Why do they do that: An Anglican Eucharist

Ever wonder why the priest does or says what he does and says during Eucharist?    One of my favorite blogs, Internet Monk, has  posted a video from St. Peter's Anglican in Tallahassee, FL of an Instructed Anglican Eucharist.


Go check it out!

GAFCON statement is published

For my Anglican friends - I'm sure you've been following GAFCON, but if not, here's the final statement from the bishops meeting in Jerusalem. I've not read it yet, but the word on the 'net is that it is strong and committed to the long-haul solution rather than a "quick" split.

Virginia court rules in favor of parishioners!

Good news for Virginia's orthodox Episcopal churches. Congratulations VA! I'm happy to know that some of the most historic and lovely churches (many I grew up around) will still remain in the hands of their own parishioners.

Why am I an Anglican?

Why would someone want to be an Anglican? Our family has left the Episcopal church, but we are still Anglican. Why? What is the draw for some 77 million people around the globe? What makes Anglicanism distinct from other branches of Christianity and Protestantism?

Check out Christ Church, NYC's website for an excellent discussion of the Ten Elements of Historic Anglicanism.

HT: First Things blog

"Common Cause Partners" Announce

a new blog dedicated to a cycle of prayer for Common Cause:

Greetings, all. The communications people from the various Common Cause Partners got together alongside the Leadership Council meeting in Orlando last December, and one of the projects we decided to work together on was a unified
Cycle of Prayer for the Partnership. We are releasing this Cycle today. It is 41 weeks long, so we can start next year's cycle with the start of the church year.

Along with the Cycle, we are launching this blog today. We'll run content related to the Cycle of Prayer here as the year unfolds. This is meant to complement other prayer blogs, as our focus will be specifically on the Cycle of Prayer.

Matt Kennedy asks a good question

Can Orthodox Anglicanism Emerge from Disarray?

And of course the comments on StandFirm are every bit as intersting as the article, so read those, too.

One way, possibly, to think of this strategy is to imagine a kingdom overrun by her enemies and its throne usurped by a pretender. In such a situation some provinces would necessarily break ties with the kingdom and seek to regroup, restructure, and prepare for re-invasion. Other leaders and entities would remain within the overrun kingdom for the express purpose of resistance and, ultimately, overthrow. Ideally, both the resistance on the inside and the new kingdom externally would support one another toward the common goal of defeating the invader and restoring the kingdom.

Perhaps it goes with out saying, but Matt, of course, has an excellent grasp of the matter at hand and does a great job distilling the many issues and positions.

Holy or Holey?

You may, or may not, have heard about the Episcopal church out in California that had a combined Hindu-Christian service (read more here and here). I wasn't going to blog about this - because, frankly, I'm tired of the Episcopal church's antics. But the Confesssing Reader has an excellent post and I think it is worth sharing. So, what is so awful about this combined service? He has an excellent explanation of the issues at stake.

A Portrait of Anglican Reformation

In my last post I alluded to a new Reformation in the Anglican church. (Actually, since the Anglican church didn't come directly out of the Protestant Reformation, it might be called the Anglican Reformation.) So, what would that new reformation look like?

Well, here's a good start from The Reverend Johnathan Millard:

1. There is confusion concerning who God is:

Over the past 40 years there has been a drift away from orthodox ways of speaking about God. In some places in TEC instead of God being referred to as Father, Son and Holy Spirit, He is addressed only by function as creator, redeemer and sustainer, and not in personal ways. The problem with this approach is that it makes God more remote and the fact is God has revealed himself to us through the Scriptures not just by function, but in personal terms as Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Another example is when the name LORD is replaced with "God." So instead of the Liturgical greeting:"The Lord be with you" you may encounter in some parts of TEC "God be with you" or even "God is in you" with the response: "and also in you." The word LORD apparently is perceived as too male, and too authoritarian.

The earliest creedal statement was simply "Jesus is Lord." And yes, it was meant to be authoritarian. I was very sad when I attended the Interfaith service at Calvary last week, to see precisely such a change had been made to the liturgy. When it came to share the Peace, the wording was not: "The peace of the Lord", but rather "The Peace of God."

