What Do Revisionists Fear?

In conversations with liberal laity and clergy about the candidates for the next bishop of Upper South Carolina, I encountered a number of prejudices and fears. Most of these were off the cuff, unofficial, and even non-verbal or unspoken. I have been bothered by this, but I have been hesitant to put it in words because I don't see the world in their way, and I would rather attempt to heal their prejudice than simply criticise them. In general, the persons I am referring to are revisionists although some are moderates. To be fair, there are things that frighten the orthodox, the reasserters, the conservatives, and should frighten the moderates, but that might be subject for another post.

Dad used to say that the root of all of the world's problems could be found in the front pocket of a man's pants. There, the hand could find money (change), car keys, and, well in this analogy let's simply say, sexual issues.

Change:

This one might sound crazy, but revisionists, once firmly ensconced in a parish, in a vestry, or in any position of power, are afraid of change. I know, these people in general are considered to be open to change, but they are not open to any change in a conservative direction.

Why do they fear change? I think it is because of the inherent weakness of their theology. Remember that the "shellfish argument" and "the Church was wrong about slavery" argument as the best arguments most can raise regarding "The Issue." Logical argument is an obstacle to them because the final conclusion would require them to change what to them was conclusively apparent through the use of the illogical and the non-scriptural, their "feelings" as their foundation.

The other thing that change refers to is "spare change" or money. To revisionist clergy in a revisionist national church, there is always present the possibility of advancement to bishop, or even to presiding bishop. There is probably little hope of advancement of the liberal clergyman in a conservative diocese, and the election of a conservative bishop would reduce these clergy's chances for "advancement."

Keys:

This relates to power or the loss thereof. Intoxicated by power, revisionists will not listen to the very thing they believe led to their current position, and that is "Reason." Reason should tell them that their ideas do not spread the Gospel, do not build up the body of Christ, and lead to a falling membership and degradation of the "brand" name "Episcopal." Why on Earth revisionists fail to acknowledge the failures of their time in positions in power is beyond reason and can only be attributed to intoxication. These revisionists, drunk with power, refuse to give up their keys and thereby commit their church to its own death by DUI.

Sexual Issues:

This should be obvious, but a little exposition might be helpful.

One, the revisionist clergy honestly believes that 2000 years of understanding of the apostolic teachings of the church are flat out wrong. If an orthodox bishop were to put the kibosh on the revisionist agenda of re-writing the Gospel message, the revisionists would be put in a position of being opposed to their bishop. This would make these foundationless preachers very uncomfortable, and they might have to consider moving to another diocese. That would interact with monetary issues already commented upon.

Two, some clergy might be involved in same sex relationships, might have youth ministers whose "lifestyle" present a danger to the youth, or they themselves might have sexual relationships outside of marriage, and would have to face the music under a more conservative headmaster.

There are other fears to be sure. I will briefly mention a prejudice or two that I have encountered.

One is the prejudice of "Evangelicalism." This came up when someone commented that one of the nominees for bishop was "Too Baptist." I was shocked by the comment. Having attended various services of Baptists in the past, I don't understand the fear. For one thing, the candidate so named is clearly Anglican in calling. For another, I think the insinuation is that anyone who even mentions the word "Bible" can be cast out of consideration for bishop as "too Baptist."

The other prejudice is the label of "orthodox" or "conservative." How this has become a negative stereotype is beyond my pay grade, but suffice it to say, the stereotype is cast, and the revisionist cannot see beyond the stereotype. Again, an "idée fixe" is unbecoming of a true liberal.

So what do revisionists fear?

They fear the loss of their jobs, a loss of power, a failure of their sexual liberation, and the humbling of their prejudiced natures.

I admit that this exposition is a bit above my pay grade, and I do not know how to heal the broken revisionist. I pray that they might abandon their agendas, and turn back to their first love: the love they experienced when they first accepted Christ as their personal Saviour and the Bible as containing within it everything they needed for salvation.

If there is anything any of us need to fear in the upcoming election of a new bishop, it is the fear of the ramifications upon the souls of others. A terrible responsibility indeed.

On the Feminization of the Species

From the U.S. Geological Survey (one of my favorite late night reads) it appears that researchers are pondering the strange increase in numbers of intersex fish in our rivers and lakes. Yes, male black bass are shedding their stereotypical behavior and adopting roles that were traditionally considered feminine. Okay, it does not just affect males,

"This condition is primarily revealed in male fish that have immature female egg cells in their testes, but occasionally female fish will have male characteristics as well."

