Full Communion Agreement with the Episcopal Church.

Apparently the secret author of the letter failed to read the entire passage, which not only condemns sexual immorality, but in the same line also says that those abandoned to a debased mind are also “full of strife, deceit, evil-mindedness; they are whisperers, backbiters.”

It is shameful, no in fact SINFUL for Christians to employ intentionally deceptive tactics.  Lying in defense of the truth is not a Christ-like action and in fact it clearly violates the 9th Commandment.

Who is the deceiver?  I do not know.  But when those who purport to follow Christ feel justified in using fraudulent tactics and lies to further an agenda, they are working for The Deceiver and not the Holy One of Israel.

Entirely aside from the issue of full communion with the Episcopal Church, I am very tired of Christians cobbling up lies to further an agenda.  We have a flurry of such lies on the internet and in the news media, including outrageous claims and statements that simply do not bear close scrutiny, but whe get repeated and reposted by otherwise well-meaning Christians.  It is shabby testimony to the world, where people increasingly are disgusted and turning away from the church because of such hypocrisy.

YHWH is a God of truth not a God of deception and lies.

The Rev John Jackman
Pastor
Trinity Moravian Church

Ecumenical Aftershocks in Massachusetts

Sunday, January 24th, 2010

Just as many dems fear the political landscape changed in Massachusetts 2 weeks ago the Council of Churches of Massachusetts seems to be bracing for a seismic shift away from support of their socialist agendas and a loss of interest in ecumenism. (We should not be too optimistic here)

Read this article and be advised that the Council of Churches clearly expresses it’s desire to broaden their scope of Christian Unity to non Christians.
I guess that oxymoron is to be expected since the Council of Churches thinks they can be the bond that brings members together.

Consider that they report that individual member churches are assuming roles of civic and government engagement that was once the responsibility of Council staff. ( This brings to mind the signature endorsements by PEC Presidents of the Heath Care initiatives and Hillary’s commitment of USA billions in reparation for our part in Global Climate Change.)

They believe Christian organizations are a Gift of God just as health care and global warming reform should be. What the Council of Churches is really concerned about is that if this is the will of God Christians will be moved to unified action without the Council possibly even without their denominational affiliation.

Both Christians and non-Christians were moved to action in Haiti apart from denominational, faith or Council affiliations. Only Christians will have the unique opportunity to bring Christ to those to whom they bring comfort and aid. As was the M O of Christ.

Is there growing recognition that the Councils of Churches are irrelevant and are losing support and influence?

One benefit: synods would be shorter and able to focus on relevant issues of the Church and its commission if it did not have to wade through one WCC and NCC authored resolution after another before finally addressing resolutions affirming Jesus as THE only way to salvation. That should have reset a focus in 2006 that would have ended our attempts to align with those who will not officially affirm Jesus’ unique role in the salvation of all.

