It is the 4th of July

Hope everyone enjoys their Independence Day.

If You Build It They Will Come

In a recent post on Off-Topic Allowed I spoke about how to begin to rebuild the Anglican Communion.  It is imperative that we begin, if not just as was laid out in that post then something similar and something very, very soon.  The other thing I would suggest is that the Episcopal Church subsidizes the entire conference, that will help those less fortunate and will demonstrate both our sincerity and our devotion. 

One of the major outcomes will be a renewed interest in the Anglican Church (the only Real Anglicans in the United States belong to the Episcopal Church) throughout the world.  See, we do not need to worry about "our numbers".  We are not GAFCON/FCA/AMiA/AMiE/CANA/and all the other alphabet soup, we are the real Anglican Communion dedicated to demonstrating throughout the world that there Christ is alive and well and bringing the gospel message to everyone in the world.  We are not exclusive, we are not bound by numbers, we are not hate-based, we are not condemning.  We are resoundingly based in the gospel, both the two Great Commandments and Matthew 25 for starters.  We care about people not numbers and we care about including everyone and not excluding anyone.  We are about a Eucharistic centered, prayer based, Christ centered world-wide work that celebrates our differences and rejoices in our Christ-centeredness.  We take seriously, in fact one of our main goals is to feed the hungry, clothe the naked, visit the sick, elevate the poor, share all our abundant resources joyfully and freely excluding no one and lifting every single person up both one at a time and collectively.

In this new Anglican Communion we need to demonstrate that we care less about what our neighbor is or is not doing and we focus on our relationship with God and our relationship with our neighbor.  That is what matters and that is what we work on.  When we share the peace we forgive our brothers and sisters because Christ has taught us to do that and we receive communion with everyone.

Yes, fellow Anglicans, "if you build it they will most assuredly come."

SPREADing the Manure

There is a "new" name amongst the Conelonialists, Charles Raven.  His little slice of heaven is called SPREAD - yes and acronym for The Society for the Propagation of Reformed Evangelical Anglican Doctrine .  And, I would believe that Charles Raven is the chief spreader.  The Head Spread, if you will.  He, like so many of his brethren are one sided and his argumentation  is based on "My way or the highway".  Where this guy came from I am not sure nor who he really is but I know where he is going.  Let me SPREAD some information:

The Society is dedicated to the preservation and propagation of the reformed Christian faith as classically expressed in the Anglican Formularies, the Thirty-nine Articles, the 1662 Book of Common Prayer and the Ordinal.

Here is his tie to the Conelonialists:


In 1999 the then diocesan bishop publicly disowned Resolution 1.10 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference which reaffirmed biblical teaching on sexuality. As a result St John’s, under Charles’ leadership, broke fellowship with the bishop as a matter of biblical conscience and in 2002 it became necessary to continue as a self funded mission congregation outside the official structures of the Church of England, now known as Christ Church Wyre Forest.

And renowned writer and great theologian that he is he has come up with this little gem almost ALL BY HIMSELF.

Events between the 1998 and 2008 Lambeth Conferences demonstrate decisively that the Communion's present "instruments of unity", including the See of Canterbury itself, are no longer fit for purpose when confronted with deep theological confusion in which evil is held out as good and good as evil. A merely institutional unity not firmly rooted in the revealed truths of God's Word written is not only counterfeit but also toxic, exposing the whole Communion to the false teaching and immorality absorbed by the Western Churches.

As I wrote earlier, we are headed down a one-way road that ends with a train wreck.  The AMiE will turn out the current Church of England and "recreate  itself anew".  If the Archbishop of Canterbury does not start with eliminating these cancers from the body of the Anglican Communion the Communion will die -- at least ass we know it. 

I have been harping on  this very issue for months and months to no avail.  If you, the Archbishop of Canterbury and his henchmen do not get with the program pretty damn quick the Archbishop of Canterbury is going to be the Archbishop of weareallburied.

As to our formal SPREADERS, you will be outed along with your Latimer Trust and every other group that supports your hatred and spews your lies. 

Still more to come!

When Is A Poke In the Eye -- Just A Poke In the Eye?

Well folks, the report from the SCCC is released  and can be found at The Lead.  Thanks to Jim Naughton for all his labor and intense pressure brought to bear on the Executive Council to have the report released.  This document is a long, thoughtful and precise examination of the impact of the Anglican Covenant on the Constitutions and Canons of the Episcopal Church in he United States of America.  I sure hope it makes everyone feel better.

