It's Not Fair! Bless Their Hearts.

Like our Diocese of Upper South Carolina, the Church of England appears to be well on its way to allowing some sort of same sex blessing to take place in its temples (see T19 post about the Pilling Report). One argument you are likely to hear in favor of same sex blessings is exactly what a non-Anglican friend, bless her heart, suggested would come next when she read about our church performing a "Blessing of the animals".

“Would you rather bless a sheep and a tree but not them?" Archbishop John Sentamu in House of Lords Debate on Same Sex Marriage June 2013 

We often chafe at God's commandments. Why should He bless heterosexual marriage and procreation and not same-sex marriage? It appears to us to be a case for that childhood lament we used when our brother or sister got special treatment, "It's not fair!" I have been laboring through the Old Testament prophets this month and Ezekiel turns that argument on its head and reminds us of the need for repentance.

“Yet the children of your people say, ‘The way of the Lord is not fair.’ But it is their way which is not fair! When the righteous turns from his righteousness and commits iniquity, he shall die because of it. But when the wicked turns from his wickedness and does what is lawful and right, he shall live because of it. Yet you say, ‘The way of the Lord is not fair.’ O house of Israel, I will judge every one of you according to his own ways.” Ezekiel 33:17-20

For more from Ezekiel 33 click here. I think he might issue a similar warning to today's Church... or maybe he already did. 

"We Don't Care Who's on Top"

Or so the billboard said a couple of months ago.

"An Auckland church has erected a billboard in support of a bill to legalise same-sex marriages.

The billboard, outside St Matthew-in-the-City, shows two model brides kissing atop a wedding cake, with the text 'We don't care who's on top'.

It comes as Labour MP Louisa Wall's bill on marriage equality is expected to pass its first reading in Parliament later today." (read it all at the NZHerald)

St Matthew-in-the-City is the infamous "church" in N.Z. that put up some outrageous Christmas billboards a couple of times in the past. Archdeacon Glynn Cardy was the instigator then, and I guess he is still at it (judging by the title of one of his recent sermons "Jesus Did NOT Die for Our Sins").

Folks, this is the picture of the progressive church that you have all been clamoring for.

A church where you can have your cake and... er....um... eat it two.

How Not to Prepare the Way

I thought Advent was about preparing the way for Christ to enter the world, and today in church we did read about the Annunciation in Luke 1:26-38.

 One important Standing Commission of the Episcopal church however, believes Advent is about preparing for same sex blessings. This is what they wrote,

"In this season of Advent when we are to be preparing for Christ’s coming, we invite you to reflect upon your own experience of 'being prepared.' How were you prepared for a marriage or for a blessing? What preparation or counseling did you receive? What do you remember, whether it was 1 month ago or 25 years ago – what sticks with you? Or if you are someone who prepares couples, what is most important to you? What works or does not work, so to speak?
Later this spring the full SCLM report will be published for General Convention and the recommended resources will be part of that report. However, we invite you to engage now with your own experiences preparing for either same- or different-gender life-long relationships."

Over at T-19, the following picture was shown and reported as having made the rounds in TEc circles (although not to this corner of the circle) ,

This is sick folks. A plague has come upon this house.

"And he that owneth the house shall come and tell the priest, saying, It seemeth to me there is as it were a plague in the house:" Leviticus 14:35

The priest will come and judge this house. If the signs of plague have not gone away, this house shall be torn down and its blocks scattered.

 ‘Why have you not built me a house of cedar?’ 2 Samuel 7:7

 We are building a house with walls of flesh upon a foundation of human desire. Such a house makes us feel good, but such a house cannot stand.

The House Call

   I have often heard it argued that since Jesus was "radically inclusive" and gave us the example of "radical hospitality," that we should therefore be welcoming of non-celibate homosexuals into ordained ministry and accepting of same sex unions as a blessed event. These are combined into the more general term, "inclusiveness." Not considering the logical basis of this conclusion, most discussions either end at this point or devolve into name calling, personal attacks, and the inevitable proof of Godwin's law.

 Matthew 9:10 (today's Gospel reading is Matthew 9:9-17) is frequently referred to in these arguments. Read it again,

9 As Jesus was walking along, he saw a man called Matthew sitting at the tax booth; and he said to him, ‘Follow me.’ And he got up and followed him. 10 And as he sat at dinner in the house, many tax-collectors and sinners came and were sitting with him and his disciples. 11 When the Pharisees saw this, they said to his disciples, ‘Why does your teacher eat with tax-collectors and sinners?’ 12 But when he heard this, he said, ‘Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. 13 Go and learn what this means, “I desire mercy, not sacrifice.” For I have come to call not the righteous but sinners.’

Jesus' words in verses 12 and 13 are usually conveniently left out of any discussion of "inclusiveness."

We can all be thankful that the Great Physician deigns to dine with the likes of us. He even makes house calls! What a surprise to come to a banquet only to told by the guest of honor that you are "sick." What should be my response as His patient? Should I deny that an illness exists in me? Dare I tell the Physican that he is wrong and demand He explain to the world that there was no sickness in me to begin with? After all, it is the world that has the problem, not me. I am a good tax collector. Everyone else is a taxcollectorophobe.