By Bronislaus B. Kush TELEGRAM & GAZETTE STAFF
bkush@telegram.com
WORCESTER — Delegate members of the Massachusetts Council of Churches were challenged this weekend to continue to seek common ground in addressing the social, economic, and environmental problems racking the world.
Additionally, they were urged to take a hard look at their own commitments to the ecumenical movement and Christian unity.
The MCC held its 108th annual meeting yesterday at Assumption College, with much of the agenda focused on ways that Christian churches in the state can bond more closely to deal with such issues and ills as peace, human rights, discrimination, racism, poverty, hunger and health care.
There was also some discussion of a report that looks at directions the organization may take through 2014. They include broadening the scope of Christian unity dialogue to seminaries and groups with very little representation at the MCC, and increasing interfaith involvement with Muslim and Jewish faith groups.
The report noted the organization is more diverse today, and added that member churches are engaging with government, business, and civic leaders on public policy and other matters; a responsibility once left primarily to MCC staff.
Following a prayer service that featured the Ghanaian choir from Wesley United Methodist Church, the delegates got down to business.
Archbishop Vicken Aykazian, the legate of the Diocese of the Armenian Church of America (Eastern), said the relief work in Haiti proves that Christian groups and churches can work together effectively.
“The Christian organizations are a gift of God to humanity,” he said.
But, he said, similar efforts are needed to address issues ranging from global warming to health care reform.
Archbishop Aykazian warned that American Christians shouldn’t become lax about racism just because a black was elected president. He added that the war on poverty is a continuing campaign, noting that 1.6 billion people around the globe live on less than a dollar a day.
He said MCC members must educate their congregants about the issues and challenge the political leadership to find answers.
In addressing issues revolving around unity, Laura Everett, the MCC’s associate director, noted that “not everything should be ecumenical” and that it’s not a bad thing if denominations retain their unique identities.
But she’s worried about the ecumenical movement, because people aren’t as curious as they used to be about the churches they don’t belong to.
Framing her point of view in paradoxes, she said, “We’re too familiar with each other but we’re not familiar enough … I worry we’re too tribal, but we’re not tribal enough.”
She said it’s imperative for Christians to help the less fortunate — and added that the best way to do that is through unity.
Kathryn Lohre, the president-elect of the National Council of Churches, said the religious landscape of the country has changed drastically since the council’s founding in 1902, and much of that is because of the number of immigrants who were able to come to the United States as a result of the 1965 Immigration and Nationality Act.
For example, Ms. Lohre, who is also assistant director of the Pluralism Project at Harvard University, which charts religious diversity in the United States, said that Massachusetts contains the seventh largest population of recent immigrants; that demographic represents 14.3 percent of the Bay State’s total population.
Naturally, she said, the increase in immigrants has changed the religious makeup of the country, adding that interfaith relations shouldn’t compromise Christian identity.
The MCC is made up of 17 Protestant and Orthodox denominations. Though not formal members, the four Roman Catholic dioceses of Massachusetts have collaborated for many years with the organization.
Clergy leaders attending yesterday’s meeting included Bishop Gordon Scruton of the Episcopal Diocese of Western Massachusetts; Bishop Robert J. McManus of the Roman Catholic Diocese of Worcester, and Greek Orthodox Metropolitan Methodios.
At the meeting, the Rev. Diane C. Kessler, a former MCC executive director, was awarded the Forest Knapp Award for her work in promoting ecumenism. Mr. Knapp is considered to be a pioneer in the ecumenical movement.

Denominational liberals have departed from the Holy Bible, the Word of our Lord.

Saturday, August 29th, 2009

Denominational liberals have departed from the Holy Bible, the Word of our Lord.

Adrian Rogers likened denominational liberals to the leaven of the Pharisees.

“In the mean time, when there were gathered together an
innumerable multitude of people, insomuch that they trode
one upon another, he began to say unto his disciples first
of all, Beware ye of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is
hypocrisy.”
Luke 12:1, KJV

“Then Jesus said unto them, Take heed and beware of the
leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees. And they
reasoned among themselves, saying, It is because we have
taken no bread. Which when Jesus perceived, he said unto
them, O ye of little faith, why reason ye among yourselves,
because ye have brought no bread? Do ye not yet understand,
neither remember the five loaves of the five thousand, and
how many baskets ye took up? Neither the seven loaves of the
four thousand, and how many baskets ye took up? How is it
that ye do not understand that I spake it not to you
concerning bread, that ye should beware of the leaven of the
Pharisees and of the Sadducees? Then understood they how
that he bade them not beware of the leaven of bread, but of
the doctrine of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees.”
Matthew 16:6-12, KJV

Liberal, denominational leadership has promoted the idea of inclusion; the notion that any sin and the sinner is OK, and even welcomed, in the church. The idea that inclusion means to condone the sin along with loving the sinner is weakening the church to the point that the church looks no different that the secular world. Christians are called to be different. Christians are called to be ‘not of the world’.

“If the world hate you, ye know that it hated me before it hated you. If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted me, they will also persecute you; if they have kept my saying, they will keep yours also.” John 15:18-20 (KJV)

For the liberal leadership, the cultural experience of Christianity has displaced a serious pursuit of true discipleship and personal holiness. When we embrace the sin, we are no different than non- Christians.