It sounds like something is hacking into Big Mouth Billy Bass' genes.



Where is this being found?

"Although intersex occurrence differed among species and basin, it was more prevalent in large mouth bass in southeastern U.S., where it occurred at all sites in the Apalachicola, Savannah, and Pee Dee river basins, said Jo Ellen Hinck, the lead author of the paper and a biologist at the USGS Columbia Environmental Research Center. The researchers also documented intersex in channel catfish for the first time."

No, not the catfish too!

So what is causing this change? It can't be a simple choice of lifestyle? There must be an external force at work. The researchers can't say yet, but they are not talking about genetic mutations, although they might want to think about the new science of epigenetics.

“We know that endocrine-active compounds have been associated with intersex in fish, but we lack information on which fish species are most sensitive to such compounds, the way that these compounds interact to cause intersex, and the importance of environmental factors,” Hinck said. “Proper diagnosis of this condition in wild fish is essential because if the primary causes are compounds that disrupt the endocrine system, then the widespread occurrence of intersex in fish would be a critical environmental concern.”

You know what? We drink that very same water...hmmm...

This might explain a lot.

I remember my Dad saying, "You are what you eat, so gobble up!" as he carved the Thanksgiving turkey.

So, the next time you put ice in your drink, or water in your glass, think...

"Why am I drinking this sissy stuff when I could have had a shot of Scotch?"



Uh, on second thought, maybe they should test the fish in Josie's Well before you drink that scotch.

e-Pravda: Conservatives are Racists, Homophobes, and Murderers

And I forgot to mention, secessionists.

Not content with the "Crosswalk" as its sole source of misinformation, the Episcopal Diocese of Upper South Carolina (EDUSC) is now using its electronic mouthpiece, the e-DUSC, to turn up the heat on conservatives. What do I mean? First look at the lead page. Highlighted and in headline position is,

_____________e~DUSC specials!______________

A sermon by the Rev. Furman Buchanan about what the life of a former SC bishop has to say about the upcoming episcopal election

I am getting tired of reading sermons, but felt it was my duty to suffer through this one in order to see what the Diocesan House wants us lowly pewsters to hear to guide us in the difficult task of choosing a bishop.

Let's take a look at this sermon. Buchanan starts with words that should pique the ears of any sharp eared pewsitter,

"We just heard what St. Paul wrote to the Ephesian congregation, 'Pray for me…to make known the boldness and mystery of the gospel…pray that I may declare it boldly…'"

I think that is from Ephesians 6. You remember that chapter that no one trusts anymore because of all that nonsense about slaves obeying their masters.

"When the air is thick with controversy, and there is deep tension and strife, when people are confused or abandoning ship, it is just plain common sense not to preach too boldly. In the life of the Church, or of a diocese, or of a congregation, these are the times when it is just plain common sense to avoid 'rocking the boat.' "

When a liberal preacher starts out this way, he is gearing up to "rock the boat."

"What would Jesus do? One of my teachers put it this way: 'Jesus was in the middle of everything but the road!'"

Is he going to attack the Via-Media folks? No way. Read on,

"I want you to notice what has happened in the story according to John’s Gospel that we have been hearing for the past month. In a lovely, green, grassy field by the sea; five thousand people gathered to see what Jesus was all about, and they ended up having an incredible picnic—a sort of holy communion on the hillside.
Jesus slipped away in the night, along with his closest friends; but the crowds came after them. They greeted Jesus, but he challenged their motivation for coming; and then he preached boldly, 'I AM the bread of life!'
You can guess what happened next. The religious folks in the crowd began to complain. (This is what we 'religious folks' do when we get offended.)
But what did Jesus do? He preached even more boldly, he kept on rocking the boat by saying, 'Your ancestors ate the manna …and they died. I am the living bread. Whoever eats of this bread will live forever.'
There was even more confusion, tension and disagreement in the crowd. This is when good common sense should’ve kicked in. It is not hard to imagine one of the disciples—someone like you or me—pulling Jesus aside and saying, 'Let’s adjourn debate on this whole “bread of life” thing for the day. It’s not polling well in the crowd. Your numbers are dropping. Let’s sleep on it, and start fresh in the morning.'
But what did Jesus do? He preached even more boldly, he kicked it up another notch by saying, 'Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life…' I remind you that Jesus is speaking to people who observed unbelievably strict dietary laws. He just said the most offensive thing imaginable. Flesh-eating and blooddrinking were just too much for the crowd to stomach."

I think he must be talking about traditionalists/orthodox/conservatives! Yes, that must be it.

