Well, there you have it. The hand of God in the outcome? Whatever the details, it is certainly a 'done deal'.

The arrival of Chicken Little - "The sky is falling, The sky is falling!"

(Note: A heartfelt thanks to David and the VOL Team for their tireless efforts to keep the world informed about the antics of Convention, and the crystal clear apostacy of TEC!)

As we watch events unfold around us, let us not waiver in our faith, nor doubt in our heart. Remember, He Himself warned us about the things to come, so that we would remain assured that He was still in control!

In an attempt to discern the signs of the times, it would appear that we are either poised for the greatest revival the world has ever experienced, or we are preparing to descend into the chaos preceding Christ's return. What is clear is that the status quo that we in the west have maintained for these many years has forever been shattered.

We can and should learn much from our brothers and sisters who are facing life and death persecution for their faith on a daily basis, and doing so joyfully. Many count themselves exceedingly blessed if they have a Bible and a Prayer Book in their assembly. Yet they are on fire for God, and allowing God to work through them in ways that we in the educated, sophisticated, and civilized west have long since forgotten! We have abundant resources, and many degress, but these Spirit-filled Christians put us to shame. Why? It is neither the lack nor the abundance of resources, but rather it is because they 'naively' believe the Word, and they trust that God is Who He says He is, and that He will do what He says He will do!

Now there's a tip!

God says in Mark 11 that if we do not doubt, but believe in our heart, that He will grant us what we say. The problem is that instead of 'having what we say', we 'say what we have', and then we wonder why nothing changes.

Matt 9:29 is a doubled-edge sword -- "... be it done unto you according to your faith." We tend to assume that means the positive, blessing side. It applies equally to doubt and fear -- "negative" faith, if you will. Deep in our hearts, we don't believe that God will come through -- " . . . be it done unto you according to your faith!"

Many may not like what I'm about to say next, but I offer it up for both time and the community of the faithful to assess. The alphabet soup of the various denominations, and the multitude of break-offs coming from them, are becoming increasingly irrelevant. The Anglican Communion Network, nor the Anglican Communion, nor any of the denominations, will matter much in the times to come. I have the growing sense that God is starting to "undo" all the divisions that man has done over the last 2000 years. This unity will be orchestrated by God, according to HIS plan, and not ours. We are starting to "rewind the tape", back to Rome, back past Rome to the 7 Councils, back past the Councils to Antioch, and eventually back to a Church like what existed in Jerusalem in the first years after Christ's Ascension. I sense the driving force on this reunification will be pressure and persecution. I don't believe denominational differences will matter much when we're sharing the same spiritual foxhole!

The Sovereign God of the Universe has chosen to work through the creative power of belief that He gave us when He created us. I believe that sentiment to be expressed on nearly every page of the Scriptures. I have much to learn about how to apply that in my life, but I sense that we all will be doing a lot of growing in this area.

If we want to walk on water, we have to step out of the boat and get our feet wet.

All praise be to the Author and Perfecter of our faith!

JAM

I agree. Becoming a persecuted minority has a way of focusing one's attention to a short list of priorities. Esoteria doesn't count for much when expecting the "midnight knock on the door".

It comes to this?

ECUSA remains an error ridden, dismay-producing Province of our church! If many bishops (including conservative ones) are desperately driven to 'move the whole' in this current direction, then, indeed, "the sky is falling!"

Where were they when rebellion and heresy was the rule of the day? And at the last hour to throw the 'whole mess' into continuing confusion and uncertainty (including the effect upon the masses)?

Good grief!
And good riddance!


Dear JAM:
I quite agree with you.
Blessed be the wonderful name of the Lord!

RMachina wrote: "Many may not like what I'm about to say next, but I offer it up for both time and the community of the faithful to assess."

Personally, I think you may have hit the ol' nail on the head. This may be the beginning of God's own version of postmodern deconstructionism. The liberals within ECUSA have been exposed this past week, as were those in the Presbyterian Church (USA). Surely more mainline denominations will follow, and a general breakdown of what we know as "the church" may soon come to pass.

With society going in the direction of secular humanism, backed by the courts and groups like the ACLU, I think the time may be approaching for all Christians to begin caring less about labels, and more about helping one another prepare for the future.

I am not an alarmist, nor do I think that the apocolypse is upon us; but I can see that a post-Christian persecution may be forthcoming.

May God have mercy on us all.

+Ed Steele

Quote:

If this IS true then these "conservative" bishops have fallen down on the job in their role as pastors. That's like saying, "I am going to subject my child to the highly toxic waste to show the government how negligent the factory up stream is being".

Besides, assisted suicide is immoral and murderous.

RMachina,

My EOC priests is saying the EXACT same thing, particularly the "I sense the driving force on this reunification will be pressure and persecution."

Blessings in our Ascended Lord
Andy

The problem is that multitudes of children are drinking that toxic waste NOW. All the conservative bishops did was to put a warning lable on the poison with the face of Ms. Schori on it.

I'm NOT drinking THAT stuff!

Don

Well the party has finished.I think that the african primates are right.The Primates of the global south will meet in september to decide
what to do with this new pagan cult(TEC), till
there Ducan and the network will need to decide what to do,they are giving more than three months
to them to decide,if in september they still being part of this pagan cult, than will be very
clear that they care more about their pension
than to be faithful to Christ.Bishop Robinson and the diocese of Recife were expelled of the
Brazilian Province becouse they did what Ducan
and others cowards orthodox bishops of the network don't have courage to do,to offer oversight to anglicans in revisionists dioceses
in US.The Recife diocese is located in the
poorest region of Brazil.When the diocese
accepted the request of oversight of American
congregation they didn't think in their pension
they just did it.The network and Ducan Pittsburgh
must decide now, the primates of the global south
know that the B033 is just blabla.The time to
talking has finished.Ducan and the other bishops
of the network must start to act as men of God,
and no like chickens.Ducan choose now with god you and the network want to follow.