The risk of being "radically included" by Jesus is the risk of being called out to be healed of your sickness and sin.  This is the main risk to those who use the argument of "radicaI hospitality" to further their agenda: they may be given a prescription that involves a change in themselves rather than the change in others that they seek.

I see nothing here to suggest that the result of Jesus' house call is the redefinition of "sin" to mean "blessing."

We are the ones who want to see sin redefined.

Life would be so much easier if only God would do as I desire.

Why My Mother Would Have Cancelled My Subscription to the Episcopal Church Publishing Catalog

I received a special delivery the other day. A copy of the Spring 2011 Church Publishing Inc. catalog appeared on my desk. Church Publishing Incorporated publishes the official worship materials for the Episcopal Church. Turning the catalog over, I noticed that the name and address of the original recipient had been marked through. I immediately suspected the work of that loyal friend, Deep Prie-Dieu. Thumbing through the pages, I was shocked to see what Church Publishing Inc. has been sending through the U.S. mail,

You can download the nasty thing here, but your computer may reject it if parental controls are in place.

Here is a small sample of their offerings.

Keep Your Courage: a Radical Christian Feminist Speaks
by Carter Heyward

"• a new collection of writings by one of the world’s leading radical
theologians, who is widely read and admired by a generation of
feminist thinkers all over the globe..."
"...in this volume of occasional pieces, the lesbian feminist theologian
bears witness to the sacred struggles to topple oppressive power. these
pieces illustrate feminist theology’s bold and transformative engagement
of its cultural, political, social, and theological contexts."

Gifted by Otherness: gay and lesbian Christians in the Church
by William Countryman and M.R. Ritley
"an affirming guidebook to the journey of those who are gay or lesbian, as well as Christian, and their unique call to reveal the gospel’s central message of inclusion in today’s church."

Radical Love: an Introduction to Queer theology
Patrick S. Cheng
"the first accessible introduction to an important, developing area of
Christian theology"
"Radical Love is the first introductory textbook on the subject of
queer theology.
Queer theology is concerned with questions about the meaning of existence,
as posed by lesbian, gay, transgender, bisexual, and other 'queer' seekers."

As My Own Soul: The Blessing of Same-gender Marriage
by Chris Glaser

Reasonable and Holy: Engaging Same-Sexuality
by Tobias Stanislas Haller

In the Eye of the Storm: Swept to the Center by God
by Gene Robinson

Christian Holiness & Human Sexuality:
A Study guide for Episcopalians by
Marilyn McCord Adams, Wil GafneY, A. Katherine
Grieb, Louis Weil, Ellen k. Wondra, Rowan Smith,
and Sylvia Sweeney, Contributors

"...a study guide for episcopalians
who want to understand how all Christian people can exercise their
baptismal vocation in the fullness of their sexual identity."

On Being a gay Parent: Making a Future Together
by Brett Webb-Mitchell

Gay Unions: In the light of Scripture,Tradition, and Reason
by Gray Temple

Same-sex unions: Stories and Rites
by Paul V. Marshall

Turn the page and you find the appropriately placed,

Good Lord, Deliver Us: A Lenten Journey by
Leonard M. Freeman and Lindsay H. Freeman

and all this time they have been sending it without a brown paper cover!

I showed this catalog to a few typical, but diverse Rock Hillians of childrearing age who happened to be gathered around the water cooler. I then asked this simple question,

"Would you and your family want to join this church?"

100% answered, "No way!"

Thank God that someone out there is teaching our parents in the way of the Lord.

So, is there any mystery why the Episcopal church can't attract young people?

(Church Publishing Incorporated is part of the Church Pension Group, so sales will help pay for your rector's and some of these author's retirements.)

Theological Principles? on Liturgies for Blessing Same Sex Couplings

The Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music of the Episcopal Church, with the able bodied assistance of our assistant priest and youth minister, has been busy spending your money developing liturgies for same sex blessings.

The following is available on their blog, and was picked up by the elves at T19 on March 10, 2011 (go there to see all of the comments).

TEC Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music
Addressing General Convention Resolution C056, Liturgies for Blessing
Outline of Theological Principles
December 31, 2010
I. Baptismal Grounding
The Christian life is rooted in the sacrament of baptism, an effective sign of our participation in God’s mission in the world and a reminder of our hope for the fulfillment of all things in God-in-Christ. Every covenant and commitment we make as Christians offers an opportunity to live out our baptismal covenant in new ways.

Is Christian life grounded in the sacrament of baptism? I agree with comment #13 at T19 who wrote, "Christianity is radical because it is rooted in the person of Jesus Christ."

