Replies

This is just plain silly.

What is s vestry doing anyway taking up "yes or "no" positions on the Iraqi War.

What were they going to do, declare St. John 'O The Woods an Underwear-On-The-Head-Free-Zone?

And why is this parish so disorganized that the rector has to stop in procession and recruit ushers?

And what in name of God does any of this have to do with Griswold's apostasy?

No wonder the Episcopalian Church (as we call it down South) is rapidly dwindling away to nothing.

Oops, my error. Vietnam war (several hours between when I read the entire piece and then posted.) But here's why the Vestry was involved:

"The rector received a letter informing us that a group of young Episcopalians from the Seattle area were planning to participate in an anti-war march in San Francisco during the coming week-end. They asked us to make our parish hall available as lodging for them. The rector promptly called a meeting of the vestry and laid the request before us."

As regards this kind of disorganization -- it can happen to the best at times.

As regard's Griswold's apostasy, the question is in the last line quoted. It is my opinion that a false parallel is being drawn. What do you think?

Thanks for the further explanation - I suppose I could have broken out of my laziness and read the whole piece myself, but it is so much easier to rely on your regular posting. Thanks. It has been very helpful during these days. You are a worthy Joshua to Arlen's Moses.

In my own parish we have political liberals and conservatives, and I have no problems taking communion together, but we are all believing Christians, regardless of our political beliefs. I have to conclude that the same is not true is not true of the supporters of these latest innovations. They are no longer believing Christians.

I think the invocation of the Eucharistic rupture as somehow making the Global South Primates unchristian is a usual liberal strawman. The issue is not the same as Griswold & Co appearing at the altar rail and being denied communion. Rather the refusal to engage in a joint Eucharist is merely the promised fruit of Griswold's apostasy.

In October 2003 Griswold signed the communique recognizing that if the "consecration" of Robinson proceeded, it would tear at the very fabric of our communion. When he went ahead anyway, many primates declared a broken or impaired communion with ECUSA. Why is anyone surprised that broken communion means no joint communion?

This morning, I read in the Book of Numbers about the Children of Israel's revolt when the spies returned from the promised land. After Moses interceded for them, God spared them, but declared they would have to wander for an addiitonal 40 years. Some then tried to attack the Amalekites anyway (they were defeated).

I was reminded of my own children who misbehave, are punished, yet refuse to understand that their actions have consequences. The liberals of ECUSA still seem to be in denial that their actions have consequences.