Report of Moravian Agreement with Lutheran ELCA Greatly Exagerated

Wednesday, August 26th, 2009
Moravians are not on Board! 
In this press release by the Lutheran news agency today it is noted that their
 actions on Human Sexuality at the 2009 church wide assembly are in step
with their ecumenical partners. (Episcopal Church, Moravian Church in
America, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Reformed Church in America
and the United Church of Christ) 

There is no debate that these actions mirror those of the Episcopal Church USA. Be reminded that even thought all the elements were served up at our Provincial Synods over the past 25 years Moravian delegates refused to go all the way. Division among the delegates stopped the resolution far short of its objective. A moratorium was called on any further action on this issue by unity synod. See a response to resolution 6. and a discussion on the event in the Hinge.

From <NEWS@ELCA.ORG>
Date Wed, 26 Aug 2009 11:34:09 -0500

 

Title: ELCA Shares Significant Actions with Ecumenical, Global
Partners

ELCA NEWS SERVICE >August 26, 2009 ELCA Shares Significant Actions with Ecumenical, Global Partners 09-188-MRC CHICAGO (ELCA) — The Evangelical Lutheran Church in America (ELCA) is sharing some significant actions taken at the 2009 ELCA
Churchwide Assembly with its ecumenical and global partners. Two
significant actions include the adoption of the ELCA’s 10th social statement, “Human Sexuality: Gift and Trust,” and the modification of ministry policies
that govern pastors and other professional church leaders in committed
same-gender relationships.

The assembly, the chief legislative authority of the ELCA, met in Minneapolis, Aug. 17-23. About 2,000 people participated, including 1,045
ELCA voting members.

The ELCA shares full communion agreements with the Episcopal Church,
Moravian Church in America, Presbyterian Church (U.S.A.), Reformed Church
in America and the United Church of Christ. At the assembly, voting
members agreed to a full-communion partnership with the United Methodist
Church (UMC) — the first such relationship for the UMC.

In an Aug. 24 letter to these and other ecumenical partners, the
ELCA presiding bishop and the denomination’s ecumenical executive said
all recommendations regarding human sexuality were “given serious and
protracted consideration.”

“These considerations reflect nearly 10 years of discernment, where
whole communities have walked together through the arduous challenge of
discerning the ecclesial call to all of God’s children in the Church
universal,” wrote the Rev. Mark S. Hanson, ELCA presiding bishop, and the
Rev. Donald J. McCoid, executive, ELCA Ecumenical and Inter-Religious
Relations.

“As we now enter into the 100th anniversary of the contemporary
ecumenical movement, Christian communities have worked tirelessly to
develop relationships, reach historic agreements, honor differences,
strive toward unity and pursue significant accomplishments together,”
they wrote.    

“We understand with you the need for ecumenical tables to discuss
theological, ethical and morale concerns that are facing Christians
today,” Hanson and McCoid wrote. “We believe the most central way of
engaging these deep-structured concerns is to enter into and remain with
one another in the heart of constructive dialogue. We wholeheartedly
encourage and invite you to engage with this church around those very
tables in the near future.”

In a separate letter, Hanson and the Rev. Rafael Malpica Padilla,
executive director, ELCA Global Mission, acknowledge some “continued
disagreements” among Lutherans both in the United States and overseas on
the topic of human sexuality.

“We will continue to be in a time of prayer and deep conversation
within the ELCA, and wish to continue the conversation with you as
companions in the common mission God has entrusted to us,” Hanson and
Malpica Padilla wrote.

In their letter Hanson and Malpica Padilla outlined other actions
taken by the assembly, including a $10 million campaign to implement an
HIV and AIDS strategy. The assembly’s action commits the ELCA to raise
funds needed to implement the ELCA strategy and to expand the church’s
commitment to support the ministries of its companion churches overseas
in responding to the HIV and AIDS crisis.