2. There is a lack of clear teaching about the divinity of Christ:
In answer to a question referencing the divinity of Jesus, in an article published earlier this year, the Presiding Bishop, Katharine Jefferts Shori, said this: "If you begin to explore the literary context of the first century and the couple of hundred years on either side, the way that someone told a story about a great figure was to say 'this one was born of the gods.' That is what we're saying. This carpenter from Nazareth or Bethlehem - and there are different stories about where he came from - shows us what a godly human being looks like, shows us God coming among us." At best that is ambiguous or confusing, and at worst it is false teaching.

Jesus was much more than someone who "shows us what a godly human being looks like." And the Church does not say that he was "born of the gods." The biblical witness and the faith of the church is that Jesus is the Son of God: fully God and fully man. The Word became flesh (John 1). We proclaim this truth weekly in the Nicene Creed.

3. There is a lack of clear teaching about Salvation and Sin:
Questioned about selfishness and falleness, the Presiding Bishop said this:·"The human journey is about encouraging our own selves to move up into higher consciousness, into being able to be present in a violent situation without responding with violence ... " and in the same interview she went on to say: "The question is always how can we get beyond our own narrow self-interest and see that our salvation lies in attending to the needs of other people."

This is not the Gospel story of sin and redemption. The Scriptures teach that all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. (Rom. 3:23). The Scriptures teach that salvation is not through our works, or our efforts to move up to a higher consciousness, or even through attending to the needs of others. Our salvation lies in Jesus, "who while we were still sinners, died for us." (Rom. 5:8); and all who believe in the LORD and call upon his name will be saved. (Rom. 10:13)

4. There is a drift towards universalism:
The Presiding Bishop says of Jesus: "we who practice the Christian tradition understand him as our vehicle to the divine. But for us to assume that God could not act in other ways is, I think, to put God in an awfully small box" (Time Magazine: July 17,2006). Jesus said: I am the way the truth and the life no one comes to the Father except through me." (John 14:6).

When, some years ago, I first heard Bishop Duncan speak of us living in a time of Reformation of the Church throughout the world, I confess I wondered if that was a little grandiose. I now believe, without a doubt, that he was right. This was illustrated for me, once again, just last week. I was deeply saddened to hear Archbishop Emeritus Desmond Tutu deny the particularity of the Christian Faith, mocking the idea that Jesus could possibly be the only way to God, and declaring that all religions are worshipping the same God, just by different names.

The archbishop is a great man who has done wonderful work for reconciliation and peace. I salute him for all the good he has done, but I am sad and troubled that he would be so dismissive of the supreme work of love and salvation that our Lord Jesus Christ did for us on the cross.

5. There is a loss of confidence in the Gospel as Good News for all:
The official teaching of the Anglican Church on the issue of human sexuality is that which has been set out by the Lambeth Conference in 1998 (Resolution 1:10). But here's the key point concerning the Gospel that I want to make:[The Conference] "recognises that there are among us persons who experience themselves as having a homosexual orientation. Many of these are members of the Church and are seeking the pastoral care, moral direction of the Church, and God's transforming power for the living of their lives and the ordering of relationships." [emphasis added]. It is that confidence in the transforming power of God that the actions of TEC now challenge.

So instead of welcoming and loving all into the church so that they might experience transformation, TEC simply welcomes and affirms people just as they are - denying them the healing and hope and transforming power of God.

6. There is erroneous teaching and practice regarding human sexuality
Over the past couple of decades there has been a serious rejection of the clear teaching of the Bible and the Church on human sexuality and marriage. The clear teaching of Scripture and tradition and of the one, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic church is that sex is for marriage. The only sexually intimate relationships that are good and holy according to Scripture and tradition are those between a man and a woman, within an intended life long, faithful covenant of marriage. That means that pre-marital sex, extra-marital sex, gay sex, any sex outside of marriage is all contrary to God's will. This is the clear teaching of the Bible and of Jesus.