The Anglican Covenant was borne out of a combination of hate by the Global South Primates and a lustful desire for power that only can be satisfied by being the absolute ruler.  In this case, Robert Duncan, John David Schofield, Jack Iker, Peter Jensen, Peter Akinola, Micael Nazir-Ali, Henri Luke Orombi and several others want to play "god".  They have placed scripture as the end all and be all AND have positioned themselves as the only true doctors of the church that not only can understand scripture but can interpret it as well!

What do they hate?  They hate any and all LGBT persons who have been called by our Savior to be included in the full life of the church.  They hate women, especially those in powerful positions such as priest, bishops and presiding bishops.  These primates and would be pretenders to the throne will not even take communion with the Presiding Bishop of our Episcopal Church. 

The Windsor Report gave the Global South the opportunity to band together to steal property from the Episcopal Church, the Anglican Church of Canada, and soon, the Church of England.  While they were doing that, providing a safe haven for thieves and deposed bishops and priests, we were distracted by the wonderful Archbishop of Canterbury telling us we had violated the Windsor Report and slapping our wrists.  And we, the Episcopal Church in the United States of America took it. We wrung our hands and tried to figure out how to play nice because that is what everyone asked us to do and we are the good child and follow our parents command.

Then the Global South/FCA and all the alphabet soup came up with this Anglican Covenant thingy.  We talked about and through it for four iterations.  All the while GAFCON and the Jerusalem Document was formed/written, the ACNA Province was formed and made Robert Duncan a provincial ruler -- yep, a deposed bishop gets to play with the big boys while we were wrestling with the iterations of the Anglican Covenant.

In the next few weeks and months were are going to continue the debate over the adoption of this silly piece of paper in hopes that we can hold the Anglican Communion together.  Guess what?  The Global south does not care one whit about this document or the Anglican Communion.  They have called for another GAFCON conference with a pre-conference to be held in New York (how is that for a slap in the face/).  The FCA has set up shop calling themselves the AMiE so that they can be legitimized in the eyes of the Anglican Communion by being -- what else but Anglican.  They have also sent Martyn Minns to England to set up shop as well.

Hey, but we have this lengthy, well written, beautiful piece of work that has provided the Episcopal Church in the United States of America with a way to review and analyze the Anglican Covenant especially as it impacts our Constitutions and Canons.  We, collectively have spent more time on this one document throughout the Episcopal Church than we have spent on Episcopal Relief and Development in the last three years.  More time on the Anglican Communion than on seeking out ways to enforce the depositions of those who have stolen property from the four diocese.  We have spent more time on this document than on almost anything you can name.  And for what?  Do you think the Anglican Communion is going to last more than a few years?  At least as we know it? 

Once again we have spent more time on trying to figure out why we got poked in the eye with a sharp stick than is in our wildest imaginations even necessary.  The Anglican Covenant, the poke in the eye, is just that, a poke in the eye. 

Have we had enough time reacting to all the junk that has been thrown at us?  It is time to make some bold statements and  move forward. Give the Global South something to really talk and worry about,  they love numbers -- we love people -- they love buildings and cash -- we love Christ and the bringing His message to the world.  Can the Executive Council and the rest of the elite structure of our church stop being the patsie and start leading in such a way that those on the outside will want to come in to the inside.  Our tent is big -- we know that.  Let's by not only words but by actions show the world we belong to Christ and not to some Anglican Covenant.

It Is Too Late -- At Least For Some

Well, England is about to be invaded!  By whom you ask?  By those who would pretend to be Anglican and need a basis for claiming as such.  I have preached about this for almost all the time I have been blogging and now we are on the cusp of a New Anglican Communion, one that does not involve the Archbishop of Canterbury, and in fact does not involve the Church of England (as we know it) at all.

A new work is being performed by the global south/GAFCON/Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans.

Here is the beginning of the end:

The Anglican Mission in England (AMIE) held its inaugural event on Wednesday June 22 during an evangelical ministers’ conference in central London.
AMIE has been established as a society within the Church of England dedicated to the conversion of England and biblical church planting. There is a steering committee and a panel of bishops. The bishops aim to provide effective oversight in collaboration with senior clergy.

Yep, that which began in America and was fostered by the Archbishop of Canterbury in a crazy attempt to appease the Conelonialists has now come back to bite ++Rowan in of all places -- England!