The watering down of the Book of Common Prayer in 1979 may be one reason why progressive thought has come to the point where when they really can't figure something out, they fall back on the argument that they are living into their Baptismal Covenant. In particular, they are prone to focus on:
"Will you strive for justice and peace among all people, and respect the dignity of every human being?" (p. 305),
and ignore:
"Will you continue in the apostles’ teaching..." (p. 304).
The "justice" argument is one that often comes up in discussions of same sex blessings.
The "justice" clause is just one of many changes to what was "The Ministration of Holy Baptism" in the 1928 BCP.
Gone are the words,
"Wilt thou then obediently keep God's holy will and commandments, and walk in the same all the days of thy life?"
The 1928 wording of the following prayer was too powerful for the progressives in 1979,

O MERCIFUL God, grant that like as Christ died and rose again, so this Child (this thy Servant) may die to sin and rise to newness of life. Amen.
Grant that all sinful affections may die in him, and that all things belonging to the Spirit may live and grow in him. Amen.
Grant that he may have power and strength to have victory, and to triumph, against the devil, the world, and the flesh. Amen.
Grant that whosoever is here dedicated to thee by our office and ministry, may also be endued with heavenly virtues, and everlastingly rewarded, through thy mercy, O blessed Lord God, who dost live, and govern all things, world without end. Amen.

The 1979 Prayer Book changes weakened the description of our basis of faith and diminished the teaching of the need for true repentance and renewal, impossible without Christ, and these changes are key to understanding the present day highjacking of the Baptismal Covenant by those espousing same sex blessings.

II. Theological Retrieval
Rooting the blessing of covenantal relationships in baptism suggests a fruitful retrieval of three key touchstones from Christian history concerning the significance of those covenants, including same-gender relationships:

I am cannot find much theology to retrieve here.

1. The sacramental character of covenantal relationships (committed relationships make God’s presence and divine grace visible);

This is totally backwards.
It is only once we are regenerate by the grace of God through Christ that we can truly love our neighbor as ourselves. The love of one's neighbor is evidence of the power of God's grace in our lives.

2. The Trinitarian imprint of covenantal life (the perpetual and mutual self-giving and other-receiving of the Holy Trinity);

But didn't the 1979 BCP change the wording used at the giving of the ring from:

WITH this Ring I thee wed: In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. Amen. (1928 BCP)

to this:

I give you this ring as a symbol of my vow, and with all
that I am, and all that I have, I honor you, in the Name of
the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit (or in the
Name of God). (1979 BCP p.427 h/t Nwlayman)

The Holy Trinity has been optional since 1979.

3. The eschatological vision inspired and evoked by covenantal relationship (the desire that leads us to commit ourselves to another person reflects the human desire and hope for union with God-in-Christ).

This is total nonsense. All in all, I would say the past 3 points are anti-theological.

III. Renewing the Church’s Theological Reflection
Retrieving the sacramental character, Trinitarian imprint, and eschatological vision in committed relationships can renew the church’s theological reflection on covenantal relationships, including same-gender unions, with these five key principles:

The strawman appears. If one takes the earlier three points as establishing a solid theological basis for covenental relationships and same-gender unions, then you can move on to the next five points. If however, you can see that this is a strawman, the following points can be ignored.

• Vocation: People are called into long-term committed relationships, as a vocation;

Wow!

• Covenant-making: Loving faithfulness can participate in and reflect God’s own covenantal commitment to God’s creation;

Thank God for his covenant. All these human covenants pale in comparison.

• Households: Covenants create households as “schools of virtue” for life-long formation in spiritual discipline nurtured by divine grace;

No, CONVENTS, not covenants, are households and “schools of virtue” for life-long formation in spiritual discipline nurtured by divine grace;

• Fruitfulness: Faithful love in relationship enables the offering of countless gifts to the wider community that would not be possible in the same way apart from that relationship, including: lives of service, compassion, generosity, and hospitality;

No mention of the fruitfulness of procreation.

• Mutual Blessing: The liturgical blessing of a covenantal relationship acknowledges the fruits of the Spirit in that relationship and in turn becomes a blessing to the faith community, strengthening the community for its mission and ministry in the world.

So far there is no evidence that this is a fruit of the Spirit since there is no evidence of confirmation through careful study of scripture, nor is there any evidence that same sex covenantal relationships will strengthen the mission of the Church.

IV. Summary of Theological Principles
Covenantal relationships are one way for Christians to live out their baptismal calling in the world. As the Church discerns the fruits of the Spirit in faithful commitments – such as households marked by compassion, generosity, and hospitality – these commitments become a blessing to the wider community. Blessing covenantal relationships, including same-gender unions, thus belongs to the mission of the Church in its ongoing witness to the good news of God-in-Christ and the Christian hope of union with God.

My summary: There is no theological principle contained in this Outline of Theological Principles.

Next, having established principles built upon straw, they move on to the next job for the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music;

Addressing General Convention Resolution C056, Liturgies for Blessing
Principles for Evaluating Liturgical Materials
December 31, 2010
Materials proposed for blessing same-gender relationships must above all be consistent with the implicit theology and ecclesiology of the 1979 Book of Common Prayer. This would suggest, for example, that they must reflect the Prayer Book’s underlying assumption that the entire life of the Church finds its origin in the baptismal font.