7. There is a seemingly 'social justice only' view of the mission of the church
I have struggled to find any clear statements from the Presiding Bishop about the basics of the faith. From her inaugural sermon through to all kinds of talks and sermons and interviews that I've seen or heard extracts from she seems to be concerned primarily with a political and social gospel. She seems to be concerned principally about the United Nations' Millennium Development Goals. There is much to be commended about these goals and much to challenge us - but they are by no means the same thing as the message of salvation for those who are perishing. (John 3: 16). If the Millennium Goals are our gospel message it falls seriously short of the message of proclaiming "Christ and him crucified." (1 Corinthians 2:1-5).

8. There is contempt for the Authority of the BibleBishop Bennison has said:
"The church wrote the Bible, and the church can rewrite the Bible." No, that is a serious error.

9. There is failure by Bishops to defend the faith
The role of a bishop in the words of the 1662 ordinal is: ''to banish and drive away from the church all erroneous and strange doctrine contrary to the Word of God." - Here in the States, the very opposite is true. Rather than drive away false teaching many of the bishops of TEC embrace it, celebrate it and declare to be good and holy that which God declares to wrong. To ordain an openly gay, non-celibate man - when the rest of the world urged TEC not to do this - is not only contrary to Scripture but is also an arrogant display of American intransigence.

10. There is a lack of respect for truth or unity
There seems to be a cavalier spirit among many in TEC that disregards the mandate for unity with the one holy, catholic and apostolic church. Claims are made by 'progressives' that they are putting truth ahead of unity. However the 'truth' they claim is that it's a matter of social justice and Christian virtue to bless same sex unions and permit practicing gay and lesbian people to hold any office within the church. This is, of course, is contrary to the truth as revealed in Holy Scripture. And the only unity they secure is among a tiny minority of the church worldwide.

I'm on board THAT Reformation train!

Two , Four, Six, Eight...Who do we appreciate?

Archbishop Mouneer Anis (of Egypt and North Africa) delivered a speech at the House of Bishops Friday, September 21st that is an excellent encapsulation of what so many of us are thinking. It makes you just want to stand up and shout! Too bad the Archbishop received only "polite applause" to quote a blogger (I'm still trying to remember who...I'll update with a link when I find it!).

Be sure to go read the comments which at Stand Firm are always every bit as good as the posts.

Here is some (most) of it:

My friends, like you, we want to be relevant to the culture in which we live. More importantly, we want to be salt and light to our societies. That is not an easy calling but it means we must remain distinct and humble at the same time. Without being distinct we cannot be salt and light; without humility we will not represent the one who said, “I am meek and lowly in heart.” We are also continuously challenged whether we should allow the culture to transform the Apostolic Faith we once received, or if we should allow the Gospel of Jesus Christ to transform our culture as it has in the past. As we struggle to answer this question we must never divorce ourselves from the faith that countless men, women and children died to protect. I believer that if we faithfully serve the Church of Christ, He will continue to fulfill his promise that the gates of Hades will not prevail against her.

Rupertus Meldenius said, “In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity”. Our hope is to be united on the essentials of faith which are defined only by the whole church. WE are not in any way trying to impose rigid views on you. Like you we celebrate diversity, but we believe that such diversity should not be unlimited and should not contradict the essentials of our faith. We are not schismatic, but we are diligent to preserve the unity of the spirit in the bond of peace. We want unity but not unity at any expense.

Anglicans are aware with humility that we are not “the” church but we are one member of the body of Christ, the one Holy Catholic Church. We proclaim this every week in our churches. This places upon us the responsibility to listen to and respect our ecumenical partners.

My friends, you may believe you have discovered a very different truth from that of the majority in the Anglican Communion. It is not just about sexuality, but about your views of Christ, the Gospel, and the authority of the Bible. Please forgive me when I relay that some say you are a different church, others even think that you are a different religion.