They also highlighted a major initiative to undertake the fight
against malaria. A two-year pilot phase could precede the initiative in
partnership with companion churches.
- – -

Information about the 2009 ELCA Churchwide Assembly is at
http://www.ELCA.org/assembly on the Web.

SEPARATION

Thursday, August 20th, 2009

SEPARATION
                                  written by Tommy Smith

“Wherefore, come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing;” (2 Cor. 6:17)  God called out the nation Israel to be a separated people unto Himself.  “For thou art an holy people unto the Lord thy God, and the Lord hath chosen thee to be a peculiar people unto Himself, above all the nations that are upon the earth.”(Deut. 14:2)  God has likewise called out Christians to be a separate people unto Himself.

Separation in scripture is twofold:

A.      From whatever is contrary to the mind of God; and

B.      Unto God Himself

The underlying principle is that in a moral universe it is impossible for God to bless and use His children who are in compromise or complicity with evil.  Separation from evil implies:

A.      Separation from this present world system. (1 John 2:15-16); and,

B.      Separation from false teachers, who are described as being “vessels to dishonor”

(2 Tim 2:20-21; 2 John 9-11)

Separation is not from contact with evil in the world or in the church, but from complicity with and conformity to it.  (John 17:15; Gal. 6:1)

The reward for such separation is unhindered communication and worship (Heb 13:13-15), and fruitful service. (2Tim 2:21)

Conformity involves the loss of these things.  Here, as in everything else, Jesus is the example.  He was “holy, harmless and undefiled, separate from sinners” (Heb 7:26), and yet He was in contact with them for their salvation.  The Pharisees accused Him of associating with sinners (Luke 7:39), even though the reason Jesus came into the world was to “seek and save that which was lost”. (Luke 19:10)

Many churches today have been so “carried about with every wind of doctrine”

(Eph 4:14), that one cannot see any difference between the church and the world.  They will receive their just recompense as spoken of by the prophet Hosea, “For they have sown the wind, and they shall reap the whirlwind.” (Hosea 8:17)

Submitted by Tommy Smith

Moravian Statement on Health Care and Ecumenism

Monday, August 10th, 2009

The goal of the ecumenical movement is to “unite” ALL religions in world (including Islam). There is evidence for that by reading Revelation, and we can easily see of how far along we are toward that end by reading the literature and articles published by the WCC/NCC, the various state Councils of Churches, and other ecumenical and “progressive organizations”. The recent ” Statement from Religious Leaders On Health Care Reform”  endorced by Moravian leaders Wayne Burkett and David Wickman (see: www.tikkun.org/article.php/20090707141055145/print)  is a good example portraying “scripture” from the Qur’an as equal to the protestant Bible. It is interesting to note that Islam is promoted as “a religion of peace” and attention is drawn to Islam surpassing other religions in terms of growth, the Roman Catholicism is the “false religion” (the “whore” described in Revelation) which will be THE One World Religion.

David T.

You can also read the following article at:
www.onthewing.org/user/Islam%20-%20German%20looks%20at%20Islam%20-%20Tanay.pdf