Here we go again. Another false assumption about baptism.

Nearly as important is that the proposed liturgical materials embody a classically Anglican liturgical ethos and style.

In other words, they want to make these liturgies look, sound, and feel traditional. Of course, they are giving themselves an impossible task. Dress up a skunk and you still have a skunk.

Recognizing the varying notions of what makes public prayer recognizably Anglican, the task group identified these qualities:
• It resonates with Scripture.

The key word here is "resonate." This is sufficiently vague and allows them to ignore scriptural references altogether.

• It has high literary value; is it beautiful according to accepted and respected standards.

No comma splices or incomplete sentences?

• It uses the recurring structures, linguistic patterns, and metaphors of the 1979 BCP.

Vague as well, but intended to dress the skunk.

• It is formal, not casual, conversational, or colloquial.

Does that mean they might throw in a few Thee's and Thou's?

• It has a ritual or sacral register.

I can see the organist now, searching for that "sacral register." This an unfortunate choice of words because the "sacral" region is, in Anatomy class, the area near the tailbone.

• It is dense enough to “carry the freight” of the sacred purpose for which it is intended.

Throw in a few imponderables then.

• It is metaphoric without being obtuse.

Metaphors can go too far. This whole liturgy thing is crying out for some pretty far out metaphors.

• It is performative.

Above all it has to be a great show!

At the same time, these rites must resonate as natural speech in contemporary ears. A sacral register must be achieved without the use of arcane or antiquated words or patterns of speech.

Would it be arcane or antiquated of me to use words like, "Where in the Bible did this come from?"

The rites should provide explanatory notes and rubrics. The material must be considered as the script for an event, not a mere collection of texts.
The proposed rites must be an expression primarily of the entire Church, not the couple seeking a blessing. These rites must allow for robust communal participation, reflecting the Baptismal ecclesiology of the Prayer Book. Related to this, since the Eucharist is the symbol of the unity of the Church though unity with Christ, these services of blessing should normatively be celebrated within the Eucharist.

I think these rites will result in a minimum of two unrepentant sinners presenting themselves unprepared to receive the Eucharist, and that is something that has consequences (1 Corinthians 11:27-30).

These rites must enact the notion of sacramental reciprocity put forth by the C056 Theological Resources Task Group, suggesting that, even as the Church blesses the relationship of the couple, the relationship of the couple is a blessing to the Church.

But, there is no scriptural basis for such an assertion.

Options must be provided so that this action of the entire Church—this common prayer—does not degenerate into a generic rite.

"Degenerate" is another unfortunate choice of words.

The Prayers of the People will be important in this regard, as will other texts. There must be a provision of numerous options.

More options will be needed to fulfill Bishop Gene Robinson's prediction "that it was time to move beyond speaking simply of 'GLBT' (Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transgendered) orientations: 'there are so many other letters in the alphabet, there are so many other sexualities to be explored.'" (see earlier post)

I can't take it any longer, so here is the last bit:

The rites must hold up the two people making the covenant as the primary ministers within this action of God and of the entire Church. The rites should give expression to the Church’s understanding that the couple is freely assuming a vocation, which can be expected to yield the fruits of mutual fidelity for the couple, itself, for the Church, and for the entire world, pointing ultimately toward the fulfillment of all human relationships and unity in the eschatological Reign of God, when God will be all-in-all.
They must be what they purport to be—liturgical prayer—not didactic or polemical statements in the guise of liturgy.

For anyone wanting to watch the sinking of the SSb TEc, it will be carried live this Friday and Saturday. Here are the details:


The two-day consultation will center on the 2009 General Convention Resolution C056 to collect and develop theological and liturgical resources for same-gender blessings. The plenary sessions will provide information
about the work the SCLM and its task groups have accomplished to date in developing these resources.
The live webcast will be available www.episcopalchurch.org/live/sclm
Participating will be nearly 200 clergy and lay deputies from almost 100 dioceses of the Episcopal Church.

Webcast schedule
Plenary sessions are scheduled:
Friday, March 18: 2 pm to 3 pm Eastern and 4:45 pm to 6 pm Eastern (1 pm to 2 pm Central and 3:45 pm to 5
pm Central; noon to 1 pm Mountain and 2:45 pm to 4 pm Mountain; 11 am to noon Pacific and 1:45 pm to 3 pm
Pacific)
Saturday, March 19: 8:30 am to 9:30 am Eastern and 11 am to noon Eastern (7:30 am to 8:30 am Central and
10 am to 11 am Central; 6:30 am to 7:30 am Mountain and 9 am to 10 am Mountain; 5:30 am to 6:30 am Pacific
and 8 am to 9 am Pacific)
In addition, the media conference slated for 2 pm to 2:30 pm Eastern will be live webcast. (1 pm to 1:30 pm
Central; noon to 12:30 pm Mountain; 11 am to 11:30 am Pacific)
The event will be held at the Atlanta Hilton Airport (Diocese of Atlanta).