I understand that it is difficult for you in your context to accept the standard teaching of the Anglican Communion. That is why you refused to accept Lambeth Conference Resolution 1.10. You also ignored all the warnings of the Primates in 2003, 2004, and 2005. Your response to the Windsor Report is seen by the Primates as not clear. You cannot say you value being a member of the Anglican Communion while you ignore the interdependence if the member churches. The interdependence is what differentiates us from other congregational churches. I would like to remind you and myself with the famous resolution number 49 of the Lambeth Conference of 1930 which declares “the Anglican Communion is a fellowship of churches that…are bound together not by a central legislative and executive authority, but by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of the bishops in conference.” With respect, I have to say that those who would prefer to speak of laws and procedures, constitutions and canons, committees and process: you are missing the point! It is our mutual loyalty and fellowship, submitting to one another in the common cause of Jesus Christ that makes us of one Church one faith and one Lord.

It is clear that you actions have resulted in one the most difficult disputes in the Communion in our generation. You may see them as not core doctrinal issues. Many like me see the opposite but the thing that we all cannot ignore is that these issues are divisive and have created a lot of undesired consequences and reactions. For the first time in centuries, the fabric of our Communion is torn. Our energies have been drained and our resources are lost and it is difficult for both of us to continue like this.

My friends, if you really believe that the truth revealed to you is different from that shown to the rest of the Communion, then you need to uphold that claim with boldness even at the risk of losing unity. If you think it is right and necessary to ordain and consecrate practicing homosexuals and that you should bless same sex partnerships or even marriages, you should be true to what you believe is right and accept the consequences.

However, if you appreciate being members of the global Anglican family, then you have to walk along side the members of your family. Those who say it is important to stay together around the table, to listen to each other and to continue our dialogue over the difficult issues that are facing us are wise. We wholeheartedly agree with this, but staying around the table requires that you should not take actions that are contrary to the standard position (Lambeth 1.10) of the rest of the Communion.

Sitting around one table requires humility from all of us. One church cannot say to the rest of churches “I know the whole truth, you don’t”. Archbishop Rowan reminded us in his paper “Challenge and Hope” that “the whole truth is revealed to the whole church”. Sitting around one table requires that each one should have a clear stance before the discussion starts. It also requires that true openness and willingness to accept the mind of the whole. We do not have to be in the communion to sit around the one table. We do so when we dialogue with the Roman Catholic Church, the Orthodox and with other faiths. It would be extremely difficult to sit around one table when you have already decided the outcome if the discussion and when you ignore the many voices, warnings and appeals from around the communion.

(...)

I know that you value personal freedom and independence. The whole world learns this from you. You need to demonstrate this by securing freedom for the American orthodox Anglicans who do not share your theological direction. Show your spirit of inclusiveness when you deal with them. I am afraid to say that without this more and more interventions from other provinces is going to happen. No one wants this.

I pray for wisdom and grace, for myself as well as for you, and I pray that God will lead us both in the right direction. Remember the illustrious history of God’s church and remember future generations who will sit in judgment on us. Remember also that the whole world is waiting and watching what you do.

Please forgive me if I have said anything that offends you.

May the Lord bless you.
+Mouneer Egypt

So if we aren't big "C" catholic, what do we mean?

By big "C" catholic, I mean Roman Catholic. A capital letter doesn't necessarily make "catholic" mean Roman Catholic, but that is how I often clarify it for myself.

The Confessing Reader (also under Bishop Curry) has posted on Bishop Curry's comments to the Archbishop of Canterbury while at the House of Bishops meeting. It is being reported (but, to my knowledge, still unsubstantiated) that Curry disagreed with ABC about the meaning of catholicity. The Confessing Reader has followed this up with a commentary on what is meant when we say "catholic".

My Bishop speaks clearly

Yeesh - well, we here at St. Margaret's have known where our bishop (Michael Curry of North Carolina) stood on the current crisis in ECUSA, we just hadn't seen his ungloved attitude. Seems he's shown it fairly clearly.

There is more information in the comments. Be warned, not all commentors are showing their christian charity or restraint. I hope it is just the stress of the week.