A German’s point of view on Islam
by Dr. Emanuel Tanay, Psychiatrist

A man whose family was German aristocracy prior to World War II owned a number of large industries and estates. When asked how many German people were true Nazis, the answer he gave can guide our attitude toward fanaticism.
‘Very few people were true Nazis ‘he said,’ but many enjoyed the return of German pride, and many more were too busy to care. I was one of those who just thought the Nazis were a bunch of fools. So, the majority just sat back and let it all happen. Then, before we knew it, they owned us, and we had lost control, and the end of the world had come. My family lost everything. I ended up in a concentration camp and the Allies destroyed my factories. ’
We are told again and again by ‘experts’ and ‘talking heads’ that Islam is the religion of peace, and that the vast majority of Muslims just want to live in peace. Although this unqualified assertion may be true, it is entirely irrelevant. It is meaningless fluff, meant to make us feel better, and meant to somehow diminish the spectra of fanatics rampaging across the globe in the name of Islam. The fact is that the fanatics rule Islam at this moment in history.
It is the fanatics who march. It is the fanatics who wage any one of 50 shooting wars worldwide. It is the fanatics who systematically slaughter Christian or tribal groups throughout Africa and are gradually taking over the entire continent in an Islamic wave. It is the fanatics who bomb, behead, murder, or honor-kill. It is the fanatics who take over mosque after mosque. It is the fanatics who zealously spread the stoning and hanging of rape victims and homosexuals. The hard quantifiable fact is that the ‘peaceful majority’, the ‘silent majority’, is cowed and extraneous.
Communist Russia was comprised of Russians who just wanted to live in peace, yet the Russian Communists were responsible for the murder of about 20 million people. The peaceful majority were irrelevant. China’s huge population was peaceful as well, but Chinese Communists managed to kill a staggering 70 million people.
The average Japanese individual prior to World War II was not a warmongering sadist. Yet, Japan murdered and slaughtered its way across South East Asia in an orgy of killing that included the systematic murder of 12 million Chinese civilians; most killed by sword, shovel, and bayonet.
And, who can forget Rwanda, which collapsed into butchery. Could it not be said that the majority of Rwandans were ‘peace loving’?
History lessons are often incredibly simple and blunt, yet for all our powers of reason we often miss the most basic and uncomplicated of points: Peace-loving Muslims have been made irrelevant by their silence. Peace-loving Muslims will become our enemy if they don’t speak up, because like my friend from Germany, they will awaken one day and find that the fanatics own them, and the end of their world will have begun.
Peace-loving Germans, Japanese, Chinese, Russians, Rwandans, Serbs, Afghanis, Iraqis, Palestinians, Somalis, Nigerians, Algerians, and many others have died because the peaceful majority did not speak up until it was too late.
As for us who watch it all unfold, we must pay attention to the only group that counts: the fanatics who threaten our way of life.
Emanuel Tanay, M. D.
Wayne State University
Ann Arbor, Michigan

Moravian Episcopal Full Communion Study Group Meets with Archivist Daniel Crews

Sunday, January 18th, 2009

This is a reminder that Daniel Crews will Speak at 6:00 Tuesday night January 20th at Olivet Moravian Church. He will be addressing the group who has been studying the Full Communion Proposal with the Episcopal Church.

Crews is the author of many publications during his career as archivist in Winston Salem. What might be one of the most pertinent to our discussions is “Confessing Our Unity in Christ” a historical and theological Background to “The Ground of the Unity” This 38 page booklet was prepaired by request of the president of the PEC for presentation to the Moravian Clergy Association in 1994 but has been updated in recent re printings in January 2000 to reflect Synod changes to the Ground.

It is expected that Daniel Crews will discuss the confessional statements and evolution of Doctrinal statements of the Old Unity between 1468 and 1573 through today.

A doctrinal statement that was developed and over a number of years evolved into the “eight essential” was affirmed Synod after Synod for more than 150 years before it’s replacement by the “Ground of the Unity” in 1957.

It is the “Ground of the Unity” that has done so much to define Modern Moravians as Genetically Disposed to Ecumenism. It is the “Ground of the Unity” that is often referenced in the agreement and informs the dialogue team from both the Moravian Church and the Episcopal Church that we are compatible.

Daniel may help us understand the environment and culture that brought about this most significant event in Moravian Synod History.

Everyone is invited Olivet Members and guests, bring a friend.

Who is TEC?

Sunday, December 21st, 2008

As some Moravian Churches begin the process of studying the Episcopal Moravian Agreement for Full Communion one of the first questions after “why do we need to do this?” is “who are the Episcopals that we are seeking this partnership with?”

Anyone who has seen the news or read a newspaper will realize this is not an easy answer.  I am not going to pretend it has been an easy answer for Moravians to define ourselves either. 

Those on the Dialogue team looked for those answers in the traditions and documents of the Episcopal Church and the Moravian Church and drew their conclusions based on those. 

