David, thank you for going into the lions' den and bearing faithful witness in the presence of evil people. I especially noted "Bishop" Knudsen's amazing claim that her diocese (Maine) is enjoying growth. The official figures of TEC ("Participation and Giving Trends") show just the opposite. But these people have a shakey grip on reality and an even shakier grasp of truth.

btw, it;s already August and those figures do not seem to have been published for 2007, at least not on the website. Too embarrassing for public consumption?

Some interesting comments can be heard in this broadcast...

I particularly liked the portion discussing whether homosexuality was hereditary. Dr. Knowland was asked what theological implications would be if it was shown that a gene does cause homosexuality. She responded that it would not mean the church should bless such relationships. The moderator then asked, "Even if the science is proven, you still won't buy it?" She responded "Of course not!"

A similar debate about whether alcoholism is hereditary or not also appears in the news from time to time. If it is found that there are firm links between alcoholism and heredity, would the supporters of the homosexual agenda also support alcoholics in their "social" drinking? After all, "they were born that way! They can't help it!"

Would the TEC ordain a minister or bishop who openly admits to being an alcoholic yet refused to abstain from alcohol? (It kind of makes the final cleanup of Holy Communion difficult, unless the church uses grape juice). Given the current functionings of TEC, I would expect they would turn a blind eye because (in the words of Bishop Knudsen) "God had indeed called him as a bishop" and that alcoholism thing doesn't matter in the greater scheme of things.

I know for a fact that (to their credit) the Diocese of Virginia worked diligently with a local minister to combat his problem with alcohol. Would they do the same for a minister who has problems resisting a homosexual lifestyle? Probably not... "Hey, we accept you as you are! Go with your instincts!"

This acceptance thing is just a slippery slope towards more twisted properties of human behavior. Eventually they will have to allow illegal drug users, unrepentent child pornography addicts and pediophiles into the priesthood all in the name of "inclusiveness." At least current U.S. laws can offer some prevention in these cases, but without such laws, how could TEC justify keeping them out?

I would have liked to hear a better answer from Bishop Knudsen about why TEC is fading and the Global South is growing. What a lot of arrogance in what she did say. She disputes David's facts, and goes on to say that her diocese has had significant growth, due in part to a "tolerant and open attitude towards gay and lesbian people." I would be very interested in what data she is looking at. Can she really show that any growth her diocese has experienced was due to their open attitude? Has she commissioned any polls on the matter? Of course, the growth of a single additional person in any TEC diocese could be considered "significant" given the general opposite trend in most other dioceses.

As a student of language I'm very interested in the lingo being employed by the female bishop from California. I first heard this language being used by radical feminists at a Western Canadian University while an undergraduate in English. It was in North American academe that the societal rot first set in. A number of special interest groups set about poisoning the minds of their students while lecturing on everything from political science to English literature and all other disciplines in between. All literature and history was interpreted through a Freudian or Marxist lens. Phrases like "entering into discussion," "meaningful dialog," and "discerning together" were paraded out every time the feminists wanted to push their points home to their captive audience. Through the gradual leveling of language, or reductionism, and by substituting words and phrases that created confusion, the feminists and their allies slowly began to erode the moral and ethical fiber of their young student charges. And, as students are always subordinate to their teachers, no objections or protests were allowed. If one did complain or raise logical objections, the academic institution would simply parade out that well worn old chestnut "academic freedom" as a pass word for every outrage committed by a faculty member. My point is, that this battle and argument was initiated eons ago -- it's the same language being used to defend the same arguments. It's old hat, but now it's infected the body of Christ.

The only female "bishop" in California is Mary Gray Reeves, of the Diocese of El Camino Real.

"Bishop" Chilton Knudsen of the the Diocese of Maine is in complete denial when she says her diocese is growing; obviously, she believes the misleading data published by TEC, which doesn't show the numbers of people who have left in recent years, since they too are in denial.

Cennydd

Here are a couple of articles that I found to show you just how out of touch with reality the powers at be are. Gene Robinson giving a sermon in Glasgow (such a pathetic little man) and Rowan stating that he is pleased with the outcome of Lambeth.

Gene Robinson Speaking in Scotland

Rowan Upbeat after Lambeth

railbirdbc, as a conservative linguist you must love Chomsky.

Feminism is of the devil.

+ + +

The bishop of Maine says to David: "I dispute your facts... my own diocese has had significant growth..."

For the record, according to the official TEC stats, in the 10 years between 1996 and 2006 the active baptized membership of the diocese has decreased 18.3%, dropping in 9 of the 10 years. The average Sunday attendance has dropped 12% in the same time period. I think the woman is seriously deluded or out of touch with what's happening in her diocese. Or a liar.

There comes a time when we need to cease the endless "conversation" and acknowledge that the person across the table from us has lost touch with reality. I suppose that we haven't learned anything since Adam was drawn into "conversation" with the serpent. That exchange didn't end so well for him, so it will be for us if this continues.

DomWalk:

It was the feminist movement that opened all the flood gates and put us where we are today. I call it anarchy.

