Oops! ABC News Prediction from 2003: "Why Episcopal Conservatives Won't Split"

The trustworthiness of the mainstream news media has been a recurrent issue these days. There is nothing new about the problem as we can see from the bias evident in the following article from 2003 published by ABC News.    

Why Episcopal Conservatives Won't Split 

By DEBORAH CALDWELL Aug. 6

"— More than a dozen conservative bishops may have angrily walked out of the Episcopal Church's convention on Tuesday, but don't expect them to leave the denomination."

Oops is right. Many bishops did leave, taking their dioceses with them, and more pewsitters left the denomination altogether. Sunday attendance has dropped by 26% so our reporter might want to revisit her expectations.

"Why? Because they learned a lesson 27 years ago, when the church battled over whether or not to allow female clergy. After a huge fight that Episcopalians still recall and dissect, the church voted yes — and some of the conservatives said with much fanfare, 'Goodbye, we're starting our own church.'"

"...Yet today, few people even remember the names of the splinter churches they formed. They are tiny and without influence. Conservatives are well aware of the history and have played the gay issue quite differently."

Women's ordination and the 1979 Prayer Book revision were two of the reasons that "conservatives" left in the 70's. There was sufficient inertia in the pews and such tiny numbers of female priests that only a small number of people left the denomination. It has taken a couple of generations for female priests to be trained, "called" to parishes, and for them to take over a large part of the Episcopal organization. The real lesson from the past is that revisionist teaching introduces a cancer that slowly invades a Church body, spreading to vital organs, weakening resistance to other threats, and ultimately leading to death.

Back to the article,

"Lesson One: Schism gets headlines (briefly) but not much else. 

Forming a new denomination would disconnect conservatives from the 73 million-member Worldwide Anglican Communion — churches in England and around the world — denying them influence, money and support. Individual parishes will also be reluctant to leave because the Episcopal Church owns the buildings and their financial assets. Instead, conservatives will look to affiliate with a church overseas so they can remain part of the official Anglican Communion."

What has happened is that "conservative" dioceses easily connected to the majority of world-wide Anglicans and were not really concerned about influence, money, or support. The Episcopal church has been able to retain some church buildings, but not all. This may have had some effect on the departure of some "conservatives" but many were willing to fight the TEc's lawyers in court.

"Lesson Two: It's all about the battle to define 'mainstream." 

"Today, women are accepted as clergy in most Christian groups, and those who opposed women's ordination appear in hindsight to have been on the fringe. And so, conservative Episcopalians in the current debate have been careful to present themselves as moderate, while portraying Episcopal church leaders as ultra-liberals who stole 'their' church out from under them."

There was no battle to define mainstream. Mainstream denominations are dying because they have cut a new channel and are flowing downhill in a new stream. Who wants the label of "mainstream" anyway?

"'This body, willfully confirming the election of a person sexually active outside of holy matrimony, has departed from the historic faith and order of the church of Jesus Christ,' Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh said on behalf of the dissenting bishops."

The quote does not do justice to the full damage to the faith from TEc's rejection of the Bible.

The Web site of the main conservative group — the American Anglican Council — welcomes visitors with this greeting: "We are mainstream Anglicans. We are orthodox Episcopalians. We're missionaries called to fulfill the Great Commission, to proclaim Biblical truth and to transform the Episcopal Church from within. We'd love to share our mission and ministry with you."

The AAC website thankfully took out that "mainstream" word.

This last bit left me scratching my head,

"Lesson Three: Play on liberal white guilt. 

Last time, conservatives opposing ordination argued that a rift would harm relations with the Roman Catholic Church. This did not persuade American Episcopalians, who were (and still are) the church of elites and intellectuals.
This time, the AAC has teamed up with Anglican leaders in Africa and Asia — where, they point out, Anglicans are growing the fastest — who say they will not associate with a church that permits a gay bishop."

I don't know how "liberal white guilt" plays into that, but some guy at the liberal General Theological Seminary (GTS) had it figured out,

"'What makes this battle interesting is that the conservatives know how to play upon white liberal guilt,' says Robert Bruce Mullin, an Episcopal Church historian at General Theological Seminary in New York. Mullin said the appeal to Third World Christian sensibilities is 'poignant' and smart, though he believes they will ultimately fail."