TEC under the Anglican Church still points to the Book of Common Prayer and Lambeth to define themselves in the Communion agreement but seems to prefer a different identity in its practice and witness. 

Those defending the agreement may say that not all Episcopal believe and act like those  turning away from their Orthodox heritage.  That is correct. But when redefining comes from the top and years of dialogue by the orthodox believers had no effect it is likely that our relationship will be more influenced by Presiding Bishop Schori and her well placed sympathetic Bishops. 

The following article by Jordan Hylden gives an inside view of the emerging Episcopal Church and can raise some valid questions of how appropriate it is for the Episcopal Church to be evaluated as a communion partner based on an Anglican connection that is so severely strained that many believe TEC is walking away from their own Anglican Communion and agreements.  

Anglican, or Episcopalian?

By Jordan Hylden

Thursday, December 18, 2008, 9:50 AM

“Are you Anglican, or Episcopalian?” As an Episcopalian interloper studying at a Methodist seminary, I get the question a lot from my puzzled friends. Each time I’m asked, part of me wants to launch into a mini-primer on Anglican ecclesiology—to wit, that Episcopalians are Anglicans, since the Episcopal church is just the American province of the global Anglican communion. Which means that, technically, the question shouldn’t even make sense—it’s sort of like asking, “Are you American, or Texan?” But, of course, I know just what the question means—it does make sense, because it reflects the sad divisions that have roiled the church over the past five years. Quite simply and sensibly, my Methodist friends want to know whether I’m a member of the liberal Episcopal church, or one of the conservative Anglican groups that broke off. And as saddening as it is to admit, I’ve come to think that their common-sense perception is more accurate than my attempts at ecclesiological theory. Their question can only be asked, and answered, because of the reality on the ground in the United States: Episcopalians are one thing, and Anglicans are another.

Popular understanding is usually much wiser than theoretical wishful-thinking, and nowhere more so than here. The divisions in the church have led the American public to attach the meanings to the words Episcopalian and Anglican that they actually bear in their usage—namely, that to be an Episcopalian means to be a member of an pro-gay, autonomous American denomination, more liturgical than most churches but firmly within the theological orbit of liberal Protestantism. To be an Anglican, by contrast, means to be part of a conservative evangelical church with bishops, connected somehow with Africa and opposed to homosexuality. The definitions have by now become quite distinct and firmly fixed in the national lexicon—ask almost any church-going American what the words mean, and you will get an answer something like the above.

Some Episcopalians and Anglicans (myself included) strongly dislike these characterizations—to be genuinely Episcopalian, they believe, means to be in fellowship with the Anglican communion, and to be authentically Anglican is to be part of a global communion of catholic Christians united by creedal orthodoxy and a commitment to read Scripture, pray, and worship together in the historic Anglican tradition. But although this sounds wonderful in theory, it is simply not what has happened, by and large, in the American context. Because of what’s taken place over the past five years, Episcopalian is now understood to be a term set in opposition to Anglican, and Anglican refers not to a global catholic communion but rather to an American-African evangelical phenomenon. Whether we think the words ought to bear these meanings is not the point—my point is that this is what the words actually do mean, in newspapers and conversations and pulpits across the country.

Take, for instance, the widely publicized formation just this month of a new conservative Anglican province—the so-called Anglican Church in North America, with Robert Duncan as its new archbishop and primate. By taking the name Anglican for themselves, the clear implication is that the Anglican Church of Canada and the Episcopal Church are not in fact authentically Anglican, since they need to be completely replaced. In this, they are only following the practice of previous breakaway groups, such as the Nigerian-based CANA (Convocation of Anglicans in North America) and the Rwandan-based AMiA (Anglican Mission in America). The commonplace notion that Anglican means “not Episcopalian” is no coincidence; this is precisely the conclusion that the average church-going American would reasonably draw from following the news.

