Posted on 12/30/2006 9:26:49 AM PST by sionnsar
A reader of this blog sent me an email thread from a certain Yahoo group on the Episcopal Church. It basically confirms what I’ve been reading on the HOBD listserv. The liberals are freaked out that their beloved +Katherine might not be treated as an equal at the Primates’ meeting, and might be the recipient of a judgment suspending TEC from the Anglican Communion. It galls the heck out of them that Windsor bishops might be present at the meeting to tell another side of the Episcopal Church story. It drives them up a wall that some of their own might not get invitations to Lambeth and yet some bishops of the AMIA and perhaps the CANA bishop might get invitations to Lambeth. Considering that Martyn Minns is a member of the Compass Rose Society, I’m sure he will get a Lambeth invitation, just as Sandy Millar will.
What is also interesting of late is the upteenth study that shows conservatives give more than liberals of their time, treasure and talent. The end game in all of this Anglican debacle mess is that liberals want conservative money to spend. The conservative LAITY (despite all the asseverations that conservative activism is largely spearheaded by power hungry clergy) want some say in how their money is spent. There is a conservative doctor in my parish who bugs me every Sunday about how the Episcopal Church spends their money. He met with the rector, at my suggestion, and none of his pledge is going to 815 due to TEC’s ties to communist Cuba, abortion, you name it. The rector, a moderate who is very loyal to TEC, agreed to his request to redirect his money to the local ministry and mission of the church.
Bishop Louttit obviously get this. Frankly, the whole Connecticut Six business wouldn’t have happened if conservatives had fed the liberal money monkey. Frankly, they just couldn’t. The Church of England covenant also comes down to money. Conservative churches in the Global South won’t take money tainted by liberal hands.
While a number of liberals keep saying, oh, let the conservatives just leave, we can all be who we are supposed to be then, and move on. Those folks tend to be laity or clergy in congregations who are self supporting. Liberals depending on the church dole, however, freak out when the idea of conservative money and property walking out the door is floated.
Folks like N.T. Wright have complained, and quite rightly, that folks of the Church Catholic shouldn’t do this sort of thing. However, I have to harp on the same point I’ve made time and again, church is a voluntary thing. Unfortunately, Tom, people aren’t going to give money to that which they don’t trust and believe in.
Therein lies the big rub in all this.
All the while, the HOBD listserv is bantering about who should read the Gospel during the service. I just worry that they don’t really believe the Gospel.
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. John Stossel's latest 20/20 report ... points out that more than 80 percent of philanthropic giving and volunteering in this country is done by conservatives. The study done over years, according to Stossel, by a self-proclaimed liberal professor at Syracuse University, showed liberals are far less likely to give to any charities, volunteer or even give blood, so this study encompasses every aspect of "personal" giving.
Data proves conservatives will donate more often and give more, even when they have less of an income than their liberal counterpart. It was shown that liberals in general do not feel giving is a personal responsibility, and their reasoning somehow transfers responsibility onto the government.
That explains why "liberals" want to increase government and social programs. It seems a bit ironic that those who give and volunteer the least are the ones that scream the loudest about increasing the already inefficient government programs to help the less fortunate.
But, it's not just being conservative that makes more people give. Apparently, it's a combination of religion and conservatism. Stossel writes that religious people are more likely to give money to charities, and give four times as much when they donate. In fact, religious participation is the single largest predictor of whether someone will give.
"... the HOBD listserv is bantering about who should read the Gospel during the service. I just worry that they don’t really believe the Gospel." No need to worry ... they've proven they do not in fact believe the Gospel.
Talk abou a scam - liberals spending conservative money, and not wanting the conservatives to have a say in how it is spent!
That's a fact of life here in the Peoples' Soviet of Washington.
Brad Drell should be aware that money is fungible, and that even if the conservative doctor's contribution is nominally being applied only to local ministry, more of someone else's contribution will be directed to 815 in its stead.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.