 So "conservatives" were suffering from "liberal white guilt" which caused them to associate with African bishops? What do you expect from a GTS historian?

To be fair, ABC News tried to include some balance in the article although it is still off base,

"Others disagree. Allen Guelzo, an Episcopal Church historian at Eastern College in St. David's, Pa., said the Third World alliance may give dissidents the leverage they need to actually split the Worldwide Anglican Communion."

That made it sound as though "conservatives" were the ones who wanted to split the Anglican Communion. Guelzo actually meant something entirely different,

"'People in Africa don't have this American clubbiness,' Guelzo says. 'They'll walk. They are the majority. So that gives an entirely new heft to dissident protests. If the African bishops really do proceed as they have threatened, then we have introduced an entirely novel situation.'"

At the end of the article the author makes her worst prediction of all,

"...Ultimately, conservatives and liberals alike will pray, cry, and yell at each other. They'll hold meetings and caucuses and issue pronouncements. There will be a gay bishop in the Episcopal Church and conservatives won't like it." 

"But the most likely outcome is that all of them — conservative, moderate, liberal, gay, and straight — will remain in the same church."

All of them will remain in the same church?

Oops! 

Does The Revised Common Lectionary Contribute to Today's Gender Confusion?

Followers of this blog should be familiar with the problems Sunday churchgoers face when the only parts of the Bible to which they are exposed are selections from the Revised Common Lectionary (RCL). Hearing bits and pieces of the scripture every seven days is bad enough, but when the RCL selectively edits out verses that might be confusing, controversial, or too harsh and judgmental for "Sunday ears" the net effect is to create a congregation of "tame" Christians, a group which would never be able to defend itself in the public square.

This Sunday provides another example of the curious (some might say suspicious) way that parts of the Bible get cut. Most pewsitters will hear Genesis 2:15-17, 3:1-7, but they will probably be unaware that Genesis 2.18-25 was dropped.

This is what people will hear today (Genesis 2:15-17, 3:1-7).

The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, ‘You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.’ (Genesis 2:15-17)

Now the serpent was more crafty than any other wild animal that the Lord God had made. He said to the woman, ‘Did God say, “You shall not eat from any tree in the garden”?’ The woman said to the serpent, ‘We may eat of the fruit of the trees in the garden; but God said, “You shall not eat of the fruit of the tree that is in the middle of the garden, nor shall you touch it, or you shall die.” ’ But the serpent said to the woman, ‘You will not die; for God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.’ So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate; and she also gave some to her husband, who was with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together and made loincloths for themselves. (Genesis 3:1-7)

So what did the congregations miss, and why might it be important? They missed the story of the creation of the animals, the creation of woman, and God's intention for the sexes.

Its all in Genesis 2.18-25,

 Then the Lord God said, ‘It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper as his partner.’ So out of the ground the Lord God formed every animal of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every animal of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper as his partner. So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and he slept; then he took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh. And the rib that the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said,

‘This at last is bone of my bones   and flesh of my flesh;this one shall be called Woman,   for out of Man this one was taken.’ 

Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed. 

If Sunday church goers miss out on the story of the creation of woman out of man, they might wind up falling for the sexual worldview of the current age which denies God's creative act and denies the purpose of the two sexes.

It is quite possible that the lack of adequate teaching from the Church about God's plan for the sexes is a contributing factor to today's gender confused society.

And the Revised Common Lectionary may shoulder some of the blame.

Powerplay: TEC Extorts Its 15%, Episcopal Diocese of Central Florida Caves

Oh, those tricky Episcopalians. They passed a resolution at their 2015 General Convention that I missed. Buried in Resolution D013 was the following wording.

(f) Full payment of the diocesan assessment shall be required of all Dioceses, effective January 1, 2019.
(g) Effective January 1, 2016 Council shall have the power to grant waivers from the full annual assessments of Dioceses within the limit established by the General Convention. Any diocese may appeal to Executive Council for a waiver of the assessment, in full or in part, on the basis of financial hardship, a stated plan for working toward full payment, or other reasons as agreed with the Executive Council. Effective January 1, 2019, failure to make full payment or to receive a waiver shall render the diocese ineligible to receive grants or loans from the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society unless approved by Executive Council.