"John records that the congregation declined from 5000 to 12. And so Jesus asked the twelve, 'Do you also wish to go away?'

I want you to consider what it would be like to serve on a vestry for a congregation that experienced a similar, breath-taking drop in numbers. What would you say to a preacher like Jesus?"

Could he be drawing a parallel to his own ministry? I don't know how long he has been at St. Martins in Columbia, but the growth and development charts from the Episcopal church pages show a membership of greater than 1000 in 2002 dropping to about 650 in 2008.
UPDATE: I received word from an anonymous commenter that most of the decline was during the tenure of another rector. I hear that one got promoted to canon of the Ordinary.
(A note to the uninitiated, the liberal preacher is quite happy with the departure of those annoying conservatives. It is amusing to watch this one use scripture to justify the shrinking Episcopal church, I don't think I have seen this before although I have heard the quality over quantity argument in the past.)
I would feel right at home in this congregation.

"Now imagine standing in the pulpit of that same congregation trying to summon the courage to preach boldly.
What would you say to those who were leaving?
We would much rather hear some 'common sense' preaching, wouldn’t we? Maybe some helpful hints for happy living!
How do you think this would fly?
'Dear people of God, it is time we had a black bishop for the Episcopal Church in South Carolina!'
Does this sound too bold, given the tension that is already present in the Episcopal Church and in our nation?
Does it feel like I’m trying to rock the boat, when our diocesan numbers are declining?"

Oh, I see now. He is obviously going to show how the issues that he thinks are causing the current decline of the Episcopal church (same gender marriages and ordinations of openly gay, divorced men) should be declared boldly and openly because they are the equivalent of racism.

And don't you see, conservatives are racists and homophobes? He is not through and wants to pile it on with even worse associations. Let's see if you pick it up in the following interesting history lesson:

"Well, listen to another story about bold preaching that cuts very close to home.
On Christmas Eve of 1860, God was working yet another miracle inside a young woman whose name was Margaret. She was married to a preacher in Eastover, S.C. They were probably at Church, singing hymns about the Christ child, and dreaming about the child they were expecting. On Christmas Eve—of all days—our state government declared its intention to secede from the United States. It was the 'common sense thing to do' given the tension, strife and disagreement that was all around."

Okay, there are those common sense folks again, remember, this is code for "conservatives." This time he is equating them with secessionists.

"In 1861 the American Civil War began, Abraham Lincoln became President, and Margaret gave birth to William Alexander Guerry. Things were falling apart—Margaret died when William was just a boy. His father struggled to make ends meet. And his grandmother read to him on Sunday afternoons out of the Bible and the Prayer book. Many Episcopal Church leaders in the South wanted to secede from the Church during this time, much like the confederate states. Given the tension, disagreement and strife in the Episcopal Church back then, it was the 'common sense thing to do.'"

Here he uses repetition to emphasize the parallel he is trying to draw between the present day issues of the church and the issues of the 1860's.

"William graduated from high school in Charleston around the end of the Reconstruction Era. It was a time of great tension and uncertainty. He went to Sewanee on a scholarship, and not long after graduating from college decided that he was called to ordained ministry.6 There continued to be much volatility and fear within the Episcopal Church in South Carolina. For example, black clergy and lay persons from St. Mark’s in Charleston were rejected as delegates at the diocesan convention.
In 1888, William graduated from seminary and was ordained at Christ Church in Greenville. He served capably in a number of capacities in South Carolina and beyond during this tense and ambiguous period in the Episcopal Church in S.C. At one diocesan convention there was even a resolution to segregate the blacks into a distinct, and separate organization. In 1907, at Trinity Church (now Trinity Cathedral) in downtown Columbia, William Guerry was elected bishop of the Diocese of South Carolina. It was a time of tension and fear not unlike our own time. There was anxiety about a new scientific theory by Charles Darwin,"

Throwing in Darwin is another liberal tactic. It is commonly used to demonstrate the ignorance of traditionalists.

"strife about developing new liturgies for a new 1928 prayer book, tension about race relations, and fear about the economy and about war. And South Carolina Bishop William Alexander Guerry preached boldly about striving for unity, and not uniformity in the Church. He preached boldly that (quote) 'the Church should be broad enough to embrace within its communion…every living soul.'"

Code word warning: "Broad church" means embracing heterodoxy and bad mouthing orthodoxy.
He is trying to draw that parallel again because this is the same language liberals of today use to justify rejection of the Apostolic traditions.