Actually the two great word merchants that have influenced my own thinking and style are George Orwell and Malcolm Muggeridge. In fact, I don't really trust language to mean what it says. But when revisionist Newspeak began its interface with theology (another buzz phrase) the game really went to the dogs. To the liberals I say this, "I don't respect your point of view in the least, because I know what your real agenda is. You are liars and deceivers, plain and simple. And you are playing mind games with the souls of your fellow humans. Hell is your fitting domain."

Sorry, railbirdbc, I should have put the sarcasm warning on. Chomsky is a radical left word-merchant par excellence.

Agreed on Muggeridge and Orwell!

I know you're in B.C. but if you want to see the early mark of feminism in TEC, compare the 1928 and 1662 lectionaries and Solemnizations of Matrimony. Here in the states, this problem goes waaaaaay back.

+ + +

DomWalk:

Quite right, the feminist movement got under way in Europe before the First World War. But feminists were along with other special interest whackos, kept on the fringes. I see the 1960s as the era when the feminists began getting real attention (with the publication of the FEMALE EUNUCH, and with the clamming of Gloria Steinem). Canada was and is at least two decades behind the United States in innovation and anarchist movements. The collateral damage done by feminists is beyond description, and I can only liken it to the damage done during the McCarthy era in the US in the 1950s. But feminist doctrine leans heavily on the Marxist model, so that puts them in the left-wing fascist camp along with Stalin and Mao.

As a relief from all the low intrigue associated with Lambeth I thought I would pen this tribute to the recently deceased Russian writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn. I wonder whether VO could set-up a special tribute thread to him?

Please note that the emphasis will be upon the way he influenced my thinking rather than repeating the kind of in-depth analysis of his work and views. These can be found elsewhere by simply googling 'Death of Alexander Solzhenitsyn.'

Death of a Titan

It was with sadness that last Sunday evening I heard on the BBC1 news of the death through a stroke of the famous Russian Writer Alexander Solzhenitsyn at the age of 89.

To a large extent, his work will provide their own tribute. What they did for me at a formative age was provide insights into the horrors of totalitarianism and the kind of mentality which made Soviet network of prisons and labour camps (the Gulag) possible. I remember whilst ploughing through the volumes of the Gulag Archipelago during my late teens and early twenties learning how easy it was for whole populations to plunge into the worst kinds of bestial behaviour once certain restraints had been removed. The Gulag Archipelago provides one of the best testimonies to the doctrine of original sin outside the Bible. Even at that early stage, the question which formed in my mind was how could even the civilized and education sections of a country actively support such horrors. Related to this was the question as to how the Russian Orthodox Church had failed to prevent them - after all Stalin had trained as a priest.

For me, the main lesson I drew from Solzhenitsyn's work was the need to tackle lies and totalitarian mentalities at an early stage before things reached the point they did under Lenin and Stalin when it became impossible to do anything. It's a lesson that I've applied both during the days of the Toronto Deception and on this forum. I have only to recall images of Nazi and Soviet death camps to realize what can happen when there's a casual toleration of evil.

On a more positive note, Solzhenitsyn's example of defiance showed that at critical junctures the courage of one man can make a difference. On reading his memoir 'The Oak and the Calf' I was struck by how amazingly God protected and bless him. By all normal counts he shouldn't have lived to be 89. I was also impressed by the way he used his training in military strategy to run rings around the KGB.

Some of the criticisms he made against Western Civilization also stick in my mind and seem more apt today then when he first voiced them during the late 1970s. At that time I began to get glimmer that I would eventually be called upon to challenge some great evil (or series of evils) in the Church and so its come to pass.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn was of great help in providing me with a role model to follow. He was one of the great formative influences of my early Christian years. A particular encouragement was the way he showed that the lie need not always prevail. Truth does come out no matter how deep its buried by those with a vested interest in the lie. In the end the truth came out about Communism and it will also come out about Rowan Williams and the Lambeth Conference.

Whatever may have been his faults Solzhenitsyn was undoubtedly a great man and in the last few days his greatness has passed from us. Nevertheless, his influence will live on just as it has lived on in this forum. Despite being rejected by his contemporaries Solzhenitsyn was vindicated and his example should provide hope to all Christians who are called to withstand 'the inhuman power of the lie.'

So thank you Lord for allowing this brave writer to be such an influence in my life.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/08/04/AR2008080401822.html?hpid=opinionsbox1

UKUSER, many, many thanks for your beautiful, moving tribute to Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn! May his memory be eternal!


"Masha"


"Brethren, be sober, be vigilant: for your adversary the devil, as a ramping and a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour: whom resist, steadfast in the Faith."

A very tricky lineup and questions. This Ms Chilton Knudsen has learned well how to sound moderate while in fact being extreme. She seems to believe that her kind of change is inevitable and will and must come--and odd sort of view of history and highly implausible.

David your best moment was at the end when you posed the question about why we are all fleeing TEC. Ms. Knudsen was most unresponsive. The idea that the empty churches will fill with gays (1% of the population, perhaps) is delusional.