And why?  Well the answer is fund in the following simple statement:

The AMIE will continue to encourage church planting and all forms of Christian witness in accord with the Jerusalem Statement of the GAFCON Conference in June 2008.

According to the Jerusalem Declaration the Archbishop of Canterbury is an antiquated idea that has become superfluous to the GAFCON congregations.  So, Martyn Minns is in and Rowan Williams is out.

What this group needs desperately, is a claim to English succession.  Planting the AMiE will give them that.  John David Schofield has said all along he will keep the Anglican Diocese of San Joaquin close to the Anglican Communion.  Now we know what he meant. 

In addition, they really do not need much out of England other than a few throwback bishops, preferably those that have been deposed so they will all look alike.  And, here is the kicker, I have to admit I was incredibly and devastatingly wrong about Mr. Robert Duncan.  I have said for years that he was pissed that a woman go t the job he so richly deserved and that he was out for his own province. Wrong, he is out for his own Communion!  Why have a diocese when one can have a province and why have a province when one can have a communion.

So, let's get back to arguing about the Anglican Covenant so that we do not have to worry about this.  If we do not feel stupid yet, just wait a little bit longer, it will become clearer in just a few months.

Archbishop Rowan Williams,  I will ask you a question someone once asked me, "Got your resume up to date?"

A Call To Disband the Communion Partners

                                     

There is a subversive group within the Episcopal Church in the United States designed to work from within to destroy the Episcopal Church.  For those of you who do not know it, it refers to itself as the Communion Partners.  In the interest of transparency, there are at least four former rectors from the diocese of San Joaquin that were mentored by Mr. John David Schofield. One of those authored the constitutional revisions that the Conelonialists used to split from the Episcopal Church of the United States.   The interesting thing (at least one) is that these folks will not step up to the plate and declare their allegiance to the Global South.  They would rather pretend (for the definition of pretend please ask Leonardo Ricardo, he can fill you in) they are "working within" the confines of the Episcopal Church for the betterment of the Episcopal Church.  But let's look at their actions as based on their own commitments.

What follows is a direct quote from the CP website (in black) and the editorial comments (in blue).
Purpose:
Communion Partners

• provide for those concerned a visible link to the Anglican Communion

The only real Anglicans in the United States belong to the Episcopal Church and we are already represented by the Presiding Bishop to the rest of the world.

Many within our dioceses and in congregations in other dioceses seek to be assured of their connection to the Anglican Communion. Traditionally, this has been understood in terms of bishop-to-bishop relationships. Communion Partners fleshes out this connection in a significant and symbolic way.

Again, the only real Anglicans in the United States are represented by the Presiding Bishop.  She, has and continues to reassure the entire Episcopal community within the United states that we are "connected".  I am unclear about this concept of "bishop to bishop" since each province is represented by the primate of that province.  Our basic relationship within the Anglican Communion is Primate to Primate.  The  Communion partners have violated this concept on a number of occasions including a surreptitious meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury that was never sanctioned by our Presiding Bishop.

• provide fellowship, support and a forum for mutual concerns between bishops

The House of Bishops in the United States provides a perfect opportunity for this.  The idea that a combination of rectors and renegade bishops can do this better through some back door methodology is pure pride.

The Communion Partner bishops share many concerns about the Anglican Communion and its future and look to work together with Primates and Bishops from the wider Communion. In addition, we believe we all have need of mutual encouragement, prayer, and reassurance. The Communion Partners will be a forum for these kinds of relationships.

This is not their role.  The role of a bishop is to provide pastoral care to their diocese.  The role of the primates is to discuss Anglican Communion relationships.  What pride! What ambition! Why do the diocese for which these power hungry folks come from allow them the time to do that.  I bet these bishops are the same ones that tell their diocese that they do not have the time to meet with each church on a yearly basis.

• provide a partnership to work toward the Anglican Covenant and according to Windsor Principles

This is not their job/role either.  They should be directing the affairs of their diocese and allow the House of Bishops and the House of Deputies to take care of these events.  They are usurping the role of the people who are elected and attend convention.

The Communion Partner bishops will work together according to the principles outlined in the Windsor Report and seek a comprehensive Anglican Covenant at the Lambeth Conference and beyond.

Once again, did the Presiding Bishop abdicate her role and did the deputies to convention abdicate their role so that this group that "clearly represents the majority of the Episcopal Church" could fill in for them?