"So now you know that roughly one hundred years ago, a man who grew up in Charleston, S.C., someone whose immediate relatives fought as Confederate Soldiers in the Civil War, someone who was educated at a college chartered to serve young white men from the south—this person stood up in the building we know as Trinity Cathedral in Columbia, S.C. and preached boldly when he said:
“Dear people of God, it is time we had a black bishop for the Episcopal Church in South Carolina!”
Bishop Guerry’s vision of the Church can be summarized in the opening sentences of what we proclaim at a Holy Baptism. There is One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism. One God and Father of all. Bishop Guerry wanted all people, regardless of race, to be part of the community of Christ in the diocese, and he wanted a black Bishop Suffragan to work alongside him to build up the Body of Christ in this state."

Without a doubt, Bishop Guerry was bold, a martyr perhaps, and ahead of his time. So what happened to him?

"Bishop Guerry’s dream was never realized. And in 1928, a priest who passionately insisted on the principle of white supremacy walked into the bishop’s office in Charleston and shot him. He died several days later, as a martyr—a witness—for the faith. Bishop Guerry preached boldly, not only with his lips, but with his very life."

We should at this point thank Bishop Guerry for his sacrifice, but what does this have to do with the present issues of sexuality in the church? It is an old liberal argument that says, "The church got it wrong about Darwin, wrong about slavery, wrong about racism, and is wrong about human sexuality."

So why doesn't this preacher come out and boldly state what he believes? (In case you can't guess, he appears to believe in the ordination of non celibate homosexuals) Didn't he start out with, "Pray for me…to make known the boldness and mystery of the gospel…pray that I may declare it boldly…?" I think the only bold thing he did was to mention Lincoln's name in a Columbia South Carolina church.

Why does he instead openly and boldly paint a negative picture of traditional belief?

Because the liberal message does not work. It is ultimately a message of despair. After all, once you throw out all that sexual moralism, all that "Southern obsession with sin" (sorry for the quote from my rector), all that stuff about original sin and the sinful nature of man, and the liberal preacher is left with no explanation for why God became incarnate and died for us. Wo needs Jesus, who needs the church? He will fight with his dying breath any attempts to get the congregation to study and appreciate doctrine and tradition, for he knows that once they do, they will be free of his control, they might challenge his personal agenda, and they might boldly turn "his" church on its head.

This preacher should be honest enough to admit that even his "common sense" and the ruling liberal thought in the Episcopal church might be in the wrong.

I can only conclude that his sermon points to his opinion that,

Conservatives/traditionalists = secessionists/racists/homophobes/the cause of all decisiveness/and...MURDERERS.

Okay, he didn't say it directly, but I think it is there, and I think it is a despicable use of the pulpit. This probably explains where all the people have gone.

He concludes with an appeal to God to keep those evil conservatives out of the Diocese of Upper South Carolina.

"I don’t know who the candidates for bishop will be when we gather at Trinity Cathedral this December, but I pray that they will be women and men who are eager to preach just this boldly with their lips and in their lives. I pray they will insist upon a diocese that is broad enough to embrace within its communion every living soul."

(More coded speech and another use of repetition to emphasize a point).

The next question that needs to be answered is this. Who in the diocesan house picked this particular sermon to promote as a "must read" before the bishop election?

If there was ever any doubt as to the leftward bias of the leadership in Columbia, the "Crosswalk" article praising Philip Linder+'s work at the General Convention 2009, and this e-Pravada recommended reading should be sufficient proof that a good old fashioned house cleaning is in order. Diocesan funds should not be used to promote this destructive liberal agenda.

The Copper Coins

Today's sermon was preached by Mary Cat and I thought she did a respectable job on the Gospel lesson, Mark 12:38-44, also known as "The Widow’s Offering."

"As he taught, he said, ‘Beware of the scribes, who like to walk around in long robes, and to be greeted with respect in the market-places, and to have the best seats in the synagogues and places of honour at banquets! They devour widows’ houses and for the sake of appearance say long prayers. They will receive the greater condemnation.’

He sat down opposite the treasury, and watched the crowd putting money into the treasury. Many rich people put in large sums. A poor widow came and put in two small copper coins, which are worth a penny. Then he called his disciples and said to them, ‘Truly I tell you, this poor widow has put in more than all those who are contributing to the treasury. For all of them have contributed out of their abundance; but she out of her poverty has put in everything she had, all she had to live on.’"

Mary Cat showed her example of the "mite" offering. Two mites might be misheard as in the following cartoon,



The anthem for today was "Tu Pauperum" by Josquin, and the English translation of the words fit the scripture quite well.