The Age of Apathy is gone and i now beleive we enter the Age of Opposition to orthodox Christianity.

let us be honest - no one is surprised by ECUSA GC06 - many could have writtent the script before it came to be. the only surprise will be how many of the other provninces will try to 'spin the media' that ECUSA has accepted WR and complied. Wont take long for Ken Kearon etc to get the media machine cranked up. Await Abp Eames usual media fudge (he says a lot but it has no subsance) as the chairman of WR.

See www.reform-ireland.org/ for their initial response to the events of GC06.

i think we will see a global re-alignment of orthodox anglicans and certainly here in the church of ireland there is a generation of evangelicals who are quite prepared to break communion with their bishop on such issues and to bypass such structures in order to remain faithful to the Word of God and the great commission to evangelise the world.

BHTech - dont cross the Tiber over this issue - find a faithful and biblical churh and worship there. Personally crossing the Tiber is only to invite another whole set of painful dilemmas.
God bless
hobbit

God's peace. I have been a dedicated lurker for several years but have never joined and posted until now. But as ECUSA spirals down into the abyss and so many faithful Christians are wondering where they are to go, I really felt the time has come to speak out.

I began my Christian journey in 1971 as a convert from atheism while in graduate school in Florida. Not knowing where to go, I joined a Presbyterian Church US church, became a staunch reformed Calvinist, and enthusiastically left with that church when it split to form the PCA. A few years later, I joined a theonomically-driven PCA congregation in Tyler, Texas that went through several realignments ending in near-independency as it tried to become ever more "pure." As always, I prided myself on my being "TR"--"Truly Reformed" (I even got a mention in Gary North's "Dominion Covenant" book!).

All of this came to a shattering end when I, my wife and two young children, and four other families were "excomunicated" by the tinpot leaders of this church, which had by now become a cult in that it advocated Calvin's execution of rebellious children and other fantastical aberrations. To his eternal credit, the late Greg Bahnsen flew out from Irvine, CA to defend us from the kangaroo court of our "trial."

Where to go? My children were enrolled in an Episcopal school. After seeking counsel from a godly Episcopal priest, I found refuge in the Episcopal Church in 1982. There, I learned that the Church actually has a history that precedes the Reformation--and I began to love the liturgy. But I still needed the Articles, and I was still a Protestant.

You know the history of ECUSA from that point, so I won't bore you. At the end, I was commuting with my wife from Tyler to Ft Worth--about 200 miles round trip--to attend St Vincent's under Bp. Iker. We are old now, and this was wearing us down.

But here we are today. What follows is a copy of a goodbye letter I posted to the White Horse Tavern when I tearfully left that great Anglican listserve in 2004 (with one update noted). I am not "trolling" for converts; only sharing my experiences. If this post helps anyone find his way, praise be to God. Blessings, ~Br. Carlo~

********

God's peace. The time has finally come (is actually overdue) for my departure, as I and my wife were formally received into the Roman Catholic Church on July 8, 2004. We both shed many tears and prayed many long, hard hours over this conversion, but now that we have had time to "towel off" on the other side of the Tiber, we are both too busy with exciting new opportunities to cry any longer.

Some of you have followed the gradual shift in my point of view over my years in this listserve. I am grateful that only a few ever clamored for my ejection--and those privately, for the most part. Actually, the listserve has become a meeting-place for many perspectives, some openly stating that they are not Anglicans. The only viewpoints that are not welcome, it seems (especially from the recent Purgatory discussion), are Roman. That's OK with me--we still have some right of association guaranteed us in this country, and I respect that.

But some of you may be curious about how things are over here, without wanting to swim the river yourselves. I will admit that becoming a Roman Catholic most certainly does NOT transport you into a trouble-free zone of orthodoxy! Just the other day I found myself alone, defending the Catholic Faith against a group of cradle Catholics. Rome is dealing with the "lavender Mafia" in its seminaries, with liberation theology in South America, with "feminazis," with universalism (a bigger issue than most will admit, in my opinion), with sexual corruption in the priesthood . . .well, you name it, we've got it. But--and this is a big difference from Protestantism--none of the aforementioned practices are part of official Church teaching, and never will be.

In a word, why did I convert? What Rome has, and Anglicanism doesn't, is GENUINE AUTHORITY. A blessed consequence of this is an authoritative Magisterium, and authoritative ANSWERS--volumes and volumes of them, stretching back for centuries. I don't pretend to understand the "Romish doctrine of Purgatory"--but I believe it, because the Church teaches it. If I want to study about purgatory, I need only look back through centuries of development of this doctrine, from its most primitive articulations to the present dogma as stated in the Catechism of the Catholic Church. Protestantism has nothing to compare on this or any other doctrine. It has only the well-reasoned writings of this or that Reformer, who, reasoning outside of the Church and her authority (usually with only a partial Bible and from a fallacious "sola scriptura" presuppositional stance), has not only become heretic but has founded a new sect! As one RC bishop said, "To be deep in history is to cease to be Protestant." What is the latest count: 25,000 Protestant denominations? 30,000? How many new denominations will we have in *this decade,* just from the ECUSA?