We Need to Talk, You Must Listen

A hypothetical conversation between Bishop Waldo and a simple pewsitter.

"Such truths are ‘non-negotiable'"

"What truths?" you ask (unless you are an Episcopalian in which case the question should be, "Who are you to define truth for me?).

This article from 2009 at LifeSiteNews came to mind when I was pondering the different conclusions reached by the Episcopal church and the Catholic Church regarding same sex relationships.

"Long Island’s Bishop William Murphy has come out swinging at Nassau County Executive Thomas Suozzi, after the New York politician publicly stated he was a 'practicing Catholic' who now supports same-sex 'marriage,' a position that Murphy said is incompatible with being Catholic."

But would be perfectly compatible with a practicing Episcopalian.

"Suozzi, the DeCounty Executive for Nassau County, expressed his support for same-sex “marriage” in a June 13 op-ed for the New York Times. Suozzi described himself as a “practicing Catholic,” who had abandoned his previous support for civil unions, saying now anything less than civil same-sex “marriage” would create “a separate and unequal system."

And same sex marriage is somehow equal?

"Bishop Murphy penned a forceful response in that week’s edition of the Long Island Catholic, the newspaper for the Rockville Center diocese, stating he felt compelled to respond publicly to Suozzi, “because [Suozzi] publicly identifies himself as a practicing Catholic.” Murphy stated that Suozzi was “contradicting some basic moral teachings of his own faith” that no Catholics are free to deny.

“The logic of Mr. Suozzi’s argument is difficult to discern,” wrote Murphy. “It seems that he has become convinced that because he has met homosexual persons who have suffered discrimination, they now have a ‘right’ to insist that the state redefine their private sexual relationships and give such the term of marriage.”

Bishop Murphy made clear that Suozzi’s disregard for the Church’s teaching on same-sex “marriage” and “abortion” do not qualify him to be a practicing Catholic, because these teachings are “unambiguous, faithful to the Lord and binding on all Catholics.”

“In saying this, I am not singling out Mr. Suozzi. I am speaking to all Catholics in our diocese and beyond, reminding them that what we bishops teach is not “another opinion” among many that Catholics may choose or not choose.”

“Instead, such truths are ‘non-negotiable,’ binding on all of us who claim to be ‘practicing Catholics,’” reiterated Murphy. “Otherwise we are not faithful to our Lord, to His Church and to the ultimate truths about the human person which alone can bring us freedom, justice, joy and peace.”

I agree that there are ultimate truths about the human person which can bring us freedom, justice, joy, and peace. They can be found in the Bible. As an Episcopalian however, I lack a bishop who can render a statement about human sexuality as anything other than "another opinion." If I have a question, where am I to turn?

Ever since they started printing the Bible for the masses, problems of authoritative interpretation have been multiplying as fast as authors of controversial books. At the present time, some denominations have come to the point where all interpretations are acceptable as long as we can still hug each other during the passing of the peace.

The passing of the peace...requiem aeternam. Yes that is where our freedom can lead us, to the injustice of biblical revisionism, to the misery of the soul made slave to the flesh, to the loss of peace.

Bishop Murphy's solution to issues such as those concerning sexuality is to rely on the teachings of the bishops. The Episcopal protestant way was the way intended in the Articles of Religion,

XX. Of the Authority of the Church.
The Church hath power to decree Rites or Ceremonies, and authority in Controversies of Faith: and yet it is not lawful for the Church to ordain any thing that is contrary to God's Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another. Wherefore, although the Church be a witness and a keeper of Holy Writ, yet, as it ought not to decree any thing against the same, so besides the same ought it not to enforce any thing to be believed for necessity of Salvation. (1801)

but as evidenced by the actions of recent general conventions and by the actions of the bishops of the church in ordaining whosoever they please and teaching highly individualized new gospels, the Episcopal approach has devolved into a "do as you so desire" non-solution that openly parades its contrariness to God's Word written.

We should learn from the failures of both approaches.

Catholics, follow your bishops, Episcopalians, please open your Bible and turn to...

Romans 1:16-28 (NAB)
"For I am not ashamed of the gospel. It is the power of God for the salvation of everyone who believes: for Jew first, and then Greek.
For in it is revealed the righteousness of God from faith to faith; as it is written, 'The one who is righteous by faith will live.'
The wrath of God is indeed being revealed from heaven against every impiety and wickedness of those who suppress the truth by their wickedness.
For what can be known about God is evident to them, because God made it evident to them.
Ever since the creation of the world, his invisible attributes of eternal power and divinity have been able to be understood and perceived in what he has made. As a result, they have no excuse; for although they knew God they did not accord him glory as God or give him thanks. Instead, they became vain in their reasoning, and their senseless minds were darkened.
While claiming to be wise, they became fools
and exchanged the glory of the immortal God for the likeness of an image of mortal man or of birds or of four-legged animals or of snakes.
Therefore, God handed them over to impurity through the lusts of their hearts for the mutual degradation of their bodies.
They exchanged the truth of God for a lie and revered and worshiped the creature rather than the creator, who is blessed forever. Amen.
Therefore, God handed them over to degrading passions. Their females exchanged natural relations for unnatural,
and the males likewise gave up natural relations with females and burned with lust for one another. Males did shameful things with males and thus received in their own persons the due penalty for their perversity.