"Thou art the refuge of the destitute/poor,
Alleviator of all weakness, hope of the exiled,
strength of the heavy laden, path for the erring,
Truth and life.
And now, Lord Redeemer,
I take refuge in Thee alone; I worship Thee, the true God.
In Thee I hope, in Thee I trust, My salvation, Jesus Christ, uphold me, that my soul may never sleep in death."

I found a nice interpretation by John Lienhard of the University of Houston who, in putting in his two cents worth, wrote,

"My favorite among Josquin Des Prez's motets is an odd piece, Tu Pauperum Refugium -- Thou art the Refuge of the Poor. It begins with soul-settling chords. Then it moves off into the complex polyphony Josquin so perfected 500 years ago.

The text recites the attributes of God -- 'alleviator of weakness, hope of the exiled.' But when Josquin reaches the line, 'path for the erring,' a strange thing happens. The grand order of the music seems to break down. The countertenor line stumbles about like a man lost in the woods. Where is it going?

Josquin had the mind of a linguist. His music is rich in word games and subtle text settings. What he does here is to teach us all a lesson about the word error.

It's from the same root as errant, which means embarked on a searching journey. Five hundred years ago, the two meanings were closer together. A person in error was a person searching for the truth. So Josquin's errant countertenors search for order."

Two mites = One penny.
Eternal life = Priceless.

Style over Substance: Philip Linder+'s Responses to the Search Committee.

The once in once out and then back in again petition nominee Philip Linder+'s responses to the search committee's questions have been posted via links from the Bishop Search web page. I needed a little help because I was not sure that I was learning much from his answers. One of the most interesting comments I received was from a parishioner in Columbia,

"His eloquent non-responses are very typical of his long-winded evasive responses to most issues..."

I had a similar impression, but I did not have much experience listening to him respond to the issues. Let us think about this style over substance question as we examine his responses.

A. Faith Story: He begins with his faith story where we find,

"I said to God, 'If you really want me to be a priest, then when I flip open this Bible the page has to tell me so!' My Bible opened to John 15: 'I am the vine, and My Father is the vinedresser…You did not choose Me, but I chose you and appointed you that you should go and bear fruit, and that your fruit should remain, that whatever you ask the Father in My name He may give you. These things I command you, that you love one another.'"

I tried to duplicate this style. So, I isolated the NT between my hands and opened it randomly (try it yourself), and you would not believe what I came up with, 1 Thessalonians 4:3-8,

"It is God's will that you should be sanctified: that you should avoid sexual immorality; that each of you should learn to control his own body in a way that is holy and honorable, not in passionate lust like the heathen, who do not know God; and that in this matter no one should wrong his brother or take advantage of him. The Lord will punish men for all such sins, as we have already told you and warned you. For God did not call us to be impure, but to live a holy life. Therefore, he who rejects this instruction does not reject man but God, who gives you his Holy Spirit."

OOPS!!!

Continuing on in the faith story we find,

"The Reverend Martin Gable of St. Martin’s, Atlanta, taught me that one is always a priest and pastor—you cannot step in and out of that call"

Wait just one minute! As I recall, Linder+ was first called to run for bishop, then recalled and dropped out, then called back and went in by petition. In cell phone speak we call that style "Call Roaming."

"—and above all else you must be an individual that never breaks trust with the people whom you serve. Today my wife and I continue to struggle with God’s will and call for our lives and ministry."

Breaking trust...maybe some other Trinity folks can fill me in on the rumor that he told some church leaders that he would not run for bishop, and then he went ahead and accepted the nomination. Others can explain the level of trust they gained from his letter to the parish after he withdrew from the bishop search process, and how they felt when they found out that he agreed to be a petition nominee.

Question B

“I would work hard to establish a strong personal relationship with every clergyperson, congregation, and institution I serve.”

Where is the substance? His resume indicates that the only diocesan office which he has held is Deputy to the General Convention. In ten years in this diocese, he has not served on the Diocesan Executive Council, and as a result, he was an unknown in this neck of the woods until his escapades at the 2009 General Convention became known in that infamous "Crosswalk" article.

C. The SSB questions:
Remember earlier, I think in part A, he said,

"I am deeply passionate about my love for Jesus, The Episcopal Church, the Anglican Communion and my desire to serve the people of God."

The substantive facts on the ground (his work at GC 2009) show that his passion for the Anglican Communion is not in its preservation.