This ragtag spawn of John David Schofield should be disbanded immediately.  We do not need a bunch of cowards to weak to declare their allegiance to the Global South and too lustful of power and too much like their "friends" in Fort Worth and Pittsburgh and San Joaquin to really be a part of the Episcopal Church in the United States of America.  Communion Partners please do not go away angry, just go away.

Let's Give The Anglican Covenant All The Time It Deserves

The Anglican Covenant was born out of a combination of pure hate and absolute lust.
Those who put forth the covenant, primarily the Global South better known as Conelonialists, determined a long time ago to kill the Episcopal Church in the United States of America.  As far as I can tell, the Anglican Church of Canada runs a real close second but the primary goal was/is to eliminate the Episcopal Church of the United States.  This group hates women, as does little Bobby Duncan and big old "Texas" Jack Iker and rolly polly John David Schofield.  It hates the LGBT community and has enlisted not only many unwitting laity from the United States but has found an incredibly strong financial partner in the Institute for Religion and Democracy.  But make no mistake, the goal since before the year 2000, was to put the Episcopal Church out of business.  But the ultimate result is for this group of primates, Orombi, Akinola, Duncan, Jensen, Venables, et al, is to either completely take over the Anglican Communion OR to form a new Anglican Communion and take it over.  In either case, and I believe they do not care which of these two results is the final one, they just want to be the power.  Yes, it is lust, but it is lusting for power. 

This group of primates, the Conelonialists, lust for power.  Therein may be the reason why they are so intent on distracting everyone by use (or abuse) of the LGBT community.  Read their documents from the Chapman Memo to the Jerusalem Declaration to everything in between.  They are a lustful bunch hell bent on taking all the power they can get and using it for their own advantage.  They accuse everyone else of carnal sins that violate the biblical commandments when all along it is they who are the real violators.  Their lust for power consumes them all and they will not stop until they have what they want.  Talk about out of control human beings, wow!  Read their statements and see if this is not a perfect match!

And, the Archbishop of Canterbury is knee deep in this as well, but for a slightly different reason.  He has been chosen by the Crown to lead the Church of England and by definition, the Anglican Communion.  Why does he do what he does, generally violating his own personal faith and principles to get there?  Because of power!  He has been "chosen by the crown" (read that by God) to lead his community and he dare not let it slip away.  Read the Archbishops books if you think it does not violate his personal beliefs.   His lust for power is one in holding the Communion together at all costs.  He does not want to be the Archbishop that under his watch witnessed the destruction of the Anglican empire!  So he balances everyone against the middle.  See his latest antics if you do not believe that, he is holding the communion together at all costs, including his own soul.  He cannot afford to have primates taking his power and wielding it like a sword cutting off "errant" provinces heads at a moments notice and on a whim.  No, no, no, that just will never do.  It is so messy and he can do so much better of a job.  He does not want a split communion even though by definition the Conelonialists cannot be Anglican without him.
So you see, this covenant is something no one should even spend a moments worth of time on since it is born out of hatred and lsut and will serve no good no matter how one has "wrapped the present".   But, we (as well as every other province) struggles to come to grips with a stupid, worthless document that will serve no one any good at all.  In the meantime, we watch as the Conelonialists continue their lustful charge for more power.  They set up offices in England, the call for another GAFCON conference and we fiddle while Rome burns.  If we do not snap out of this pretty quick we will deserve exactly what we get.

Ignorance Is Bliss

I believe this is the new mantra for the Conelonialists. Why do I believe that?  Well, the final Canadian Supreme Court decision has been out for days.  Many bloggers have picked up on it and written about it.  The problem is that none of the "biggies" have even mentioned the decision.  What is the decision, you may ask.  In a nutshell the Supreme Court of Canada has determined that the property that was stolen from the Anglican Church of Canada by the Conelonialists and there henchmen MUST be returned to the rightful owners, that would be the Anglican Church of Canada.  Let me say this one more time so that everyone can understand -- The one, final and complete decision in Canada is that ALL the property stolen by the friends of the Anglican Church in North America must be returned to the Anglican Church of Canada.

Now, this, it would seem is good news for us in San Joaquin, Fort Worth, Quincy, Virginia, Pittsburgh and while Canada has nothing to do with us here in the United States it is big news for us.  Except no one from Stand Limp to Title 1/9 and MJC and even Karaoke Land has never mentioned one word. 