Moreover, the vision of Anglicanism here in play clearly gives very little weight to catholic order and global communion. The new Anglican church was created, as it were, by fiat— Duncan’s forthcoming elevation as archbishop, and the new group’s status as an Anglican province, are thus far only self-declared realities. And although Duncan’s group and his supporters have asked for approval from the global Anglican instruments of communion, they have also made it clear that they do not consider such approval to be necessary. Duncan and his allies enjoy the support of five evangelical Anglican primates, mostly African and all associated with the confessional GAFCON movement. This is, forthrightly, all the approval that the new church supposes itself to need; apart from this, Duncan’s group considers itself authorized to go it on its own. If ordinary Americans are expected to suppose that Anglican means something other than a conservative evangelical movement with liturgy and bishops, it cannot be from reading the daily headlines.

Episcopalians, for their part, genuinely do see themselves first and foremost as an autonomous, liberal American denomination. Their election of Gene Robinson as the church’s first openly gay bishop, of course, along with their practice (in many dioceses) of liturgically blessing same-sex unions, has led to a great deal of turmoil. But despite being asked many times by the Anglican instruments of communion to reverse course for the sake of Anglican unity, Episcopalians show little sign of doing so. By and large, Episcopalians like Bishop Robinson; as one friend of mine remarked, the thing about Robinson isn’t that he’s theologically unique as an Episcopalian, it’s that he’s so typical. Most Episcopalians are very content with their church’s position on homosexuality, as well as with the church’s general doctrinal haziness; such things are not about to change anytime soon. Even though holding to such positions may well mean walking apart from other Anglicans, the majority of the church views this as an unfortunate but acceptable necessity. In short, it seems clear that for most Episcopalians, the core of their identity lies elsewhere than their status as Anglicans.

All in all, it is hard to avoid the conclusion that the commonplace definitions of Anglican and Episcopalian in the American public lexicon have their roots not simply in confusion or misunderstanding, but in what has actually happened on the ground. Many may view these realities as unfortunate, but that does not change the fact that they have indeed become realities. If these words are to change in their popular meaning, they will have to change also in fact. And to do so will mean fighting an uphill battle against the forces that have given them their current definitions.

So far, so gloomy. I’m home from seminary at the moment, visiting family and friends in North Dakota. When I get asked—as I undoubtedly will—whether I’m Anglican or Episcopalian, what will I say in reply? As of right now, believe it or not, I still think that my answer can and should be, “Both.”

The answer depends not on the probability of being understood; given what I have just laid out, I have little reason to think that. My reason has much more to do with necessity and hope. As I made clear to my diocesan standing committee last summer, I understand myself to be an Episcopalian precisely because I am an Anglican; if I did not believe in the vision of a genuinely catholic and reformed global fellowship of Christians that the Anglican communion, at its best, holds out, I would have little interest in joining up with a denomination that, frankly, is more committed to their openness toward diverse beliefs and practices than to orthodox Christian doctrine. If I cannot say that I believe myself to be an Anglican first and Episcopalian second, then my place in the church makes little sense.

And that, in turn, is dependent upon being able to hope that Anglicanism actually means something beyond the local and the ad hoc; that there actually is, in fact and not only in theory, a global fellowship of Anglican Christians committed to the creedal faith and to common prayer, worship, and reading of Scripture. In short, despite the general futility of my hand-waving attempts at explaining Anglican ecclesiology, I have to stick to my guns—even though I think that the terms Anglican and Episcopalian have almost entirely left the barn, I can’t accede to what the words have come to mean in their near-universal American usage.

Is there still reason to hope that the words will somehow change their meanings? As for Episcopalian, I don’t see how it could. Next summer’s General Convention will be important to watch; many expect that it will further underscore the church’s autonomy and commitment to theological liberalism. Even so, the valiant Communion Partners, the group within the Episcopal church committed to both catholic order and doctrinal orthodoxy, remains forward-looking and vocal. If the status quo remains unchanged, their long-term future in the Episcopal church is dubious, but they intend nevertheless to remain committed to both Anglicanism and the Episcopal church so long as it is possible.