You might be interested to know that while the Tyler ECUSA churches are graying, "sissifying," and running on dead men's money, the RC Diocese of Tyler, Texas is bursting at the seams with new converts--many of them young, with families. We have grown from a single cathedral church in Smith County to well over a dozen parishes and even more missions. I was recruited immediately into lay catechism service, where I now teach Scripture to a huge class of youngsters on Friday evenings. During my confirmation service (and my wife's reception back into the Church) the Bishop of Tyler--a Jesuit--thanked God for all of my Protestant years, in which by God's grace I was taught about Jesus, the Bible, and good works--and gradually, by God's grace, brought home! He even encouraged me to remain with my Anglican Franciscan Order, the FODC (short of Communion, however). [NB: I am now a member of the original, Catholic Franciscan Third Order, the Secular Franciscan Order or SFO.]

In closing, I want to thank all of you, especially those who disagreed with me over the years and helped me to sharpen my understanding. My love of the Catholic elements of the Anglican church will always burn brightly, and my understanding of the Protestant elements will, I hope, make me ever more zealous to see that expression of Christianity in which the fulness of truth dwells--the Roman Catholic Church--is presented "spotless and blameless" before God on that great day when we shall all stand before Him.

So a group of conservative bishops decided to vote against their own consciences [most of them surely oppose women bishops] in order to show the world what a mess the Episcopal Church is. Wow - that's leadership for you. When I was in Catholic grade school the good sisters taught us that using wrong means to accomplish right ends is sinful. Going back home to Rome looks better and better.

Professor Foley,
Thank you. You have shown how the Episcopal prayer book of 1979 has contributed to the apostacy of TEC.Not only did they follow the lead of Rome in the language, they intentionally moved the image of God from "transcedant" to "incarnational" and finally, at the last to "Jesus my buddy" who "has my back". I do not need Jesus as my buddy. I need the creator of all things who loves me and cares for me. And I do not want the mass to echo what I put up with in the outside world. I want to step into the holy when I kneel at the altar, not only with a holy language but holy sights and smells. I want to "worship the Lord in the beauty of holiness". And I have news for the liturnazis who have dumbed down worship out there. There are more than just a few who agree with me. When I meet with people and they ask about my church and I tell them about the liturgy they invariably respond "Oh, I would love to visit" or"Gee, I wish my church worshipped like that." When I do a wedding where many come from other churches (I have particularly seen this in RC's) they see the liturgy as something they remember and miss; as something they would like to recapture in their spiritual life.

KievCaves, Thank you for posting the article about changes to the RC Mass. Since i am used to the 1928 Prayer Book, when i attend a RC Mass i can not help to be reminded of the 1979 alternate Service Book of ecusa... ugh.

Again thankyou, gregory


ps BroCarlo, Thankyou, too.

This all reminds me of the Army officer in during the Vietnam War who explained to a reporter (while his men were torching a village) that he had to destroy the place to save it from communism.

It'd be interesting to know what must be going on in Schori's mind as she ponders this discovery of 20 additional "votes" from the right.

If I were those bishops, I'd be planning a move because like many of the (more ideologically-bound) liberals, she's not going to give any paybacks except the back of her hand.

They don't need to leave like our diplomats did in Saigon, April, 1975, but just leave the whole mess behind and let Schori figure out what to do with a depleted denomination that, like South Vietnam, is dying all around her.

Hope you find an inexpensive printer and crank out a lot, and I mean A LOT of posters with this picture. It's a beaut!

"When I was in Catholic grade school the good sisters taught us that using wrong means to accomplish right ends is sinful."

That's not what happened. Those bishops just put an image on the warning label. Any other action under the circumstances would have been immoral.

I understand the strategy, but principals are principals, nonetheless. This woman's principals are not sound.

Isaac

Thanks to Br_Carlo!

You are an inspiration for others. And although no experience in life is ever wasted (as your testamony clearly shows), you continue to do your good part for many.

As a Canadian Anglican, my current work is yet before me, from a Provincial point of view. I value your word, and the presented changes are heartening to me.

I welcome the Lord's hand in all of this. He is not done with any of us yet! Reformation out of error is a very good gift from God.

Pity those, and pray for those, who are gleefully sucking up what ECUSA has to offer.

Who knows about the accuracy of the source. I doubt it.

However, if the choice was between Bishops Parsley and Jefferts Schori, there was no "right" or "better" choice. Bishop Parsley had voted against the Robinson consecration but had then moved to take the most aggressive stance possible against the Network and orthodox advocacy. The result? The state of Alabama has one of the strongest new non-TEC Anglican churches.

I believe the greatest danger to the person in the pews is obfuscation and a lack of honesty about what the church has become. With Jefferts Schori we have greater clarity, and thus there is much less of a chance that parishioners will be lulled into believing that nothing has changed, when indeed over the last 30 years everything has changed.

Frankly, I respect Jefferts Schori more than most of the other candidates in that she says what we means and means what she says.

Well spoken. Regrettably Bishop Parsley allowed his ambitions and comforts to triumph over his conscience. What a waste of gifts and potential.

The election was close. On the fifth and final ballot, only 15 votes separated the winner +Schori from the runner-up +Parsley. +Parsely was certainly the more moderate candidate; he did not support the VGR election.

My own view is that extremists on both the revisionist and resasserter sides brokered as divisive a GC as they could to highlight the differences between the factions.

And, despite their strong words, the orthodox bishops show no sign -- yet again -- of taking their flocks out of TEC, where the liberal faction will hold numerical and organizational power for the forseeable future.

There's going to be a fight over real estate regardless of how and when the reasserters/revisionists split -- what's the wait all about?