The Episcopal pledge was not required in the past and many parishes who disagreed with the pro-abortion, pro-gay ordination, pro-same-sex marriage stances of TEc tried to not contribute to the larger organization by designating their diocesan pledge to be used solely for the purposes of their diocese. 

In times when the budget of the Episcopal Diocese of Upper South Carolina was tight, some of us asked for a cut in the Episcopal pledge. All such suggestions were quashed by the Bishops at those times.

It appears that Resolution D013 was worded to give struggling dioceses a waiver. I suspect the rump dioceses, small groups of parishes that decided to stay in TEc after the majority of a diocese departed, were the intended beneficiaries of this largess. 

The reality of this resolution is slowly sinking in at the diocesan level, but TEc loyalists, like my past bishops, will probably succeed in furthering the progressive agenda by passing resolutions in support of paying the full ask from 815. The Diocese of Central Florida recently did just that.

From the Episcopal Diocese of Central Florida comes the following,

Debate Heats Up Over Mandatory 15 Percent Assessment
February 1, 2017  

In an otherwise calm and orderly convention, the heat rose during the discussion period R-1 Episcopal Church Assessment, the mandatory 15 percent assessment scheduled to begin Jan. 1, 2019.

After years of using an “asking formula,” the National Church changed the wording to “mandatory” with Resolution D013 at the 78th General Convention in 2015 and set by Resolution C001. In the past, under the asking formula, a parish suffered no consequences if it did not contribute to the National Church.

Currently, the assessment stands at 16.5 percent. Some parishes, which oppose certain rules set forth by the National Church, pay their money to the Diocese of Central Florida, but ask their money not be sent to the National Church. Those parishes will not have that option when the 15 percent assessment takes effect. Without getting a waiver, a diocese that does not pay the full assessment will be unable to get grants or loans from the Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society, the name under which The Episcopal Church is incorporated, conducts business, and carries out mission.

“I heartily support the efforts being made to find ways for us as a diocese to meet the 15 percent financial assessment voted on by General Convention,” said the Rt. Rev. Bishop Gregory O. Brewer during his State of the Diocese Address. “Among other reasons, because the financial funding brings integrity to the work for change. And the work for change brings integrity to the financial funding. The two go hand-in-hand. As it might be said crassly, ‘Put your money where your mouth is.’ And that’s what I’m committed to us doing.”

After heated and impassionate pleas from both sides, R-1 passed with a significant number of dissenting votes. 

To download the full resolution, click here.

I had to laugh when I read that classic bit of Episcobabble from Bishop Brewer,

“Among other reasons, because the financial funding brings integrity to the work for change. And the work for change brings integrity to the financial funding."

 There are a few reasonable pewsitters left in Central Florida, and one was actually quoted in the article,

“One word: mandatory. That’s a tax. I want to be able to give freely. It’s not too cheerful if they have your arm behind your back. I have no problem with the 15 percent as opposed to the 10 percent. It would make all the difference in the world to me if they took out that one word—mandatory.”
—Dr. Larry Warren, St. Andrews’, Ft. Pierce

 If I was a member of a church in Bishop Brewer's diocese, I would stop putting money in the plate because to give is to support the extortionists at 815 who are going to use the money to push their progressive agenda and who will continue to fund pro-abortion groups such as the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice (formerly known as the Religious Coalition for Abortion Rights).

Sadly, most pewsitters are unaware of where their pledge dollars are going.

Sad but true.

We Too Can Hear the Voice From Heaven

This Sunday's lectionary will have many pewsitters listening to Matthew 17:1-9 and his account of The Transfiguration.

Six days later, Jesus took with him Peter and James and his brother John and led them up a high mountain, by themselves. And he was transfigured before them, and his face shone like the sun, and his clothes became dazzling white. Suddenly there appeared to them Moses and Elijah, talking with him. Then Peter said to Jesus, ‘Lord, it is good for us to be here; if you wish, I will make three dwellings here, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah.’ While he was still speaking, suddenly a bright cloud overshadowed them, and from the cloud a voice said, ‘This is my Son, the Beloved; with him I am well pleased; listen to him!’ When the disciples heard this, they fell to the ground and were overcome by fear. But Jesus came and touched them, saying, ‘Get up and do not be afraid.’ And when they looked up, they saw no one except Jesus himself alone. As they were coming down the mountain, Jesus ordered them, ‘Tell no one about the vision until after the Son of Man has been raised from the dead.’