What about the definition of Anglican? In the October issue of First Things, I expressed the hope that last summer’s Lambeth Conference, and particularly the leadership of Archbishop Rowan Williams, gave strong evidence that the center of the Anglican communion intended to hold together; that the Episcopal left and the GAFCON right would not, in fact, carry the day and so lead the communion ever-further down the road to fragmentation and incoherence. Since that time, most of the action has been on the GAFCON and Bishop Duncan side; and the more influence they have, the less chance there is of an eventual coming-together of things.

But the ball is now in center court, as it were—this February’s meeting of the Anglican primates will be crucial, as will the meeting of the Covenant Design Group in April and the Anglican Consultative Council’s meeting in May. If Anglicanism is truly to mean something beyond the local, these meetings will carry forward the Lambeth vision of a genuinely covenanted “global” and “catholic church,” with its ministry, faith, and sacraments “united and interdependent throughout the world,” as Rowan Williams has put it.

There are, of course, no guarantees. The forces of dissolution and division right now are strong, and it is always much easier to pull apart than it is to hold together. The question “Anglican or Episcopalian?” may always be with us; but at the least, we may still be able to hope that the question “What kind of Anglican are you?” will not become just as common.

Jordan Hylden, a former junior fellow at First Things, is a graduate student at Duke Divinity School.

 

HEY! COME BACK! YOU CAN’T DO THAT

Tuesday, October 7th, 2008

Is this insanity contagious?

 

Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori had better go below deck and see the gaping hole in her sinking ship.

 

She can go on pretending this is about Openly Gay Bishop Gene Robinson but she needs to listen to those who are leaving.  They make it clear that this is only one of many symptoms of biblical abandonment and they find they  must jump ship and get as far away as possible in fear of being sucked down as the once might (TEC) Sinks!Schori seems to demonstrate no understanding of the  commission of the church and little understanding or willingness to listen to those who are trying to remind her.

 

I wonder if she will stand firmly and proudly on the stern as TEC slips below the water or will she eagerly scamper off to another denominational rescue vessel where through a full communion agreement she will be recognized as a Bishop in good standing? 

Episcopal leader calls diocese secession illegal

 Oct 5 2008 6:20PM
Associated Press

Washington (AP) Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori (SHOHR’-ee) says the Diocese of Pittsburgh probably won’t be the last to vote to leave the U.S. branch of the world Anglican Communion.But she told a forum at Washington National Cathedral that she considers Pittsburgh’s secession to join with more conservative Anglicans in South America to be a violation of church law.

The Diocese of San Joaquin (wah-KEEN’),

California, had previously quit the Episcopal Church, and dioceses based in Quincy, Illinois, and Fort Worth, Texas

, are set to vote next month on leaving.Conservative Episcopalians object to the denomination condoning homosexuality, a position highlighted by the 2003 consecration of the openly gay Bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.

But Jefferts Schori said that issue is less important to God than helping the poor. 

 

Comment by reader:
Ms Schori foolishly violated church law to “depose” Bp Duncan 2 weeks prior to this vote making the vote even more lopsided. Now she has the gall to talk about whether it is legal for a diocese to leave. She is an oceanographer not a canon lawyer. Here is what a canon lawyer says:”The Episcopal Church, like each of the Dioceses which make it up, is itself an unincorporated association. What does that mean? An unincorporated association is, first of all, not incorporated-that is to say, it is not a permanent legal entity, as is a corporation. Second, it is an association-which is to say that it is a voluntary assembly of people who choose freely to belong to it. While they are members, they must obey its rules. But if the association had a rule that “members who join us may never leave us,” that rule itself would not only be unenforceable in any court, but it would violate the very definition of an association, in an effort to turn it into a permanent, corporate-like entity.” http://tinyurl.com/4grhpw

Ms Schori’s heavy handed ways has made the denomination the fastest declining in America – and that was last year. With four whole dioceses leaving, dozens and dozens of lawsuits across the country, this year’s statistics will make last year’s look rosy.