Sinon, a devious gift-giver

A post for my ClassEd friends, who I know will particularly appreciate an essay that starts with a bit of classical history! :)

The Episcopal Church's Trojan Horse by George Naff Gray, Jr.,
Exclusive to VirtueOnline http://www.virtueonline.org/
September 14, 2007

Homer, the great Greek poet of tragedies, writes of a Trojan War where the Greeks were unable to breach the walls of the City of Troy. After some ten years, the Greeks used a ruse to gain entrance into the city.

They set sail just beyond the horizon, but left behind a huge horse as an offering to the Trojans. Unknown to the Trojans, Greek forces lay hidden inside the belly of the beast. Despite doubts of the sincerity of such a Greek gift, King Priam had the horse brought inside the city. A great celebration took place.

Late in the night with the horse left unguarded, the Greek forces that lay hidden inside came out and opened the gates of the city to the Greek hordes that had returned in their ships under the cover of darkness. Once access was gained inside the city, the Trojans were defeated and Troy was destroyed.

A similar ruse may be used by the Episcopal Church (TEC) to overcome the Anglican Communion's bulwark teaching on human sexuality called Lambeth 1.10 and destroy the Anglican Communion. Like the Trojan War, an Anglican war of words has been under way for ten years.

It began in earnest with the Anglican Communion's adoption during the 1998 Lambeth Conference of the Lambeth 1.10 teaching concerning the blessing of marriage being between one man and one woman. The war of words does not simply consist of a disagreement over this one teaching, but over a much more significant issue encompassed in the word: hermeneutics.

Christopher Landau of the BBC speaks of this hermeneutical war this way: "The problem for Anglicans is that they cannot agree on how to interpret the Bible, and therefore they arrive at very different views on a number of moral issues."

Hermeneutics are the methods or theories used for interpretation. An essential element to the hermeneutical approach is the understanding of the word: truth. Truth expresses facts that conform to reality. However, the leadership of TEC has been employing a new understanding of "truth" in their approach to the hermeneutical task of interpretation.

The hermeneutical method of TEC does not lend itself to one interpretation. "Truth" in TEC can be pluriform and thus, there can be more than one set of interpretations which have led to theological understandings and liturgical practices within TEC that are both foreign to catholic Christianity and against the express teachings of Lambeth 1.10.

For example, The Presiding Bishop of TEC uses this hermeneutical approach in publicly expressing that Jesus Christ is one of many ways to the Divine as opposed to traditional hermeneutical standard of catholic Christian teaching that conforms to St. John's writing: Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me. (John 14:6 KJV)

When the elected leader of TEC fails to publicly acknowledge such a basic tenant of the Christian faith, then without question, something is profoundly wrong.

What is wrong within TEC is its approach to hermeneutics and its understanding of "truth" to be pluriform. Pluriform truth has led to practices within TEC that have been condemned by the instruments of Anglican unity and Roman, Orthodox, and Protestant churches around the world.

Christian charity has been repeatedly sought after by the larger Anglican Communion in calling on TEC to refrain from those practices that most clearly violate Christian teaching. The most recent request came from the leadership of the Anglican Communion in February through the Dar es Salaam Communique.

Read more...

Bishop Akinola - Historical overview and current actions

The following is from the Archbishop Peter Akinola in Nigeria. This article was printed in BabyBlue Online and StandFirm. It was so good I had to give you the opening paragraphs. You can read the rest at the link below. BabyBlue Online's intro has some great links that I hate for you to miss if you are interested in the situation in the Anglican Church. They are included below:


BabyBlue NOTE: We were with Archbishop Akinola late yesterday afternoon with others from Virginia and it was an extraordinary time to hear from the Archbishop himself, as well as ask him questions and spend time in conversation with him. He is an extraordinary man, one who has an incredible sense of humor as well as a sharp mind and a big heart. That is the man I know. These words are his. When you meet him it is clear that he is passionately committed not only to our Lord Jesus Christ, but to the Church and the Anglican Communion. Last night he reminded us, among other things, that he is not leaving the Anglican Communion (and plese take note of that). The journey he recounts here begins in Kuala Lumpur, a meeting I remember hearing so much about ten years ago, as well as the historic document that came from that gathering and how it came before General Convention in Philadelphia in 1997. It had been in response to this presented by Bishop Spong of Newark that outlined where The Episcopal Church was indeed headed (I remember both documents laid out side by side in the House of Bishops in 1997, and that was ten years ago). Denver 2000 was a shock to the progressives that what they wanted didn't happen on their timetable and so cooked up the ingenious plan (make no mistake about it - remember who Gene Robinson's predecessor was) to elect Gene Robinson and time it so that confirmations would have to be conducted at General Convention 2003, thereby assuring that this statement would become the policy of The Episcopal Church, something all ready in place in practice, but with the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire became officially sanctioned of The Episcopal Church - and without one change to either the liturgy or the canons - and of course, ignoring the teachings of Scripture, the pleas from all the instruments of the unity in the Communion, and the House of Bishop's own theological committee itself.

Here Archbishop Akinola reminds us where we've been and how we got to where we are today, now forty days before the Dar es Salaam deadline.

A Most Agonizing Journey towards Lambeth 2008

I therefore, the prisoner in the Lord, beg you to lead a life worthy of the calling to which you have been called, with all humility and gentleness, with patience, bearing with one another in love, making every effort to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace. (Eph. 4:1,3)

We have been on this journey for ten long years. It has been costly and debilitating for all concerned as most recently demonstrated by the tepid response to the invitations to the proposed Lambeth Conference 2008. At a time when we should be able to gather together and celebrate remarkable stories of growth and the many wonderful ways in which our God has been at work in our beloved Communion as lives are transformed new churches built and new dioceses established there is little enthusiasm to even meet.

There are continual cries for patience, listening and understanding. And yet the record shows that those who hold to the “faith once and for all delivered to the saints” have shown remarkable forbearance while their pleas have been ignored, their leaders have been demonized, and their advocates marginalized. We made a deliberate, prayerful decision in 1998 with regard to matters of Human Sexuality. It was supported by an overwhelming majority of the bishops of the Communion. It reflected traditional teaching interpreted with pastoral sensitivity. And yet it has been ignored and those who uphold it derided for their stubbornness. However, we have continued to meet and pray and struggle to find ways to maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

The journey started in February 1997 in Kuala Lumpur. It was here, during the 2nd Encounter of the Global South Anglican Communion that a statement was issued in which concern was expressed about the apparent setting aside of biblical teaching by some provinces and dioceses. The statement pleaded for dialogue in ‘a spirit of true unity’ before any part of the Communion embarks on radical changes to Church discipline and moral teaching. [ ]

Sadly, this plea, and several similar warnings, have been ignored and ten years later, in February 2007, the Primates of the Anglican Communion met in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, and experienced an agonizing time trying to repair the Communion that has been so badly broken. Their earlier prediction at the Primates Meeting at Lambeth Palace in 2003, that rejection of the faith committed to us would tear “the fabric of our Communion at its deepest level,” has proven to be accurate. In Dar es Salaam the Primates proposed, as one last attempt to restore unity, a period of seven months for those who have brought our Communion to the brink of destruction to reconsider their actions and put a stop to the harmful actions that have so polarized our beloved church. [ ]

With about seven weeks to go, hope for a unified Communion is not any brighter than it was seven months or ten years ago. Rather, the intransigence of those who reject Biblical authority continues to obstruct our mission and it now seems that the Communion is being forced to choose between following their innovations or continuing on the path that the church has followed since the time of the Apostles.

We have made enormous efforts since 1997 in seeking to avoid this crisis, but without success. Now we confront a moment of decision. If we fail to act we risk leading millions of people away from the faith revealed in the Holy Scriptures and also, even more seriously, we face the real possibility of denying our Saviour, the Lord Jesus Christ.

The leadership of The Episcopal Church USA (TECUSA) and the Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC) seem to have concluded that the Bible is no longer authoritative in many areas of human experience especially in salvation and sexuality. They claim to have ‘progressed’ beyond the clear teaching of the Scriptures and they have not hidden their intention to lead others to these same conclusions. They have even boasted that they are years ahead of others in fully understanding the truth of the Holy Scriptures and the nature of God’s love.