"I gave much time, prayer, and voice to the development of Resolution D025 called, 'Anglican Communion: Commitment and Witness to Anglican Communion.' In 2006 I voted for B033, dealing with 'manner of life' and the election of bishops, as the best way forward at that moment in time. What became clear at this General Convention was that B033 would not hold anymore on its own, so the deep question for me was how can we find that Anglican place of middle ground? I felt we must come to the great Anglican principle of the via media—that the truth lies in the tension of the extremes."

Apparently, Dean Linder voted for D025 in 2009 largely because he sensed that most other bishops would no longer abide by B033 not because of any stated theology or doctrine. He follows the decisions of others. Style point.

His via-media style points are not backed up by substance. I am beginning to think that the via media is a convenient chasm into which the left tosses claims to "Truth," hoping that the real Truth never emerges.

"I saw our passage of Resolution D025 as our acknowledgement of what is, as a way forward that is not perfect, but nonetheless a way for us to state boldly that we as Anglicans, as Episcopalians, are now recommitting to our faith and love in Jesus Christ now with a desire to fully focus upon mission and ministry in His name."

He knows the way forward that he has prepared, he just is unwilling to admit it.

“Some may choose to interpret this differently, however I firmly believe that we have respected the spirit of the worldwide Anglican Communion.”

And just who might see it differently? Not just this lowly pewster...

The Archbishop of Canterbury himself visited the General Convention and asked the deputies not to take any action which could strain the Anglican Communion further. After the Convention passed D025 (which Linder+ worked mightily to put together) and DO56, the Archbishop said, in his understated, English way, “a realistic assessment of what Convention has resolved does not suggest that it will repair the broken bridges into the life of other Anglican provinces.” While the Dean professes that the General Convention honored the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop disagrees. Via media indeed.

"...at the 76th General Convention I was not able to support the House of
Bishops’ recommendation to study and develop resources for the blessing of same gender
relationships. I firmly believe that neither The Episcopal Church nor the Anglican Communion is in any way prepared theologically or emotionally to embrace such a practice as 'official.' Clearly the blessing of same gender relationships are unofficially taking place in certain dioceses and other jurisdictions within the Anglican Communion, however that is very different from the Church officially sanctioning them as a body. Within the Diocese of Upper South Carolina I do not believe that our congregations or people as a whole, support the blessing of same gender relationships either from a scriptural or theological understanding, and as bishop I would not allow this practice. If a priest in our diocese were asked to perform such a blessing, I would not allow it, but rather invite the priest and the church members involved to meet with me to discuss why their bishop and our diocese stands in that place. I would offer to them my love, prayers, and concern; and, yes from a pastoral perspective it would be very difficult."

Not ready for "official" (his quotation marks) blessings of same sex marriages. He thinks the theological foundations have not been done. I wonder what he thinks of the theological work that has been done that opposes SSBs? I wonder, would he allow SSBs to be done as long as they are kept in the closet, or on a don't ask/don't tell basis as part of that "generous pastoral response" approved by the General Convention? He appears to say, "No, not here because that is not what the people want." It would be preferable if he could say that the apostolic teachings are against it!

Question D

“although I have not been able to give my time to this as dean, as bishop and one who has previously been active in Cursillo, I will fully support these ministries by my presence at weekends and their continued incorporation into the diocese’s vision as a tool for evangelism and renewal.”

It is unclear to me why Linder has not had time for Cursillo as Dean but would have as Bishop. Moreover, he professes an interest in evangelism. Yet according to statistics provided by the Episcopal Church, the Average Sunday Attendance (ASA) at the Cathedral has remained stagnant.

My overall impression of his responses are that he is trying entirely too hard to appear as a moderate (style), when in actual fact he is part of the revisionist class (substance) that is wreaking havoc on the ever shrinking Episcopal church. This nominee, if elected, would continue to move the church away from its sure foundation and towards the shifting sands of the secular world because, recall his build up piece from Crosswalk, where he described D025,

"The resolution," Linder said, is "a truthful acknowledgement of what is, a way forward that is not perfect but nonetheless a way for us to state boldly that we are now recommitting to our faith in Jesus Christ with a desire to focus fully upon mission and ministry in his name. I believe," Linder continued, "that we have turned a major page in going forward...and we have done so in a most Anglican way that respects the worldwide Anglican Communion."

Acknowledge the "What Is." Bow down before It.

And I still don't get how anyone can "state boldly" a "not perfect..." "...way forward."