I think what has happened to ECUSA, as well as in other Anglican churches in the West, is eerily similar to what happened to the Roman Catholic church with its Vatican II.

Jesus Christ Son of God, have mercy on me, a sinner.

To paraphrase a line from the old Paul Newman movie, "Cool Hand Luke": 'What we got here, is failure to excommunicate!'

Br_Carlo

Thank you for posting this beautiful account of your spiritual journey. I hope that many of the orthodox Christians who currently find themselves trapped in TEC will take heart from your story, and know that their own stories can have a good ending - while much may be lost even more can be gained (to steal from the title of Cardinal Newman's autobiographical novel).

When (because of a destructive matrix of reasons) I left the Catholic Church 4 years ago and became Episcopalian I did so because I convinced myself that the Anglican Communion was a fully Catholic Church (at All Saints Cathedral, Milwaukee, that was an easy conviction to hold). Even as I gradually came to see that Anglicanism is, in fact, a Reformation tradition and not Catholic, I was still able to talk myself into staying. I decided that the same lack of doctrinal cohesion that enables a unitarian like Spong to remain a member in good standing enabled me to be as Catholic as I wanted to be and still stay in TEC. So I held to the truth of purgatory and Christ's substantial presence in the eucharist; I continued to venerate images and relics; I prayed to Mary and the holy saints - and the whole time I remained a card-carrying Episcopalian.

So why did this comfortable (if essentially dishonest) arrangement finally break down? Well, partly because it was dishonest. Partly because I saw that the directions 815 were taking in liturgy and sacramentology would eventualy make my Catholic life in TEC impossible. But mostly because I got tired of being Catholic alone. The very essence of Catholic Christianity is that it is ecclesial and communitarian. I didn't want to venerate the Mother of God or worship the Eucharist or observe the full liturgical calendar alone in my room. I wanted to do it as part of a community that was believing and doing the same thing. Basically, I was dying of spiritual loneliness.

So, after months of struggle, I returned to the bosom of Holy Mother Church on the Feast of St. Cyril of Jerusalem (the father of that full liturgical life that I love so much). It's not perfect. Many lay Catholics, deacons, priests and bishops are not perfect. So what - neither am I. But this Church is perfect, not in its human membership but in its living the full perfection of Christian belief and praxis. I have never looked back.

Peace to you, Br_Carlo, and to all here.

John

God's peace. Compline wrote: "I think what has happened to ECUSA, as well as in other Anglican churches in the West, is eerily similar to what happened to the Roman Catholic church with its Vatican II."

I beg to differ. In NO sense--and I truly mean NO--is there the slightest similarity between Vatican II and the last ECUSA General Convention. The only things that changed in Catholic practice with Vatican II were matters of discipline, which can always be changed to reflect changing needs (after all, seafood for modern westerners is a luxury item nowadays rather than a penance!). NOT ONE WHIT OF DOCTRINE WAS CHANGED. This is in stark contrast to ECUSA GC's, where new and progressively more damning heresies seem to be the order of the day. Blessings, ~Br_Carlo~

Greetings to all in the Holy Name of Jesus Christ! Thanks for your posts, jmichal and brother Carlo. I too held on as long as I could to ECUSA but, as with you, it became an issue of personal integrity and honesty. Fortunately, I stumbled (funny how thigs work) across an orthodox anglican group, to which I now belong. It is the Orthodox Anglican Church, under the primacy of ++Scott McLauglin. Our advertising tag line is "Really Anglican, Truly Orthodox" and ++McLaughlin means it!

Not trying to "troll for parishoners" but you may find the OAC website of interest, not to mention some great downloads. The web address is www.orthodoxanglican.net

God bless,
Smoky

smoky, So what is the difference between OAC and RC?

And where does "Episcopal Orthodox Church" fit in?

Must admit though i have a problem with Episcopal anything due to anyone hearing it automatically says Gay church...

humbly, gregory

ps just started reading;

http://www.orthodoxanglican.net/documents/Orthodox%20Anglicanism.pdf

Frcorny, I assume you are speaking in the "inner city vernacular" when you say "Jesus is my buddy," or "Jesus has my back," when you mention the 1979 Prayer Book. Of course, very few parishioners in the pews look at it that way....I certainly don't. Most parishes don't use the 1928 Book of Common Prayer for a couple of reasons: The language is archaic and confusing to some, and the services are too lengthy. I think if the book was to be published in a more up-to-date vernacular but using the same order without leaving anything out, it would be acceptable and easier to use. It would be written in the modern-day "language of the people," so to speak.

Cennydd

Gregory: As far as the difference between the OAC (Orthodox Anglican Church) and RC (Roman Catholic) is that we are, indeed Anglican in the continuing Church sense of the word, however do not seek communion with Canterbury (for which I personally am very glad). The rites are Western Orthodox, using the '28' BCP.

As far as the question of where does the EOC (Episcopal Orthodox Church) fit it, that used to be our name, however due to the unfortunate connotations attached to anything "episcopal", it was decided in the past year to changed the jurisdictional name. We've been around since the mid-60' when ECUSA began the slow slide into heresy. Any other questions, just give me a holler.

In Him,
Smoky

Well, the last vote was Schori 95 and Parsley 82, so 4 "switched" votes would not have made a difference. In fact, one would have to have seven conservatives voting "liberal" (or should I say "ultra-liberal") to have swung the election. I think we would have a lot more talk if this had been the case.

