Posted on 06/20/2006 9:04:57 AM PDT by Warhammer
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Episcopalians passed a resolution expressing "regret" for consecrating a homosexual bishop in 2003, but not "repentance" as many of the world's Anglican archbishops have urged. The resolution that apologized to other Anglicans for not taking into account "the impact of our actions" was passed the same day as the newly elected presiding bishop played up the divisions within worldwide Anglicanism by saying homosexuality is not a sin. Meanwhile yesterday, a key conservative bishop responded to the election of Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori by asking the worldwide head of the Anglican Communion for "alternate oversight" under a foreign archbishop who holds the traditional church teaching on homosexuality and female ordination. The resolution of regret, which passed the Episcopal House of Deputies 563-267, also must pass the House of Bishops, which will consider it today at the denomination's triennial General Convention meeting in Columbus, Ohio. -snip- Members of Integrity, the church's homosexual caucus, said the Episcopal Church will not back down from its advocacy of same-sex unions and homosexual bishops. "I see no energy in this house to turn back the clock," said the Rev. Susan Russell, Integrity president. "The vote [for Bishop Schori] yesterday is a sign the House wants to move forward. "Offering a challenge to the Anglican Communion is not a negative thing. Hopefully, 30 years from now, I'll be back here in my wheelchair to see them elect a gay and lesbian presiding bishop."
(Excerpt) Read more at washingtontimes.com ...
They have pretty much told the rest of the Anglican Communion to go pound sand. I wonder if the Communion will stand their ground and excommunicate (can the Anglicans do that or is that just a Catholic thing) the Episcopal Church.
Personally, I predict a lot of new Anglican churches here in the U.S. pretty quickly.
COLUMBUS, Ohio -- Episcopalians passed a resolution expressing "regret" for consecrating a homosexual bishop in 2003, but not "repentance" as many of the world's Anglican archbishops have urged.
The resolution that apologized to other Anglicans for not taking into account "the impact of our actions" was passed the same day as the newly elected presiding bishop played up the divisions within worldwide Anglicanism by saying homosexuality is not a sin.
Meanwhile yesterday, a key conservative bishop responded to the election of Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori by asking the worldwide head of the Anglican Communion for "alternate oversight" under a foreign archbishop who holds the traditional church teaching on homosexuality and female ordination.
The resolution of regret, which passed the Episcopal House of Deputies 563-267, also must pass the House of Bishops, which will consider it today at the denomination's triennial General Convention meeting in Columbus, Ohio.
-snip-
Members of Integrity, the church's homosexual caucus, said the Episcopal Church will not back down from its advocacy of same-sex unions and homosexual bishops.
"I see no energy in this house to turn back the clock," said the Rev. Susan Russell, Integrity president. "The vote [for Bishop Schori] yesterday is a sign the House wants to move forward.
"Offering a challenge to the Anglican Communion is not a negative thing. Hopefully, 30 years from now, I'll be back here in my wheelchair to see them elect a gay and lesbian presiding bishop."
So, you're saying having a "visible person in charge like the catholics have in the historicity of the papacy" ensures their claim is true?
ping
It is the homosexual rape of a diseased church before our very eyes. They are snakes; reprobates revelling in their own perversion and encouraging others to do same. Should be a prime example of what will happen when the church is not vigilant to distance themselves from evil and resist them. Grace without repentance is not God's love but a counterfeit.
The comment about oversight doesn't wash. It is about obedience and submission in the church to Biblical authority. The Episcopals have blasphemed their way to debauchery and destruction; I pray it comes sooner rather than later.
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams.
FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this moderately high-volume ping list (typically 3-9 pings/day).
This list is pinged by sionnsar, Huber and newheart.
Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com
More Anglican articles here.
Humor: The Anglican Blue (by Huber)
Speak the truth in love. Eph 4:15
And yet the Orthodox manage it.
The New Day is almost upon them.
The tyrannical Homosexual Arrogance Movement takes its latest victim.
Yeah... I am gonna say this once, and I am absolutely sure that I am not the only one who feels this way.
If they want a feel good church then they can certainly have a feel good church... of their own making. There is no need to divide an conquer as they are doing in the ECUSA.
This isn't part of our federal or state government, so there isn't really a need for a homosexual insterest group. It's CHURCH for goodness sake. If they don't like it they can go somewhere else or create their own. Why oh WHY do they feel the need to stomp on everyone else's faith? (because they are unrepentant and wish to believe whatever they want) IF they have (and most certainly have) departed from the historical Christian teachings, then depart already and leave the Church alone.
What an utter waste of time and money.
< /vent>
Which is why, obviously, the Reformation occurred, and the Council of Trent was necessary....
The papacy has advantages and disadvantages, just as decentralized churches do. The papacy can be a Good Thing if you have a good, faithful, humble pope who is served by a good, faithful, humble bureaucracy. As the example of the pre-Reformation church demonstrates, that can a Bad Thing if your church does not have those characteristics.
The example of the Anglican Communion shows the other side of this: there is no clear mechanism for addressing heresies, even when they're obvious as such.
As with all things, churches are Of Men, and thus prey to the sins of men. God will do as He must to keep His word alive.
On the other hand, western Christianity has splintered thousands of times since the great schism, usually attended with different doctrines.
The Orthodox faith is the property of all Orthodox believers. That is one of its strengths and why it has not been subject to doctrinal change. Since the authority lies in the Faith, and not in men, it cannot be changed by those who wish to move with trends (like TEC).
Many former Episcopalians, like me, have become Orthodox precisely because we suffered through so much misrule at the hands of men (and women).
I respect Roman Catholicism greatly (my best friend is a Roman Catholic who describes Catholicism and Orthodoxy as the two lungs of the Body of Christ). I could not become Catholic because I am afraid that the Catholic Church will be the next target of these loathsome heretics. I am so tired of seeing everything I love cheapened, mocked and ruined. I pray that my family and I will not have to go through it again.
And I pray for the Roman Catholic Church and Holy Father Benedict. May his arm be strengthened for the battle that is already upon us.
How Christian of you. :)
No offense intended, PG, but you're seriously misguided if that's what you really think. You've made the mistake of thinking this is an isolated thing.
But to the folks who are radicalizing the ECUSA (and the Presbyterians, and the Methodists, and the Lutherans, and....) there is NO DIFFERENCE between the church and the federal or state governments. It's not mere coincidence that the exact same issues are being fought by the exact same people in every walk of life. (You forgot to include Big Business in your list, btw.)
It's all part of the same battle. They do need to divide and conquer -- each and every institution that stands in their way. One of our side's biggest mistakes has been our failure to recognize the nature of the war.
What do you think of Paul's comments about what the church should do to those who corrupt the church? Do you think it was "Christian"? The Christian faith has been a tough love faith since its inceptions. Jesus was no wimp; he was a bold in your face kinda guy. We have been lulled into the perception he was a smarmy, humble, lowly person and HE WAS NOT. It takes someone concerned about those living in a pathological disease called sin to call it what it is. To do otherwise may seem charitable but it does nothing for the sinner.
Because they can't build their own church. They can't build their own governments, or any other kind of organization. There are no gay scouts; gays have not responded to "discriminatory" insurance practices by forming their own insurance companies. They do not wish to build, but to take over, to "improve."
Everyone else is the point. It's not about what they want, but what they want from you. It's not about how they are living their lives, but how you are living yours.
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.