Last year we were treated to Luke's version and I took the opportunity to point out the times in the Gospels that God the Father speaks. Since I am on the road today, I would ask you for your prayers for safe travels (especially through Atlanta), and to please look again at last year's post which I copied below,

"Listen to Him"

The Gospel reading from Luke 9:28-36,(37-43a) contains the story of the Transfiguration of Jesus, and in this we hear a voice from the clouds,

Now about eight days after these sayings Jesus took with him Peter and John and James, and went up on the mountain to pray. And while he was praying, the appearance of his face changed, and his clothes became dazzling white. Suddenly they saw two men, Moses and Elijah, talking to him. They appeared in glory and were speaking of his departure, which he was about to accomplish at Jerusalem. Now Peter and his companions were weighed down with sleep; but since they had stayed awake, they saw his glory and the two men who stood with him. Just as they were leaving him, Peter said to Jesus, ‘Master, it is good for us to be here; let us make three dwellings, one for you, one for Moses, and one for Elijah’—not knowing what he said. While he was saying this, a cloud came and overshadowed them; and they were terrified as they entered the cloud. Then from the cloud came a voice that said, ‘This is my Son, my Chosen; listen to him!’ When the voice had spoken, Jesus was found alone. And they kept silent and in those days told no one any of the things they had seen.

The voice of God coming from a cloud is also found in Mark and Matthew,

Mark 9:7 And a cloud overshadowed them, and a voice came out of the cloud, “This is my beloved Son; listen to him.”

Matthew 17:5 He was still speaking when, behold, a bright cloud overshadowed them, and a voice from the cloud said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased; listen to him.”

The voice parallels what the voice heard at the time of Jesus' baptism (which is another event repeated in all of the synoptic Gospels),

Mark 1:11  And a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.”

Matthew 3:17 and behold, a voice from heaven said, “This is my beloved Son, with whom I am well pleased.”

Luke 3:22  and the Holy Spirit descended on him in bodily form, like a dove; and a voice came from heaven, “You are my beloved Son; with you I am well pleased.”

The Gospel of John does not include these, but instead recalls a voice from heaven near the end of Jesus' life,

John 12:27-28 “Now is my soul troubled. And what shall I say? ‘Father, save me from this hour’? But for this purpose I have come to this hour. Father, glorify your name.” Then a voice came from heaven: “I have glorified it, and I will glorify it again.”

How many times do we pray to hear God's voice?

Why do we feel disappointed when we do not get an answer when the answer is staring us in the face?

"Listen to Him"

And how can we hear the voice from heaven?

By opening up those dusty Bibles and reading what God has to say!

Would Curry and Jennings Share the Same Bathroom? They Want Texans To

The Episcopal organization is led by The Most Rev. Michael B. Curry, presiding bishop and The Rev. Gay Clark Jennings, President, House of Deputies. They just cannot keep their noses out of the loo. I knew they were close, but their opposition to separate-sex restrooms as stated in the letter quoted below sent to the Speaker of the House of the state of Texas has me wondering if Curry and Jennings would object to sharing the same bathroom themselves?

I apologize for planting that image in anyone's mind.

"January 30, 2017
The Honorable Joe Straus Speaker of the House
P.O. Box 2910
Austin, Texas 78768 

Dear Speaker Straus: 

Thank you for your stand against Senate Bill 6. As the presiding officers of the Episcopal Church, we are firmly opposed to this legislation and condemn its discriminatory intent."

It is now a form of malevolent discrimination to separate the sexes.

"We reject the notion that transgender people do not deserve equal civil rights and protection under the law."

Going to any potty of your choice is now a civil right.

"We affirm the dignity of all of God’s people, for we are all equally children of God, as the prophet Malachi declared when he wrote: “Have we not all one father? Has not one God created us?” (Mal. 2:10)"

There goes the Episcopal 1979 Baptismal Covenant argument again, and here I go again repeating what I have said before: "The meaning of 'dignity' has become so perverted that today when any of our selfish desires is denied, it amounts to an attack on our dignity. If a man says he is a woman and you say 'No, you are a man', you guilty of not respecting his dignity."