Norman

Did the conservative bishops nominate her? Are they responsible for the nominating committee's decision to make her one of the four heavy favorites? Don't blame a few for what 95 did. The HOB is apostate. A few votes either way won't change that.

Faithfully,
Gideon

This was released by +Duncan today, and it will surely be on this website soon, but here is the preview.

A Pastoral Letter from the Moderator of the Anglican Communion Network
23rd June, A.D. 2006

A Pastoral Letter from the Moderator

TO ALL THE BELOVED OF THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION NETWORK: Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,

Grace and peace to you from God our Father and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

A new day is dawning. It is a new day for all of us who understand ourselves to be faithful and orthodox Anglicans, whether within the Episcopal Church or gone out from it.

It is with sadness, but also with anticipation, that I write to you now that the General Convention of the Episcopal Church has provided the clarity for which we have long prayed. By almost every assessment the General Convention has embraced the course of “walking apart.”

I have often said to you that the decisive moment in contemporary Episcopal Church and Anglican Communion history occurred at General Convention 2003. At that time, in the words of the Primates, the Episcopal Church took action that would “tear the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level.”

Since that time, the tear has widened. While we had hoped that this Church would repent and return to received Faith and Order, General Convention 2006 clearly failed to submit to the call, the spirit or the requirements of the Windsor Report. The middle has collapsed. For that part of the Network working constitutionally within ECUSA as over against the dioceses represented by the thirty progressive bishops who issued their Statement of Conscience, we are two churches under one roof.

Even before the close of Convention, Network and Windsor bishops began disassociating themselves from the inadequate Windsor resolution, and thus far one Network diocese has formally requested alternative primatial oversight.

More initiatives are underway. Pastoral and apostolic care has been promised without regard to geography. All I can tell you is that the shape of this care will depend on a very near-range international meeting. Other actions will follow upon continuing conversations with those at the highest levels of the Anglican Communion. Over the course of the month of July, many of the things we have longed for will, I believe, come to pass or be clearly in view for all.

The Anglican Communion Network has never been more united. We are gaining strength, both domestically and internationally. This is the time for biblically orthodox Anglicans to hang together, supporting one another in solidarity, in prayer and with expectancy.

My prayers are with you all, especially those whose plight is most difficult and whose patience is most worn. Pray for me and for all the leadership in Network, Episcopal Church, and Anglican Communion, and most especially for the Archbishop of Canterbury in this crucial moment in modern Anglican history. Again I say to you that a new day is dawning.

Faithfully in Christ Jesus,

Bob Pittsburgh+

The Rt. Rev. Robert Wm. Duncan Moderator of the Anglican Communion Network

Gergory, I hate to disagree with you. There can never anysuch thing as an Episcopal/ Anglican Orthodox Church. As I noted to Andy (KievCaves) elsewhere, "...Andy, As a former member of the greek Archdiocese here in the US, I have felt like a voice crying in the Wilderness when I have noted that being Orthodox and Anglican is a contradiction in terms. You are right to say, "I understand, as a former Anglican, the comfort in applying the "orthodox" reference. But this is not correct, and as I moved into Orthodoxy, discovered that many Eastern Orthodox take exception to the application of "Orthodoxy" to mean "traditional" or "original" in regards to Anglican doctrine and practice."" You did not go far enough. You should have also noted that the EOC does not recognize any sacraments as valid (with the exception of Baptism unless you are a member of the Russian Church in Exile)except for her own." I would add what many Anglicans would consider O/orthodox would be consider unorthodox by the EOC.

I will note that since the NER and TER are both unhappy with the resolution at the convention and, for that reason, the resolution that was rammed through was a true compromise. I still think it is ironic that both sides claimed that the Holy Spirit was on their side. I wonder how the HS communicated with them? History is written by the winner;the jury is still out won who won here.

ORTHODOX:

Greek "Ortho" - true, correct
"doxos" - doctrine, opinion

I know this is a touchy semantics exercise, and again THIS IS NOT MEANT TO INSULT OR BE ARROGANT, but if "orthodox" is applied to the body of faithful Angicans, then we fall into questions such as:

- Women priests/deacons (which view is "orthodox?) Many in AMiA and I suspect many leaving ECUSA and who are faithful Anglican Christians support either/both female deacons/priests and still consider themeselves "orthodox" in faith. I suspect many others would take exception

- Eucharistic Transubstantiation/Consubstantiation (which is "orthodox"?)

- Liturgic Content/Theology and Understanding (1928 prayer book / other books (What is standard, how is standard established, who decides?)

- Authority of priest/vestry/Bishop (what is the "orthodox" model?)


We ARE one Body in the risen Christ. These "issues" aren't I think meant ot be divisive so much as definitive. There is ~2000 years of tradition to look to. "Orthodoxy" entails more than just being against revisionism. Revisionism is heterodox, false, poison, and an abomination. That said, the faithful church, in whatever capacity, must be forward looking in its witness, "definition" and presentation to the world - and cannot base itself on just being "anti-revisionism" or "anti-ECUSA"

Offered in Christ's love -
Andy

Greetings Br. Carlo,

I understand the fundamental point you are making, i.e. that the Church of Rome has not officially deviated from the Nature of God as has the ECUSA. That has to be the single core issue beyond which reconciliation is no longer possible.

However, if I may do so without appearing argumentative, posit that there was, indeed, a liberal takeover of the Roman Catholic Church, the results have been perhaps not so obvious to us as has been the excesses in the ECUSA and elsewhere. Traditonal Roman Catholics, which were the bulk in the pews at the time of Vatican II, are finding variant paths, e.g. Pius XII Society, etc. in a struggle to adhere, in some fashion, to the Roman Church as it had been for some 1900+ years prior. Not wishing to clog our Anglican forum with the minutiae of Catholic doctrines and so on, suffice it to say that there were major changes in the RC Church and the conservatives lost. Mel Gibson is only the most visible of the Catholic community who believe, with I feel some real justification, that their Church was hijacked.