Both TECUSA and ACoC have been given several opportunities to consult, discuss and prayerfully respond through their recognized structures. While they produced carefully nuanced, deliberately ambiguous statements, their actions have betrayed them. Their intention is clear; they have chosen to walk away from the Biblically based path we once all walked together. The unrelenting persecution of the remaining faithful among them shows how they have used these past few years to isolate and destroy any and all opposition.

We now confront the seriousness of their actions as the year for the Lambeth Conference draws near. Sadly, this Conference is no longer designed as an opportunity for serious theological engagement and heartfelt reconciliation but we are told will be a time of prayer, fellowship and communion. These are commendable activities, but this very Communion, however, has been broken by the actions of the American and Canadian churches. The consequence is most serious because, even if only one province chooses not to attend, the Lambeth Conference effectively ceases to be an Instrument of Unity. The convener’s status as an instrument or focus of unity becomes seriously challenged. Repentance and reversal by these provinces may yet save our Communion. Failure to recognize the gravity of this moment will have a devastating impact.

Read the rest at BabyBlue Online. Scroll down to "Scorned Opportunities"...

What is all the fuss about?

So, maybe you are somewhat new (or not and just confused - it's ok, we are, too , sometimes) to the "fuss" currently occurring in the Episcopal Church and the wider Anglican Communion (of which the Episcopal Church is a branch). There are some at my own church, where education about this very issue has been a core issue, who remain somehow "in the dark" about the history of these issues and the depth of these issues...and the implications of these issues.

I'd like to share some of the articles I've read lately that I feel are low on anglican jargon, which frankly confuses me, and help explain the issues at hand. I'll be sharing them as they pass across my "desk" in the coming weeks. The time is getting very near that major decisions will be made and chips will fall where they may.

You may think, "So what? I'm not Anglican or Episcopalian." That may be true, these troubles aren't yours....yet. However, let me just remind you that the Anglican church decided to approve birth control for married couples in 1933...there are very few (especially mainline) denominations that have not fallen into lock-step with that decision. (That may be a biased example, but it is what it is.) I pray that the decisions currently made by our mother church (ECUSA now known as TEC) will never affect your churches...and maybe they won't.

But in the meantime, perhaps you'll pray for those of us standing for biblical authority. We are facing losing our beloved churches (only buildings, yes - but some of these have been attended by families for generations), being personally sued by our denomination, and our congregations being splintered as we search for new church homes. Have no doubt, we know all this can be born for Christ! But it is painful....

Perhaps you'll take a moment or two to read the first article I'd like to share - a revealing personal history of a fellow Episcopalian and her activity in the denomination. You'll know better how to pray for your fellow Christians. Thank you for going to the throne room for us!

If you are praying for us, I'd love for you to leave a comment. Sometimes we feel like our struggle goes unnoticed, so it would be encouraging beyond words to know that you care enough to pray and comment. Thank you.

Anglican Communion Action

Well, this week the Anglican Communion Network held an annual conference in Plano, TX. I've not been able to follow much of the action, but am trying to glean what I can. Two open letters have been posted in recent days which have given me insight into some Episcopalian's motives and thoughts and helped me better understand the ACN's stance. Here they are:

From Phillip Turner to Stephen Noll.

From Stephen Noll to Phillip Turner.

You can follow more of the "action" at the various Anglican blogs and websites listed in my sidebar.

Farce and Future

Going back to my two posts prior to the give away (have you signed up to win yet???), one of the thoughts that has occurred to me is this: If our past church decisions concerning contraception and women's ordination have led us farther and farther away from creedal Christianity, what will our current and future decisions do? Here is a point in case:

After the election of Gene Robinson to bishop (an openly gay man in an non-celibate relationship), ScrappleFace posted this farce. This was a joke. The point was to provoke the question, "What's next?". Well, the farce has now COME TRUE a mere 4 years later.

Hat tip to First Things. They have an excellent article (all their articles are excellent) discussing this at length and the implications for interfaith dialogue. Otherwise, I'm still digesting....