The only thing I can posit is that ignorance is bliss -- but you already knew that.

Death Be Not Proud

DEATH be not proud, though some have called thee
Mighty and dreadfull, for, thou art not so,
For, those, whom thou think'st, thou dost overthrow,
Die not, poore death, nor yet canst thou kill me.
From rest and sleepe, which but thy pictures bee,	5
Much pleasure, then from thee, much more must flow,
And soonest our best men with thee doe goe,
Rest of their bones, and soules deliverie.
Thou art slave to Fate, Chance, kings, and desperate men,
And dost with poyson, warre, and sicknesse dwell,	10
And poppie, or charmes can make us sleepe as well,
And better then thy stroake; why swell'st thou then;
One short sleepe past, wee wake eternally,
And death shall be no more; death, thou shalt die. John Donne I thought this to be appropo for the moment.

Real Anglicans Own Thier Own Property

It appears that the long awaited day has arrived, at least in Canada.  The Supreme Court of Canada as well as two lower courts have ruled in favor of the Anglican Church in Canada.  That is to say, the property that was absconded with by those who left the Anglican Church to form the Anglican Network in Canada have had their final day in court and lost.  According to some records those ANiC folks spent over $1.3 million in their quest for recognition. 

The current bishop, the Right Reverend Michael Ingham, tired and worn but quietly satisfied then said,
"The money, time, and energy taken up by this long and unnecessary conflict can now be directed back to the real work of the Church."
Cheryl Chang, special counsel to the ANiC, said Thursday the court decision was "extremely disappointing" and should be of concern to all Christians.
"While these congregations have remained steadfast in their faith, and have not changed the traditional teaching of the Christian church, they have now been called to sacrifice all their assets, including their church properties, for the sake of their faith."
Chang added: "We just have to find new places to worship."

I think the only way to interpret what Ms. Change says is as follows: "Remained steadfast in their faith means supported greedy, power hungry bishops in their quest for Anglican domination."  "Have not changed the traditional teachings of the Christian Church (except modified the "Thou Shalt not steal commandment as authenticated by the Supreme Court of Canada)".   "Have now been called to sacrifice all their assets including their church properties (I refer you to the commandment thou shalt not steal).

For those of you occupying the property here in San Joaquin that does not belong to you, and to those in all the other schismatic diocese that are occupying property that does not belong to them I call upon you to call your leaders to task for the sinful waste of your money (see the costs to ANiC ) and stop now and give the property back to the rightful owners.  Now is better than later.  You also can "just find new places to worship".

The Real Anglicans in Canada own their property as do the only Real Anglicans in the United States.

H/T Vancover Sun
H/T The Lead
H/T Diocese of New Westminister

How Many People Were At The Cross

I am still flabbergasted at the Global South's infatuation with numbers, inflated, regurgitated, and created for the sole purpose of the personal gratification of people such as John David Schofield, Robert Duncan, Peter Akinola, Henry Luke Orombi, and Gregory Venables and Peter Jensen. 
 From the time I first came into the Diocese of San Joaquin these folks starting with John  David Schofield have insisted that the way to heaven is through more and more and larger and larger numbers of people coming into the parish/diocese.  That motivation has in part led to the idea that any action that might reduce those numbers is morally wrong.  So, we get this little ditty from the man closest to virtue:

Bishop Chester Talton of the rump TEC Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin has told diocesan clergy that as of the Sunday of Pentecost, June 12, they may bless what a press release called "sacred unions."

The June 7 release said that, following consideration by the diocese's Equality Commission, "the clergy in the Diocese of San Joaquin may perform blessings of same-gender civil marriages, domestic partnerships and relationships which are lifelong committed relationships characterized by 'fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God.' "

Talton's authorization notes that because Episcopal Church canons and California law do not allow same-gender marriage, no diocesan priest may solemnize such a marriage until both sets of laws allow such an act, and the diocesan bishop specifically allows such solemnization. No priest is required to bless same-gender relationships.

 San Joaquin's decision came in part, the release said, in response to General Convention Resolution C056 which states that "bishops, particularly those in dioceses within civil jurisdictions where same-gender marriage, civil unions, or domestic partnerships are legal, may provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this church."

Now you know why the bulk of this diocese fled TEC and is now a member of the Anglican Church in North America.