The main point I wished to make in my earlier post was that with the ECUSA, and not just the ECUSA, and the Roman Catholic Church heterodox, liberal factions successfully captured the respective churches. That the ECUSA is only more flamboyant in its descent into the abyss is, I believe, surface level only.

Thank you for the opportunity to expand on this question.

Well, the issue of Orthodox/orthodox and Catholic/catholic, has been tackled on a recent thread. Anyone remember which one?

Some of this is semantics - between use of Proper Noun, and Adjective use of these names. Also, the use of orthodox began to be used in our circumstance of refuting Liberal bias and error in our midst.

Am I correct in assuming that another 'rehash' is in order?

Otherwise, very good posting, friends all!

I'm not talented in this way, but I wish that someone would do a picture of Schori as Jadis out of The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe.

I hope that Bishop Ducan will start acting very
quick to organise a new anglican province in
America.

I hope that when Bishop Ducan organize the
new province in USA,its name will be
The Anglican Church of America,and its leader
(primate) will be an Archbishop and not
same stupid thing called presiding bishop.
And the dioceses will have decent names
and no stupid names as Upper South Caroline,
El Camino Real,North Neverland,Middle Central
Southwest Texas.

wheelspinning ... protestantism ... protestantism ... protestantism ... protestantism ... protestantism ...

How about something really different - naming the new provinces or dioceses or whatever after (gasp) saints? Of course, we'd need to pick saints' names that everyone can spell, so Athanatius, um Athenasius, er Athanasius is out.

Or, the Diocese of the Holy Nativity, or Incarnation, or Sacred Heart?

Hmmm? Whaddya think? I'm actually quite serious, despite the smilies.

I have been reading on this site for the last 3 days, with mounting sadness. I was baptized and confirmed in this church and to see it destruct, and morph into a cult, cuts to my core.

Believe me brother and sisters, you are not alone in this misery. Many, once biblically based denominations are traveling on the same destructive path as TEC.

I just wanted you to know you will be in my prayers and thoughts. Sola Fidi

Yep zach. The words Orthodox/orthodox has been hijacked by the conservative wing of the Anglican Church. As KievCaves noted, this is not appreciated by those who are truely Orthodox, members of the Eastern orthodox church. My suggestion is that the right wing of the Episcopal Church simply call themselves the Conservative branch of the TES. That should not offend any one. BTW, the EOC would really be offended if the left wing of the TEC were to try and usurp the word O/orthodox. The right wing has not figured out that "tradition" is, in many cases, more important than the Bible in the EOC and in the RCC. When the bible collides with tradition, tradition usually wins.

Believe me brother and sisters, you are not alone in this misery. Many, once biblically based denominations are traveling on the same destructive path as TEC.

The Dutch have a proverb about this kind of situation: "Een schip op het strand is een baken in zee." (A ship on the beach is a beacon to the sea).

Hi Zonaras --

I want ask you on you statement "The right wing has not figured out that "tradition" is, in many cases, more important than the Bible in the EOC and in the RCC. When the bible collides with tradition, tradition usually wins."

Could you give some examples in EO where this is so? I'm assuming you're prob. refering to reverence of saints?

PS - I don't think there is ANY worry on the left-wing of TEC having anything to do with the descriptor "orthodox." I have first hand experience with their literal REVULSION of "evangelical" and "fundamentalism."

There is a book written by our former TEC rector called "Saving Salvation - The Amazing Evolution of Grace" that very clearly delineates the true foundation of TEC theology. In their mind there is no difference between Orthodoxy (of EOC type), Billy Graham evangelicalism, Fred Phelps 5 point calvinism, Pat Robertson/Jerry Falwell right-wing fundamentalism, and traditional Anglicanism. They use the term "fundamentist" like the descriptor "neanderthal, hatemongering, superstitious fanatics" -- and mean it. The book is an easy read - very informative about the mindset of TEC.

Editorial Reviews

Book Description
With increasing frequency, mainline Christians are challenged--by televangelists as well as by neighbors, friends, and coworkers--with the question: "Are you saved?" Not only are they stumped for an answer, but they may be unsure of exactly what salvation means.
This book examines the concept of salvation in the Hebrew Scriptures and in the New Testament, showing readers that salvation, rather than simply the attainment of a faraway heaven in the afterlife, is also accomplished in the here-and-now through the Gospel of Jesus. In everyday language and an accessible, conversational tone, Saving Salvation helps Christians reach a deeper, more nuanced understanding of salvation than that provided by the dominant religious culture of our day. More than a heavenly reward for "good behavior" or "right belief," Smith says, salvation is also the gift of God’s abundant grace—through the love of family and friends, prayer, and service—in a Kingdom experienced here on earth.

With its thorough grounding in Scripture, along with reflection questions posted on the Morehouse website, Saving Salvation will serve as an excellent resource for both individual, small group, and parish study.

About the Author
Stephen Smith, an Episcopal priest, is rector a St. Patrick's Church in Dublin, Ohio. A frequent presenter at the Kenyon Summer Conference in Ohio, he has also presented at Epworth Center in Michigan, a highly regarded Methodist conference center.