Bishop Nominee Neal Michell+ Address to the Diocese of Dallas

I have been hunting for pre-walkabout material on the nominees for the next bishop of Upper South Carolina. This is something everyone should do in order to know these guys better. I came across an address to the Episcopal Diocese of Dallas by the Rev. Canon Dr. Neal Michell given on 10/16/2009. I will excerpt some of it, but for those wanting the full text, here is a link.

He starts with a picture of himself and the diocese,

"I stand before you as one of the most hopeful and hope-filled people in the Diocese of Dallas.
Take a moment and look around you. As you look around you will see why I am so hopeful. What you will see are leaders. This room is full of some of the best leaders in the Episcopal Church. I wish you could spend a week with me. If you could, you would spend time as I do with some of the best leaders of our diocese. You make me hopeful for our future.
If you were to spend a week with me, you would talk to a number of clergy from other dioceses, many wanting to come serve in the Diocese of Dallas. Every week I get a call from one or more priests who want to come here because they have heard of all the exciting things going on and what a positive place for ministry it is. We are truly spoiled here in the Diocese of Dallas because this is such a positive, innovative, and supportive diocese to be a part of."

Okay, I don't want any anonymous comments suggesting I move to Dallas (find out why at the bottom).

Later on, Michell+ touches on something else of interest to us in SC. Our diocese has been working to create Spanish language ministries and he notes the progress being made in the Diocese of Dallas. Experience with these congregations and the Spanish liturgy is a plus. Interestingly, they have an active Kenyan and Tanzanian congregation as well as a Korean congregation in the mix.

"• Funding Fr. Noe Mendez on a full-time basis at Holy Nativity, Plano
• St. Mary’s, Irving – Fr. JJ Bernal – from about 75 on a Sunday to about 300 in the Hispanic service; parish called him as rector
o Several families have been added to the non-Hispanic congregation
• St. Luke’s, Dallas – Aquilino Lara, a graduate of Instituto Teológico San Mateo had about 15-20 on a Sunday when he came to assist there less than a year ago; they
now are drawing 75 people per Sunday.
New Hope Church – Korean, meets at St. Andrew’s, Farmers Branch
• Fr. Augustine Lee – they have about thirty in that congregation, and they have a young man that is interested in pursuing holy orders.
Trinity, Dallas, on Hillcrest has over 150 Kenyans worshiping there weekly. They have recently added a worship service targeting Tanzanians. They are currently ministering to about 65 persons.
Ascension, Dallas, is sponsoring their first Sudanese Aspirant for Holy Orders – he is attending Seminary of the Southwest in Austin. He is one of the Lost Boys of Sudan."

And how diversified and improved is their discernment process?

"• We currently have 21 people in the discernment process.
• Nine are scheduled to graduate this coming spring.
o Five are under the age of thirty
o Seven are under the age of forty
o Four are pursuing the Diaconate
o 19 the priesthood
o 7 are women; 14 are men
• In addition, we have four candidates in the Titus Project for rural areas"

Hopefully they are more organized than our process.
Later in the Strategic Planning section he addresses my concern,

"• We have made streamlined the discernment process. As I mentioned above, over half of those in the discernment process are under the age of forty. Those in the discernment process will tell you that our discernment process is more supportive and less adversarial than it has seemed to be in years past."

And speaking of the strategic plan,

"• We have continued to plant churches. We have planted five churches and several new communities of faith, targeting Latinos, young adults, Koreans, and African Immigrants. Approximately ten percent of our average Sunday attendance is traceable to these new communities of faith.
• We are have increased the number of people going on short-term mission trips.
• We have been more intentionally involved in more and more local outreach. We are leaders in the City of Dallas Justice Revival.
• We are revising the way we do communications.
• All Saints Camp continues to be a place where leaders are developed and people deepened in their relationship with Christ.
Have we accomplished the goals we set for ourselves? No. Are more passionate about the gospel as a diocese? Yes. Have we made great strides? Yes. We are a remarkably different diocese than we were nearly nine years ago when we first embarked on our Strategic Plan. We are more mission oriented, more evangelistic, more strategic at every level."

and towards the finish,

"We have not been ritually stringent. Some prefer 'smells and bells,' others use guitars and drums. But the overarching character of our diocese is that we have a passion for the gospel and the apostolic faith, and the unity of the Church is of paramount importance. Apostolic faith and Catholic Unity. "

He appears to be committed to unity, and as Canon of the Ordinary, he has experience with the work of the diocese.

I have one reservation however, and that is, will he hold it against me that I can't stand the Dallas Cowboys?

Stewardship, Burwell+ Style.