And since they did not see fit to acknowledge God, God handed them over to their undiscerning mind to do what is improper."

P.S. Nassau County Executive Thomas Suozzi lost his re-election bid and conceded defeat on Dec. 1, 2009.

Echoes from GC 2009 Heard in the 2011 Diocesan Budget

In March 2010, the Episcopal Bishop of Washington D.C. gave permission for priests in his diocese to preside at civil marriages according to this report from Episcopal Pravda Online. In July 2010 the Living Church announced that the Diocese of San Diego joins Massachusetts, Southeast Florida, and Southern Ohio in allowing same-sex blessings to "move beyond" where we were.

On May 15, 2010 we were presented with the "joyous" consecration of Mary Glasspool.

Does anyone remember this statement from one of Upper South Carolina's deputies to last year's General Convention of the Episcopal church? (Posted July 14, 2009)

Please remain calm!


Once again, as in 2003, we are dismayed by sensational headlines written, in some cases, by folks who have no understanding of Episcopal polity, our Constitution and Canons, or our Baptismal Covenant. Before you let anyone send you into a panic over the passage of DO25, pull out a copy of our Constitution and Canons and refer to sections on elections, ordinations, etc. While the fear is that passage of DO25 will further antagonize our Anglican family (and, no, it will not be received well), the reality is that the resolution did not actually change anything. What it does, in essence, is to say that these are our canons, the ordination PROCESS is open to anyone, but there are no guarantees that someone who goes through the process will be ordained. Our bishop feels that this resolution does not negate BO33, which asks us to exercise restraint in the ORDINATION of anyone whose manner of life presents a challenge to the Anglican Communion and to restrain from the blessing of same-sex unions (but, stay tuned – that resolution will be coming to us soon).

I can hear the echoes now... Please...Please...Remain...Remain...Calm...Calm...

I know that she was just echoing the Bishop's party line, but do we really need echoing deputies? Maybe so, if you are really desperate like the Sheriff was in this cartoon clip:



While our diocesean deputy was playing echo in 2009, the T.E.C. rats were in the hen house planning for their dastardly ordinations and same-sex liturgies to occur 2010.

The effects of GC 2009 are still being heard.

Although the powers that be in the Diocese of Upper South Carolina say, "blame the economy" (I recently wanted to stand up and shout, "It ain't the economy stupid!" when I heard that from the mouth of an Upper South Carolina clergyman), I think the reverberations from GC 2009 are one possible cause for the continued decline in the diocese's budget projections ($300,000 less income predicted for 2011) (Track the progress of the budget here). Falling Sunday attendance is another reason. It is getting increasingly difficult to ask people to come visit your church once you mention the brand name, "Episcopal." In addition, once visitors come and are exposed to the heretical views of many of our clergy, they take their Bibles and flee for their soul's sake, never to return. As a result, people just aren't giving to the Episcopal church like they used to. Why should they? Why give money to an organization that has chosen to walk away from your first love, the Good News as presented in the Gospels, as handed down by the Apostles. T.E.C. has taken on new lovers. For one, Biblical revisionism has, like the adulteress, lured the church astray. Pimps and prostitutes now run the show in the Episcopal church.

Woe to the church that does not hear the echoes from the past.

Woe to the shepherds who blame the sheep for a lack of wool.

I think for the next General Convention in 2012 we should send that same old cotton pickin deputy back, along with our new Sheriff, Andy, to represent us so we can hear all the echoes...echoes...echoes... from... from... from... 2009...2009...2009... again...again...again...

Of course, we might not have enough money to pay for their trip!

Way, Way East of Eden

From Edith Tucker at the Berlin (NH) Reporter:

h/t Greg Griffith at StandFirm in Faith

"BERLIN — An historic first took place on Saturday, Jan. 2, in the 'City that Trees Built.'

Elizabeth 'Betsy' Hess and the Rev. Eleanor 'Ellie' McLaughlin, both of Randolph, were wed in a civil ceremony near the entrance to St. Barnabas Episcopal Church on High Street.

The Rt. Rev. V. Gene Robinson, the ninth Bishop of the Diocese of New Hampshire, blessed their rings and their Christian marriage at the altar. The blessing ceremony followed the civil marriage ceremony, which was jointly performed by Randolph Town Clerk Anne Kenison and Justice of the Peace Anne Jackson of Lancaster."

Don't worry, this was just a "generous pastoral response (GC2009 CO56)" by a simple country bishop.

"Ms. Hess, who holds a Ph.D. in clinical psychology from the University of Montana at Missoula, maintains a private practice in Berlin, and the Rev. McLaughlin, who earned a Ph.D. in medieval history at Harvard University, is the retired rector of St. Barnabas and a parishioner at St. Paul's, Lancaster.