""Corruption of Realized Eschatology into Revisionist Escatology
"Realized Escatology" is what distinguishes Christianity from Judaism, as well as from the anti-materialism of the Greeks, as well as the various Gnostic heresies (such as Manichaeism) that grew out from it. To put it simply - Jesus is in fact THE Messiah and He DID in fact bring the Messianic age into the world of time and space. Thus the Old Testament understanding of salvation through sacrifice and deed to attain righteousness was forever changed into a salvation of grace through the attoning sacrifice of Jesus for sin.

However, "Realized Eschatology" - or rather the grace brought into the world through Christ - DOES NOT allow the denial of the need for repentance and conversion. Indeed the revisionist theology of the modern Episcopal Church and "Jesus Seminar" seem bent on removing any notion of sin, repentance and conversion from the theological equation - calling such notions "exclusionary" or "fundamentalist." Smith's mischaracterization of Christ's realized escatology - summed up in John 14:6 "I am the way and the truth and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me" is typical of revisionist arguement. Smith calls it "right belief," whereas its a choice on our parts to either accept our state of falleness and the redemptive power of Christ's love, or deny our sins. Unlike God's eternal truth, revsionist theology such as espoused here can be manipulated to justify sin though concepts such as "evolving truths" - a favorite pat expression of ECUSA. What they mean is changing "truth" to fit a given cultural view. Indeed the book's introduction may reveal this truth, as it is an apologetic for same-sex relationsips as "good" in the sight of God.""

With a theological meter registering "shallow" at best, the author of Saving Salvation was often asked by the orthodox in his parish if he crossed his fingers during the Nicene Creed. Don't waste your money. Spong, Borg, and The Great Story authors Connie Barlow and Michael Dowd are his idols.

Oh -- needed to follow-up on my faqvorite section of this book - on the Bible. Here are some choice quotes:

From the section called "Lost in Translation" pp. 90 - 98

- "We have changed the way we translate the biblical books from their ancient texts based on knowledge gained since those texts were written. ... I went to my Greek professor (at Sewanee) and asked him why the Bible translators would deliberately translate the Bible in ways other than as actually written. His response: "The Creed." .... So, Biblical translators have simply taken into account the Creed and changed the biblical text in order to fit the Creed's theology."

- "The translators of the NRSV (Bible) have corrected this error."

- "St. Jerome simply changed the text (in Paul's leetter to Galations) to make the text conform to Paul's letter to the Romans."

Section "The New View of Salvation" pp. 72-72

- "I was finally convinced of this radical shift in public definition of Christianity when I visited a major bookstore to buy a Bible. My copy of the New Revised Standard Version was wearing thin. When I went to buy a new copy, the book was unavaiable ... There were plenty of Bibles, but not a single NRSV. Instead there were dozens of editions of the New International Version (a favorite translation of the fundamentalists) ..."

Like I said - he at one time was a rector at an EC we attended ... the anecdotes are particularly interesting in that regard because the long duplicity of TEC leadership was now out in the open.

Andy, I guess you could include that along with relics, but I was thinking of the "ya-ya" factor one encounters in the Greek Church. I think it also exists in the OCA. Some examples include certain ethnic issues that get bumped up to the level of canon law. Cases in point would be the 40 days that woman have to remain excluded from a church after the birth of a child. The OCA seems to be moving beyond this one here in New England. Although the Greeks would argue that this is for the health of the mother, they will admit in private that a woman who has just delivered a child is ritually unclean. The excessive reliance on prostrations in the OCA and other slavonic jurisdictions (even better if done on a stone floor)! No sex on Saturday night with your wife before communion on Sunday morning (there may be a canon on this issue, I'd have to check). The rules for fasting vary a bit between jurisdictions. Much of this falls under the heading of discipline, but the bible deals with issues of discipline. Like the Roman Church, the EOC seesm to prefer tradition to canon law or the bible. Cynically, I ranked the issues in order of importance in the last sentence.

I believe that Rome and Constantinople may be right because too often people forget the bible is a document that locked into a specific time frame and does NOT allow for change in the world. Tradition and canon law allow for change. If one does not allow for change, one can get nailed as Rome did in the case of Galileo or (I suspect)fundamentalist christians will (personally, I think the proper tense of the verb should be "have been")when the jury comes in on Darwin's theory of evolution (Again, I think the jury has come in). These are just my opinions, FWTW.

"I believe that Rome and Constantinople may be right because too often people forget the bible is a document that locked into a specific time frame and does NOT allow for change in the world. Tradition and canon law allow for change."

Quite wrong. The word of God is "living and active". It is not a dead document but illumined by the Holy Spirit.

I can think of no religion which has been more promoted and more extolled in spite of the overwhelming scientific evidence to the contrary than the religion known as "evolution". Rather than write a book here, please check out: http://www.answersingenesis.org/. We have been told the lie so many times that even faithful Christians accept evolution as "truth."

For me, it comes down to this simple concept: If evolution (not 'adaptation', which is an observable process that is quite different from one species evolving into another) is true, and Genesis chapters 1 - 11 are not literally true, then my faith is in vain and the rest of the Bible is myth. Why? Because if evolution is true, then we had death before sin, and we have no reason to believe the Biblical account in any other area, including my need for a Saviour.

In this area at least, Bp Spong is intellectually consistent. He disregards what the Bible says because he believes evolution to be true. He recognizes the intellectual inconsistency of trying to accept both.

He has made his choice. What say we -- choose this day whom we will serve!

JAM

I see a new headline- THE SOUTH SECEDES (from the TEC aka ECUSA.