This past Sunday we at ECOOS listened to a skit put on by the stewardship committee. ECOOS stewardship campaigns are generally low key and only sometimes come off as desperate pleading. On occasion, we might hear a word from the pulpit about tithing, but it is generally all handed over to the stewardship and finance committees to discuss such matters. During the stewardship committee's skit, I chanced to wonder what was going on in the churches of the various nominees for bishop of Upper South Carolina. Given that each has only a one in six chance of being elected bishop this go round, I suspected that it would be business as usual in those churches. Later, as I relieved myself after coffee hour, imagine my horror as a gnarled, blotched, ancient hand reached under the stall door, pushing an envelope towards my feet.

I whispered, "Deep Pew, is that you?"

I heard no response except for the sound of the door closing. Opening the envelope, I found that Deep had obviously been to church at Holy Cross Sullivan's Island and documented John Burwell's sermon on stewardship. I knew there was some cross pollinization between the two dioceses of South Carolina, but I never guessed that Deep Pew buzzed between here and Sullivan's Island. Thanks Pew, that saved me the trouble of searching through and listening to the recorded sermons on-line (which would have been a little awkward at the time).

Here are some highlights from a sermon given by John Burwell+ on 10/25/2009. He starts off with,

"This morning, Let’s talk about expectations, and impossibilities, and the power of God!
Look with me again at our middle lesson – From the Book of Hebrews, chapter 13. I want to call you attention to verse 6:
'So we say with confidence, The Lord is my helper; I will not be afraid. What can man do to me?!' Have you seen this verse before? Recently? Anybody looked closely at the pledge card in your possession this morning? (That’s right, it’s on the pledge card!)
Do you know why that verse is printed on our pledge cards? It has to do with expectations, impossibilities, and the power of God."

After an exposition on Exodus, we get to where the Israelites are trapped between the Egyptian army and the Red Sea,

"With the calm confidence that only comes from a life surrendered to the Lord, Moses told the Israelites, 'Fear Not!' It’s verse 13. You see it? Middle of the page. Left hand side. Moses says, 'Do not be afraid!'"

Is he actually asking people to read from their Bibles?

"He says 'Stand firm. The Lord will fight your battles, you need only to stay out of his way!'
The only way to become free of fear is to know that God is with us. To know that HE is in charge of all our impossibilities!"

A bit further on,

"What seemed to human eyes to be a cul-de-sac of impossibility wasn't. God still had one more move to make. And the parting of the Sea became a metaphor of what God can do with impossibilities!!"

And towards the end,

"Now, what has this to do with you? In particular, what does MOSES and the Red Sea have to do with the pledge cards you now have in front of you this morning?
Well, God has led you here, to this place and time - Just like God led the Israelites out to the Red Sea. And today – this morning - I'm asking you to place your faith in God's almighty power.
I’m not just asking you to put a dollar amount on the pledge card. I’m asking you to consider what God can do with impossibilities!!
I’m asking you to tithe!

The last time we heard that at ECOOS was about $100,000 ago.

Today is Stewardship Sunday. Today is the day to fill out that Stewardship card and hand it in and make a pledge to God that shows that you trust Him.
...We’re talking this morning about expectations, and impossibilities, and the power of God! All throughout the Bible – in both the Old and the New Testament – the tithe is God’s expectation of his people.
Not because it’s easy to give that much - but because He wants you to trust Him.
Most of us today look at pledging 10% of our income as an impossibility! ...God’s expectation is a tithe, and the majority of us don’t even pledge, so let me tell you I understand if tithing sounds like an impossibility to you!"

He is playing the "T" card, but tying it in with scripture and his theme, clever...

"Hear now the good news!
That Same God, who did the impossible in opening the sea, is the Lord who came and lived among us. All the power of God dwelt in Jesus Christ!! And that Same Power is available to us today through his constant, ever-present, living presence! Make no mistake - Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, and today, and forever! The same love that blessed Israel long ago, has liberated us from the bondage of guilt and sin and self-doubt and condemnation!
Stack up the impossible against that! Go ahead!!!"

"Hmmm...I really should listen to more of those recorded sermons on-line," I thought.

Is the stewardship campaign being conducted at Holy Cross Sullivan's Island really any different from the campaign going on in your church? If so, in what way? If different, does John Burwell's approach work for you?

In fact, I need to find more sermon material from the other nominees too. It would be fun to compare their stewardship sermons. In the absence of any reports from the field, I guess I shall have to keep on digging. After all, there are only six weeks to go before the election.

Oh Deep Pew, where are you?