"As you are no doubt aware, this is not the first time that the segregation of bathrooms and public facilities has been used to stigmatize minority groups. 'Bathroom bills,' as they are sometimes called, were passed during the Jim Crow era, and the bogus rationale advanced then is the same bogus rationale being advanced now: the safety of women and children who are no way under threat."

 There is no comparison between racial segregation and separation of the sexes, but that won't stop the strawman from being built.

"The Executive Council of the Episcopal Church has stood against fear and in support of God’s love by passing a resolution that reaffirms the church’s support of local, state and federal laws that prevent discrimination based on gender identity or gender expression."

In case you missed it, an accusation of fear mongering is hidden in that statement and is a common tactic used by the radical left to paint conservatives as mean-spirited and hateful creatures.

"The resolution also states our opposition to any legislation that seeks to deny the dignity, equality, and civil rights of transgender people."

The same argument they used earlier except with the addition of "equality". How is the law to treat someone who one day can ask for equal treatment as a male and on the next day can demand equal treatment as a female? Prisons are facing that problem with men asking to be transferred to the women's prison because of a change in their gender identity.

"The need for voices of conscience is urgent at this moment, because laws like the one proposed in Texas target some of the most vulnerable people in our communities. In a 2011 survey, 78 percent of transgender people said that they had been bullied or harassed in childhood;"

 "Cis-gendered" children and teens also report being bullied. I have seen numbers as high as 83 percent of girls, and 79 percent of boys reporting being bullied either in school or online. I think it all depends on what one considers being bullied. These days, in our hypersensitive age, creating a "microaggression" is considered an act of bullying.

"41 percent said they had attempted suicide; 35 percent had been assaulted and 12 percent had suffered a sexual assault. Almost half of transgender people who responded to the survey said they had suffered job discrimination, and almost a fifth had lost housing or been denied health care due to their gender identity or expression."

 Curry and Jennings are implying that people who support separate restrooms for men and women  might be guilty of causing the untimely deaths of transgender people.

"For us, as Episcopalians, the proposed Texas law is of particular concern. We are currently scheduled to hold our triennial General Convention—a nine-day event that includes as many as 10,000 people—in Austin in July 2018. Our church is proudly diverse: racially, economically, and in terms of sexual orientation and gender identity. At our conventions, we are duty-bound to ensure that all of our people are treated with respect, that their safety is guaranteed, and that our investment in the local economy of our host city reflects our values.
In 1955 we were forced to move a General Convention from Houston to another state because Texas laws prohibited black and white Episcopalians from being treated equally. We would not stand then for Episcopalians to be discriminated against, and we cannot countenance it now. We would be deeply grieved if Senate Bill 6 presented us with the same difficult choice that church leaders faced more than sixty years ago."

It would be no loss to the state of Texas if the Episcopal General Convention cancels its plans. In fact, it might be better for the spiritual health of all Texans if that triennial affront to the Gospel is sent to another state.

"We urge you to remain steadfast in your opposition to Senate Bill 6 and any similar bill that might be introduced in the Texas House, and we thank you for your commitment to keeping Texas a welcoming state for all of God’s children."

 Texas welcomes all but kindly asks them to use the facilities that correspond to their biological parts.

"Faithfully,
The Most Rev. Michael B. Curry, presiding bishop
The Rev. Gay Clark Jennings, President, House of Deputies"

I am sure they have faith in something, but it is not shared by the vast majority of faithful Anglicans.

All this leaves me wondering if Curry and Jennings have enough faith to share the bathroom with each other?

I resist the evil ones, I don't give to beggars, can't love some enemies, am terribly shy, and cannot be perfect

This Sunday's reading from Matthew 5:38-48 concludes a four week walk through Matthew 5. Once again, Jesus challenges us to the point where we should realize that try as we might, we are going to need help if we are to see the Kingdom of God.

 “You have heard that it was said, ‘An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.’ But I say to you, Do not resist the one who is evil.

I resisted an evil one in a blog post. Strike one.

But if anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to him the other also.  And if anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well.  And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.  Give to the one who begs from you, and do not refuse the one who would borrow from you. 

I passed a beggar the other day, Strike two.

 “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be sons of your Father who is in heaven. For he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the just and on the unjust. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same?

Does not hating your enemies count? Strike three.