Cenny, I grew up about as low church as there is but I think that you are missing something about the "archaic language". You prefer the language of the street but the inside of a sanctuary doesn't look like the street - it is as beautiful as mortals know how to make it. Our language should also be as beautiful as we can make it. Our dress and manners should be as beautiful as we know how to make it. This should not be done in obedience to any law and if a person comes in ragged it is irrelevant. Our respect rises from a heart of grattitude and awe.

It seems that if we do not rise to worship God with our best of singing and prose we will eventually devolve into GC2006.

Don

As I've said previously, this proves the serious problems for so-called "orthodox" on obeying God and His Perfect Word versus their agenda can be little different from the "liberals" in its outworking. Walk the walk, don't just talk the talk, like Jesus judged the Matthew 7 house builders. In our Lord's murder, the "orthodox/conservative" Pharisees were overjoyed at working together with the despised "liberal" Sadduccees and Herodians so long as it fulfilled their desire to murder Jesus (Matthew 22:16). Paul says we must always be ready to test ourselves to see if we're in the faith (2 Corinthians 13:5 Examine yourselves, whether ye be in the faith; prove your own selves. Know ye not your own selves, how that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye be reprobates). 1 Johns 1 says that "If we say that we have no sin/ have not sinned we deceive ourselves/ make Him a liar and the truth is not in us/His Word is not in us." How long will it be before the "orthodox" take Luke 13;3 seriously and repent of their own sin in the matter: "Except ye repent ye will all likewise perish." God help us all. The silver lining to the black cloud is that God usually must put us flat on our back before we'll look up to Him alone. Though there will surely be uncounted millions in heaven, nevertheess sadly for most, it will be flat on the back in hell where they'll be forced to glorify Him as foreshadowed in Psalm 66:3, NASV, "Say to God, 'How awesome are Thy works! Because of the greatness of Thy power Thine enemies will give feigned obedience to Thee.'...".

Folks….these two stories are breaking over in England now. I thought everyone needs to read this. If you think APO is going anywhere, guess again. However, there are some prophetic statements about where the CofE is heading. These are both from the London Telegraph dateline today July 2, 2006. The first story was by Jonathan Wynee-Jones. Entitled “Liberals May Split From Cantebury over Homosexuals.” Here’s a clip…..

“Liberal clergy in Britain are preparing to turn to America’s Anglican bishops for leadership in a move that could produce “civil war” and destroy the Church of England. The Sunday Telegraph has learned.”

“They are considering the drastic action after the Archbishop of Cantebury, Rowan Williams. Delivered a strong warning to liberals that they could be marginalized from the Anglican Church……”

“Among the ideas discussed were the twinning of English and American parishes, and inviting more clergy from the U.S. to come to England on placements.”

“There is also the radical possibility of an American bishop “overseeing” a liberal parish in this country, whose members feel marginalized by the imposition of traditional beliefs.”

Now if any of you think this will stiffen the resolve of Rowan….guess again. Here is another article in the same paper datelined today July 2 as well. This article was posted by Mary Wakefield….here’s a clip…..

“The sun was already high over Church Hill in Hertfordshire at 10:30 on Thursday morning as I followed Christina Rees through the garden, up to her front door.”

“Christina is American by birth, but a member of our General Synod and chairwoman of Women and the Church (WATCH), which struggles to free the Church of England from patriarchal prejudice.”

“And within the hour…she’d explained the Anglican Communion to me, unraveled all its competeing theologies and made it appear suddenly quite clear that despite his recent nod in the direction of the conservatives, the Archbishop of Cantebury will eventually go with the liberal flow….”

Christina said “”You want to know what the headlines will be on July 10?” Yes, please. “They’ll all say the same thing: CofE votes for woman bishops!”

So after women bishops in the CofE, you think openly gay clergy is next? “Let’s get real,” said Christina. “Look how many of them there are already. It’s just not official yet.”

So is Rowan Williams thinking along these lines too? Christina just smiled. And maybe she’s right.

It is true that in my part of London, a nice lady priest and her girlfriend run their parish side by side, and in the next door church, a gay priest and his partner do the same. If their spiritual leader thought they were making the Creator cross, surely he’d have put his foot down by now.

And here the reporter is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. ROWAN WILLIAMS WILL NOT SEE THE BREAKUP OF THE COMMUNION FOR ANYTHING. HE WILL DELAY APO IF NOT OUTRIGHT REFUSE IT. EVEN IF HE DOES HE WILL NOT CLAMP DOWN ON THE HERETICS IN ENGLAND OR THE US. IT IS BEYOND HIGH TIME FOR YOU ALL TO REALIZE THAT THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND IS NOT IN OUR FUTURE. THE COMMUNION IS BEING BROKEN BY GOD HIMSELF AND IT’S NEW HEADQUARTERS WILL BE EVENTUALLY IN ALEXANDRIA EGYPT UNDER THE AFRICANS. DO YOURSELF THE FAVOR AND BREAK FROM YOUR OLD ESTABLISHED MINDSET…..ONCE AGAIN THE COMMUNION AS WE KNOW IT IS DEAD….DEAD…..DEAD AND SO IS THE CHURCH OF ENGLAND.

A response from another place rootbranch's post is posted;

Poster: AlMarsh Posted: 2006/7/2 9:39:04

Don't believe everything you read in the newspapers. General Synod will decide, not the Sunday Telegraph or the somewhat confused Ms Rees. And it will be influenced by how the Anglican Communion shapes up: which is about to become a much more conservative shape.


Which i agree one must understand the source and that one can be lead into helping spread false info...

FEAR = False Evidence Appearing Real