Always sorry to hear Hitler (or Himmler) brought into an argument. The standard rule is that whoever does so first loses.

Very well done.

railbirdbc,
I have been quoting this from "First Things" because it makes perfect sense. What say you?

"The Episcopal Church used to be called the Republican Party at Prayer. It has turned into the National Organization of Women at prayer."
AP+

Frcorny:

I told David Virtue that a more appropriate name for the new North American revisionist Anglican mob might be THE UNITARIAN UNIVERSALIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF NORTH AMERICA. I think the new handle best captures the real spirit of the thing. I certainly don't hear North American Episcopalians saying anything different than I'm hearing Unitarians saying. The only difference between the two is, the Episcopalians wear vestments and the Unitarians don't.

I heard this BBC discussion. The comments by Peter Tachel (spelled correctly?) seem to warrant my most-attention.

I do not "crucify" gay people-- certainly do not put up signs about "crucifying q***rs" because I find such language offensive. I make it a studied point to maintain loving relations with homosexuals-- and certainly in the area-civil (by the standard of Jean -Jacques Rousseau) in no wise annul the social contract for the franchise of citizenship to all folk. I DO show this civility to my gay sibs, even though the culture of VICTIMIZATION which now speaks from VICTIMIZERS who promote gaiety is the-exact-opposite of "fairness" or whatever it is termed that possesses folk to complain about "crucifying q***rs." I have heard of one such event-- the scuttle in criminal justice circles was that gay-blades effected a sado by executing one of their own-- I know not. I do know that crucifixion of gay people is not a common practice-- but the complaint by those plugging the promotion of homosexual interests like to complain hard about these essential non-events and non-problems.

This is an old gambit used by agitators: read about it in John Steinbeck's IN DUBIOUS BATTLE-- get a victim-- hold him up in blood no matter who is really culprit-- and show him to be a martyr. 'Willie' in Robert Penn Warren's ALL THE KING'S MEN uses variants of this device too, on the mantra, "Show 'em the ole meat-axe."

But with the gore of this-perceived-victimization, there comes too victimization by the pink:purple:paisley mafia as well. I am thinking now about the victims of the pedophile who counsels-close in ECUSA as a result of social promotion-- thence to be welcomed acceptance. I am thinking about the pastoral counseling the trans-gender priest (no doubt soon-bishop) who provides moral and marital words of wisdom to someone in Anglicanism. I am thinking of the essentially innocent bishops Cox and Schofield who were booted from the Anglican Communion by deposition-- in a lawless interpretation of Article 26 of 'the 39.' I am thinking about the firing of straight priests who 'did not go with the program' of blessing ordinations of gays-- unpublished-- due to fear of reprisal from money-talks-ECUSA-- I have heard of three accounts of this locally (Kentucky); I am thinking of these victims and I am thinking of my own experience with a priest-who-said-he-loved-me-so-to-vex-me until I opted-- with Rite 3 + Order-for-Commitment-to-Christian-Service to be in hermitage-- my Patmos 100% due to the perverse depravity of ECUSA-- only to pique the AIDS-ridden bishop of the time here-- who wanted to use these rites only for gay marriages-- WHICH WENT ON THEN AND NOW...

Thus, I do not have to hang a sign about "crucifying" anybody: I do love my gay brother, not his sin-- not his mafia-- not his secret society -- not his social promotion--yea hatefully/spitefully-- over all other possible alternatives. I can say, we can who have been victims of gay-hate-and-incivility-to-difference can say "I bear in my body the Marks of the Lord Jesus" [Galatians 6:17 KJV]-- which to those who prance nude doing profanities in Cathedral of St. John (NY) could never hope to say.

Therefore, let there be honesty (what is wrong with saying 'integrity' anyway?) about who IS colluding to victimize-- the bearers of signs in Lambeth with crucifying plaints from here appear to be the VICTIMIZERS-- AND THE PERPETRATORS OF THIS ACTUAL VIOLENCE!!!

--Vernon Lynn Stephens, Culdee
In the Place Coply & Commonly Called 'The Desert'
Over on 8th Street
Nitty Gritty City
Louisville, Kentucky USA

Bishop Knudsen just doesn't get it. One of my right-believing friends (formerly a TEC priest, like myself) was in her jurisdiction, but knew she was going to be a target eventually. Bishop Duncan was kind to grant her residence in his diocese until she was able to discern God's will and found her way to Orthodox Church.

TEC has lost women priests because they weren't willing to betray the Gospel of Jesus Christ and embrace the false good news of TEC. It would be interesting to discover what has become of these women. As for my friend from Maine, she is a blessed pilgrim, traveling to the many holy shrines of Orthodoxy where she prays for the world. Neither of us have any regrets about leaving TEC and its priesthood.

David, You did a great job at this roundtable discussion. I've posted a notice about this here:
http://college-ethics.blogspot.com/2008/08/virtue-guest-at-everyday-ethics.html

Thank you. An impressive Blog.

David

Dr. Virtue, I can only immagine your intense frustration with having to try to cogently interact with covert insanity.

God bless you, sir.

Don