One of the hallmarks of the continuing diocese of  San Joaquin is we are now connected to the rest of the Episcopal Church.  That connection develops into a strong desire to follow Christ  particularly as it relates to including ALL of God's children in all of the sacraments -- marriage included.  If in doing so it means that we lose some "membership" then so be it.  If it means we were to lose all the membership then so be it.  There were but a handful at the cross when Jesus died.  We recognize that fact. 

The Purple Shirts Are Coming! The Purple Shirts Are Coming!

Here is the latest news from the other side:

Global South Primates are planning a second GAFCON in 2013 to be preceded by a leadership conference in New York in 2012. This can only be seen by Dr. Williams as a smack in the face against his authority as GAFCON represents more Anglicans than he does. What about the failure of pan-Anglican liberalism doesn't he understand?

And how do we know this?  Well, not only has the website of GAFCON announced it but David Virtue has declared it to be true, and David Virtue would never lie to anyone.

That means the crack team of Gregory Venables, Peter Akinola, Henry Luke Orombi, Peter Jensen and the whole cast of :"Conelonialists come to town:  one if by land and two if by sea." are coming to New York in 2012.  These are the same fellows who gave safe harbor for the "Anglican" diocese of San Joaquin, Fort Worth, Pittsburgh and Quincy.  In exchange these diocese have sent cash to these neer-do-wells particularly in the first year of their absconding with the property (including cash). 

Well, I may have suggested this before but the time is really ripe what with the whole cast here in 2012.  Let's issue subpoenas to each and everyone who has received any cash from these diocese on the premise that they are part of the grand theft church property.  Then, let's request the police/state department to pull their passports and visas until the lawsuits can be settled.  How long do you think it would be before the lawsuits were once and for all settled?  You are reading correctly, let's wait till everyone gets to New York and then lock everyone in a room until the lawsuits are settled.  What do you all think?

And just asking, but do you suppose anyone in GAFCON has asked the Presiding Bishop for her permission to come to New York, her hometown to hold this conference?  Aren't we part of the Anglican Communion -- at least for a little while longer.

The Hallmarks of The Faux Anglican Diocese

I am not sure anyone has yet to categorize those issues that are near and dear to the hearts of those who live in the world of Faux Anglicanism, better known as the Global South.  Let us see if we can hit some of them today.

First, solo scripture -- the only thing that matters is scripture.  God said it, I believe it, that is all there is to it.  Please do not confuse me with the facts.  And, it appears that the Old Testament carries more weight than the new testament.  How do I know this?  Well, read the blogs that cater to the Conelonialists and the Old Testament is more often quoted than any other thing (except Matt Kennedy).  They seem to use the New Testament only when forced to and then just enough to dance on the head of a pin and no more.  The most noted outcomes from this are the hatred for women and LGBT members of our community.  They are always quick to point out how someone or some group is not fit to be at the rail with them or their minions but are real slow on the part about helping others such as Matthew 25.

Second, lots and lots and lots of male Bishops.  I did a parody a few months back on this but it seems that there is just no end to the amount of bishops these folks want and need.  The only other religious group that has more bishops than the Global South/ACNA would be the Mormons.  you can always tell the lead up to a new one by the things the soon to be bishop talks about. I am humble, following the spirit, driven by the Lord, my path has led me to this since I was knee high to a grasshopper.  And yet, the more they consecrate the more they fly all over the world.  And, ever hear these folks talk about their "flock" except in raw numbers?  I gots 40 billion, that is two billion more than the Catholics and 75 billion more than the Episcopal Church.

Third, speaking of raw numbers, the Global South/ACNA has this burning need to have more laity than any other group known to man including the Catholics.  These folks like to proceed any conversation about the Episcopal Church in the United States with how many laity they have and how few (and getting fewer or is it lesser) the Episcopal Church has all the time.  Why pretty soon, ACNA is going to have enough people to occupy several planets each one with at least forty bishops.

Fourth, they have a burning need to evangelize, especially the young families.  They are out there all the time bringing in more and more and more to their church.  Do you suppose it is fro the good of Christ?  No, of course not.  They simply want to tell the Archbishop of Canterbury how many kabillions of new Anglicans he will have when he recognizes ACNA as the new Anglicans in the United States.