 And if you greet only your brothers, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?

Hey, I went up to a stranger and greeted them yesterday, but he was a brother in Christ so I guess that is strike four.

  You therefore must be perfect, as your heavenly Father is perfect. (ESV) 

I guess that counts me out. I don't even belong in the same ballpark with Jesus.

Still, as imperfect a bench warmer as I am, I trust that he will deliver me.

Thanks be to God.

Norwegians chasing Swedes thjrough the wjeeds in rush to create a gender neutral pronoun

When I was a child, my grandmother taught me a little song causing me to be forever believing the myth of Norwegian superiority. It went like this, 

"Ten thousand Swedes ran through the weeds,
chased by one Norwegian.
Ten thousand more ran to the shore
in the battle of Copenhagen."

Alas, the myth has been busted with the recent news that Norway is considering adding a third gender to government documents, and not only that, they are following Sweden's example! My grandmother would be shocked to learn of the "Swedenization" of her ancestral home.

The article, "Could Norway follow Sweden’s lead and introduce a third gender?", appeared at The Local, Norway's news in English on 6 February 2017,   

Could Norway follow Sweden’s lead and introduce a third gender? 

The leader of Labour's youth wing said that Norwegians should be able to identify themselves whoever they want in their passports and other official documents.Norway’s Labour Party, the largest party in parliament, will consider backing the introduction of a third gender, broadcaster NRK reported.Labour’s programme committee will debate the introduction of the third gender category so that Norwegians would no longer need to define themselves as male or female in their passports and other official documents.

A third gender? That seems so unfair to all the other possible gender identities out there. Facebook has identified 58 gender options (see list here).

Norway may ignore all those alternative identities and follow Sweden's example by coming up with one "generic" category.

Although the proposal is only under the early stages of consideration, Labour committee member Mani Hussaini suggested that Norway should follow the lead of neighbouring Sweden, which adopted the gender neutral pronoun ‘hen’ into official use in April 2015. 

"Hen" would not work in English speaking countries for obvious reasons. Immigration officials might have a bit of a problem as well figuring out how to classify a new arrival, and maybe that is why Norway is doing this. Perhaps Norwegian customs agents are seeing a few "hens" come across the border and the agents are being put in the awkward position of asking if they are a "han" or a "hun",

Hussaini, who is the leader of Labour's youth wing AUF, said ‘hen’ could also be used in Norwegian as a gender-neutral alternative to ‘han’ (he) and ‘hun’.

 Around here, "Hon" (short for Honey) is used in a gender neutral context.

The most revealing quote is the following,

“I believe that all people should be allowing to live out their identity and thus the law should adapt to reality rather than the other way around,” Hussaini said. 

"The law should adapt to reality" is exactly the same reasoning used by the Episcopal organization's progressive leaders to change its doctrines on divorce, remarriage, and same-sex marriage. This will also be the reasoning for gender neutral language in new liturgies that are to be put forward as prayer book revision moves forward.

We can blame it all on those cowardly Swedes who made it official two years ago.

The Swedish Academy agreed to include ‘hen’ in its official dictionary, Svenska Akademiens ordlista, in 2015.

Red Stangland who placed Minnesota Norwegian humor on the map may have to re-write his version of "The Battle of Copenahgen" which went like this,

Ten thousand Swedes ran through the weeds,
chased by one Norwegian.
Ten thousand more ran to the shore
in the battle of Copenhagen.

Way, way back in history,
back when the world was new,
norwegian searched all over,
to find some snoose to chew.

They fished for Lutefisk and Torsk,
it helped to make them strong,
and you and me, we know a Norsk,
cannot do nothing wrong.

But swedes and danes were envious
of Viking trips and raids.
The Viking shields and helmet horns,
made all those folks affraid.

Throughout the world the Vikings sailed,
to Ireland and to France.
The even found America,
one afternoon by chance.

My grandpa says, and he should know,
the swedes made up the minds.
To beat the Norsky Vikings,
and kick a few behinds.

But history, so grandpa says,
show that the Norskies won.
They clobbered all the swedes and danes,
and made it lots of fun.

Ten thousand swedes ran through the weeds,
chased by one norwegian.

The dust from the weeds,
made snoose for the swedes,
and they called it Copenhagen,

E. C. Stangland