They described his role as an 'unspeakable honor — a thrill.'"

And that is after they listened to his dimwitted sermon.

"Bishop Robinson said he understands that having both a gay bishop and a gay priest means that some in Berlin call St. Barnabas the gay church.

'Yes, we're gay,' he said. 'We welcome people of color, people in wheelchairs, the mentally disabled — all of God's children.' Elaborating on its inclusivity, he also noted that the Rev. Fran Gardner, the rector who succeeded the Rev. McLaughlin, is also gay.

He reminded everyone of Christ's eighth beatitude: 'Blessed are they who are persecuted.'"

Drop the persecution thing already, you've won! Go ahead and say what you really think about marriage, and give us some solid Biblical exegesis while you are at it.

"In his homily, Bishop Robinson explained that when God created 'the human thing' in the Garden of Eden, which He called 'A-dam' — (which the bishop pronounced with a long 'A' and 'dame') — He wanted to make him happy, so He provided him with a helper, a partner, a soul mate.'

'It was not right that A-dam should be alone,' Bishop Robinson said, noting that this is nothing new."

Oh, I get it. Bishop Robinson is saying that God created a dame for a dame in Eden. Stop the presses! Did it really say that in Genesis? Doesn't the passage read,

The LORD God said, "It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him."

Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. So the man gave names to all the livestock, the birds of the air and all the beasts of the field.
But for Adam no suitable helper was found. So the LORD God caused the man to fall into a deep sleep; and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man's ribs and closed up the place with flesh. Then the LORD God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man.

The man said,
"This is now bone of my bones
and flesh of my flesh;
she shall be called 'woman,'
for she was taken out of man."
For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh

Genesis 2:18-24

I think Bishop Robinson is putting a little 'Broad'way (excuse me) into his Bible with that "A-Dame" wisecrack.



I had never heard of anyone making the leap from Adam to "A Dame." To do so in order to alter God's natural order as established in Genesis goes beyond revisionism and into creating a new religion.

One could argue that Bishop Robinson is merely hijacking a pre-existing sinking denomination to advance a personal obsession, but statements such as this show that he is not satisfied with the Bible and is working on a new one. "Unspeakable" indeed. Oh, there was more including this,

"'Marriage is also crazy,' he said. 'It's hard to live up to when the institution of marriage is in such trouble,' Bishop Robinson said."

Particularly when one's own choices create more trouble. Someone ought to tell the Bishop to stop knocking an institution when it is down.

Is it any wonder that Sunday attendance in the Diocese of New Hampshire has dropped by almost 20% in the past decade?

As bad as the Bishop's homily was, the town clerk reminds us that the focus is on the new secular worldview:

"Randolph Town Clerk Kenison read an historical account, written by the Rev. McLaughlin that is informed by the work of the 'boundary-breaking interdisciplinary work' of Professor Nancy Cott of Harvard University, on the changes that have taken place from the days when the State and the Established Church were one. 'In colonial society, the State established and defined both moral and economic boundaries of the marriage contract, by which the husband was provider and unitary authority and the woman, mother and wife, was the dependent and obedient subject in law to her husband.' These gendered and hierarchical arrangements of the human family have ceased to be normative. Civil Marriage has been 'disestablished'…. The Marriage here solemnized is grounded upon current values and interests determined and enforced by the State, supported and respected by Civil society."

Excuse me Ms. Kenison, but did you just say that the State created bad standards of marriage in the past, but the current the State's values are okay? Do you trust the current State as our moral agent when earlier States got it wrong?

Arrghh...

I Love... (fill in the blank)

From Nova Scotia Scott via Transfigurations comes this article from Discover Magazine The lead title says "The End of Divorce, Growing numbers of people marrying inanimate objects." The article then describes two happy marriages, one between a woman and the Berlin Wall and another between a woman and the Eiffel tower. The article goes on to explain this attraction (Objectum sexuality),

"Objectum sexuality affects mostly women, who develop affection for objects ranging from computers to national monuments to model space ships. The cause of OS—or the psychology behind it—is not understood: Some medical experts believe it is a type of paraphilia, or unusual sexual interest or disorder; others believe it may be indicative of a history of sexual abuse.

According to certified sexologist Amy Marsh, however, it could be a new sexual orientation. Marsh has surveyed a community of people with OS and said, 'What I’m finding is not much history of sexual abuse, and actually not much in the way of psychiatric diagnoses either. I’m finding they’re very happy, and they don’t want to change. I am also finding out that quite a few of them have a diagnosis of Asperger’s syndrome or autism, but not everybody.'"

Hey, they even have a web site that I love, "Objectum-Sexuality Internationale." This site contains some helpful information such as,

What is OS?

NOTE: There is little known about OS other than data our community has gathered from our personal relationships with objects. So we are not claiming to have any clinical basis, only the practical knowledge gained from each other. We welcome and currently seek professional input and study in regards to OS. We are not looking for a cure but more comprehension into our make-up as an emerging part of society.