Finally, they are fond of telling the world how the Archbishop has recognized the good friend of the Archbishop of Uganda who has recognized the Bishop of Farout who has recognized the priests and bishop of oh say, San Joaquin, which nullifies their being stripped of orders and therefore they have been sorta, kinda, almost for real recognized by the Anglican Communion.

There ya go, any thing else to add?

Hope I Die Before I Get Old --

The heading is taken from a Who song in the early sixties entitled My Generation.  I think, no I believe, that the 1960's were an extraordinary time.  Many of us came of age, in more ways than one, during this tumultuous time.  We rejected many of the staid and unprovable "facts of Life" in favor of a more thinking or at least a more thoughtful approach to the world.  The political idea that you were either for us or against us crumbled with the Vietnam war.  The social mores that there were white and black drinking fountains, and restrooms and soda fountains were rejected as separate but not really equal.  We were brought up on VISTA and the PEACE Corps and service to one's community and country was the highest calling to which one could respond.  Religiously, starting with the Catholic church the walls came down and the windows and doors were kicked open.  My lament at this point in my life, is what the heck happened?  We traded in on tie-dye for blue serge and our service to mankind in favor of service to ourselves.

I had a brief  discussion with Mr. Dale (can't be father since he was defrocked) Matson in which for some strange reason, he and at least Mr. McAlister (both Conelonialists) find the whole world came crashing down when "sex, drugs, and rock and roll" came to the foreground in the 1960s.  That it is my generation more than anything else that has caused them to reject everything we stand for and in order to return to those golden years of the 1930's??? (I guess).  Our move to full inclusion is racked by secular humanism, not by Christ's two great commandments and it seems that punishment and not forgiveness is what Jesus/God is known for and how can we possibly get those two mixed up!

Why do I bring all this up?  Am I hung up on the 60's?  Well, actually I didn't start the discussion but I find their arguments to be so out of my world view as to be almost silly, if the argument was not so narrowly defined and in fact blinded by superficial facts.  But, more importantly, I cannot live with a group that espouses a world view I cannot understand and do not believe in.  So what you say?  So, one more reason to move on as we are and IF the Anglican Communion moves with us fine, if it does not, no great loss.

People try to put us d-down (Talkin' 'bout my generation)
Just because we get around (Talkin' 'bout my generation)
Things they do look awful c-c-cold (Talkin' 'bout my generation)
I hope I die before I get old (Talkin' 'bout my generation)

This is my generation
This is my generation, baby

Why don't you all f-fade away (Talkin' 'bout my generation)
And don't try to dig what we all s-s-say (Talkin' 'bout my generation)
I'm not trying to cause a big s-s-sensation (Talkin' 'bout my generation)
I'm just talkin' 'bout my g-g-g-generation (Talkin' 'bout my generation)

The Big Huge Awful Terrible Lie!

This is a huge lie. It is Coward and the Church of England's homosexuals (and TEC's) along with their refusal to be obedient to scripture that is destroying the Anglican Communion. It is why GAFCON/FCA exists. It is why there is a Jerusalem Declaration and why a Covenant will not hold the Anglican Communion together. It is why Primates of the Global South will never sit down again with Katharine Jefferts Schori or attend another Primates meeting. They will never be seen in the same room with her. The only time they will be seen on US soil is to announce the date for the next GAFCON meeting in Jerusalem or to converse with ACNA Archbishop Robert Duncan.

Here we have a direct quote from the one who, believes if you say something long and loud enough everyone will believe it.

I am going to skip all the niceties, all the subtle nuances and get to the heart of the matter.  No, those in GAFCON/FCA, especially the Americans (and we all know who they are by now), use this LGBT thing as a ruse.  The Americans have joined the Global South to grab as much power as they can.  These folks literally lust after power.  That is the most un-Christian thing of it all -- they beat up a small vulnerable segment of society in order to accrue as much earthly power as is possible.

That is the long and the short of it!

To My Comrades: Memorial Day 2011

'nuf said.

Everybody is An Expert!

Do tell, seems everyone is an expert.  From education, I went to school so I must know how to run an educational institution to our professional military.  We have taken the idea of "do it yourself" way to far. For the most recent example, here is the mouthpiece of the Ahmanson's, David Anderson;

This weekend is when the United States remembers all of those in the Armed Forces who have given their life for the cause of their country since our founding as a nation. In addition to giving thanks for the price paid by those who served - those killed, wounded, or safely returned - and how they have defended our freedom and liberty, let all Americans be vigilant so that this price was not paid in vain. Since we are in difficult times and the military leaders are being pushed to accept "progressive" social viewpoints, let us pray for our military leaders, that they truly will have the brass to stand up to the social agenda many politicians are pushing, and the pressures from a President whose stand is already clear.