Objectùm-Sexuality is an orientation to love objects.

Sexual orientation is defined as the nature of sexual preference while the prolific definition stands as: the direction of someone's sexual desire toward people of the opposite gender, people of the same gender, or people of both. This does not include objects.

However, orientation itself is defined as: a complex mental state involving beliefs and feelings and values and dispositions to act in certain ways. This does include objects as we see it.

We love objects and many of us in an intimate way and this feeling is innate. Objectùm-sexual love comes for most in a similar awakening as other sexualities at the start of puberty. This is often followed by an acute awareness that we do not relate to peers due to the source of the projected feelings. Often objectùm-sexual people feel outcast or pressured by mainstream sexuality with a helpless feeling that we cannot change what comes so naturally.

What is the natural feeling of OS?

Just as mainstream are attracted to certain types of people, physical/intellectual, objectùm-sexuals feel a strong attraction towards objects possessing, in particular, certain geometry/function. Often this attraction is regarded as an obsession to a degree that provokes criticism.

What makes OS different from an obsession?

Truly there is not much difference. Love is a feeling that preoccupies one's thoughts. This in its own right describes a degree of obsession where all focus is on the one desired. An obsession is based on an extreme keenness for an object and that defines the significance. However, the difference for objectùm-sexuals is our love and attraction for the object is what devotes our interest to a level that appears merely obsessive.

"How can one love an inanimate object?

Indeed, the meaning of love comes into question. However, there is no single definition because this feeling has many levels and crosses every part of the spectrum. Virtually every one and every thing can be loved. Love does not have any rules that requisite to whom or to what we express this multifaceted emotion, as long as it causes no violation or harm to the subjected.

The spectrum of love is so vast; one may relate it to a bell curve. In the middle will certainly appear the majority of those whose relationships can be characterized by the similarities to whom and how they love. And at one end of this curve, that is where Objectùm-sexuality finds its place. While we have no firm numerical data, we are clearly a minority which facilitates the criticism of our way of love and life. But none-the-less, we still fall under the curve of the enigmatic emotion known as love.

OK, so the question isn't answered for those who strongly believe that love must be reciprocated to be in and have a relevant relationship. Naturally, if one sees objects as inanimate, then objectùm-sexual love and our relationships would undeniably be scrutinized. Indeed, there are cases of love being one-sided as with any orientation, but in general we do feel love in return."

The natural question for this blog is, "When will the O.S. people be brought into "full inclusion" in the Episcopal Church?

And, "How is this supposed to end divorce?"

Can't Stop Talkin About Em.

Who can't stop talking about sex in the T.E.C.? We have heard that the problem with the Episcopal Church is that those rwascally conserwatives won't stop talking about it. A commenter read through all the proposed resolutions for the 2009 General Convention of T.E.C. and had the following revelation.

Ralinda wrote on T19 on 03/27/2009,

"To save you from having to tally them up: of the 46 resolutions filed, 19 advance the agenda of homosexual activists in the church. One resolution adds gender identity or the expression of gender identity to “protected categories” for ordination (C001). Nine resolutions conform the marriage canons to the language of civil laws permitting same sex unions (C019, C025, C028, C041, C042) or remove restrictions and/or authorize the development of liturgies for same sex blessings (C004, C009, C017, C031). Seven resolutions (C007, C010, C015, C024, C033, C036, C039) repudiate and reverse Resolution B033 from GC ‘06, which asked TEC to observe the Communion moratorium on any further consecrations of non-celibate homosexuals as bishops in the Church. In response to the 2008 elections in states where the traditional definition of marriage was affirmed, one resolution (C023) calls for Episcopalians to reject and work against Defense of Marriage statutes, and another (C014) authorizes a new Theological Study (i.e. revision) of Christian Marriage. There are no resolutions filed to support the consideration of the Anglican Covenant."

Thank you Ralinda.

I bet they won't stop talking about Anaheim 09, and it hasn't even happened yet!


(Betty Hutton and Fred Astaire)...enjoy!

Fight For Your Children

How a story is worded and presented by the author has a profound influence upon the reader.

This particular story hit the blog waves Jan. 28, 2009 and caused a minor flap. It was the story of two children in the U.K. being raised by their grandparents. In a remarkable example of age discrimination, and after two years legal wrangling, the children were taken from their family and put up for adoption.

So how old were these decrepit people? 59 and 46 according to the report.

Maybe there are other reasons that these grandparents were unfit.



Perhaps it was because the grandfather was a "farmhand." In that case this is class discrimination.

Maybe it was because the grandmother has "diabetes" and the grandfather has "angina." In that case it is health discrimination.



The article only mentions the age of the grandparents as the reason. They were "too old."

There must be more to the story. Did the writer present all the facts, or just selected facts to gin up our emotions?

You can imagine the outrage racing across the www.



I don't think the outrage has anything to do with the fact that the children are to be adopted by... read it here...