Seems that Mr. Anderson has decided that the leaders of our armed forces are driven by a social agenda.  Clearly, Mr. Anderson has no concept of what or how or why the Joint Chiefs of Staff make decisions.  I will say this, most, in fact I believe all, have faced combat at one time or another in their careers.  Certainly those in the Army and Marine Corps have -- if not Iraq, Afghanistan or Viet Nam.  Mr. Anderson has already decided for the Joint Chiefs that having someone next to you in combat that is LGBT will hamper your chances of staying alive.  Clearly, Mr. Anderson has never EVER been in combat.  With bullets and RPGs and mortars flying all around no one cares about one's sexual orientation and certainly no one is going to ask you about it.  I was in tanks, and tanks are staffed by four persons. I never asked and I never cared -- we were too close to worry about those things.  We relied on each other to stay alive -- that, for me is the issue and I think that is the issue for the Joint Chiefs of Staff.  Let me be clear, I had no social agenda in my tank other than staying alive and the people I worked with never let me down and I never let them down.  Mr. Anderson, you ouht to stick to what you know -- if there is anything.

Any More Questions?

Well, the revelations over the past few days by Colin Slee and the "bigwigs" in the Church of England should have removed all doubt about the Anglican Communion and the Anglican Covenant.  Many in and out of the Episcopal Church in the United States have talked and debated and discussed and thought and prayed all to the end that we must slowly and deliberately consider this Anglican Communion.  Now we find out that we were all "getting played" by the guy that could not imagine a world without the Anglican Communion being led by the Archbishop of Canterbury and his right hand guy, the Archbishop of York. 

Well, way back when I wrote this "Isn't There Something About Lying ++Rowan Williams".  And a little later we wrote this about his work "Tokens of Trust".  And I wrote this about the similarities between Rowan Williams and Neville Chamberlain.  All in all I wrote about the machinations of the Archbishop of Canterbury almost 25 times.  What I suspected has now been proven to be true.  The fact is the (arch) Bishop has transformed himself into a pawn.  A pawn of those forces that seek unity in place of God.  The forces that seek hegemony instead of universality.  The forces that seek to destroy anyone or anything that gets in the way of power and corruption.  The forces that seek to refuse to accept Christ's commandment to reach out into the world and love your neighbor AS YOURSELF. 

There is an old adage that goes "absolute power corrupts absolutely" and once again we have first hand knowledge of that.  Now, I ask the question I have asked on many occasions, "Is this the Anglican Communion that we (the Episcopal Church in the United States of America) wish to remain in communion with?  It is not just the refusal of the Archbishop to accept, really and truly accept, LGBTI persons as fully God's children but it is the evil and mean spirited ways in which the Archbishop of Canterbury has gone about keeping them out of full inclusion.  The lying, the cheating, the power-grabbing, the two-faced bold-faced untruths that he has told not only in his writing but in his daily actions.  Is this what we aspire to?  Is this what we wish to remain a part of?  Is this what we long for in our relationships both here and abroad? Is this the head of OUR Communion?

I will once again renew my plaint that we must be about the business our Lord and his father created for us.  If others wish to follow fine, if not fine.  But, let's not fool ourselves any longer.  "As for me and my house, we will follow the Lord."

John Guernsey Finally Gets What He Really Wants -- A Real Purple Shirt

Many, many years ago, in a land called Virginia, our family was one of 36 families that made a difference in a place called Dale City.  We began as a mission of St. Margret's, Woodbridge, VA and met in an elementary school cafeteria that served on Sundays as our "little church".  From that came a growing and loving community that Father Chuck Stein nurtured and developed.  Then, Father Stein retired and we began the arduous search for a new rector.  During the interim we had a marvelous woman, one of the first ever ordained, and then, John AM Guernsey.  John was smart, talented, a good preacher and very ambitious.  From the very beginning, he believed he was marked for greatness.

We left that parish in 1983 and travelled back to the land of our ancestors.  John stayed and worked hard but apparently never quite made it to bishop -- until the Ugandans decided he should have a purple shirt.  Listening at times (actually reading) John was never completely comfortable until now.  He has been elected bishop of the Mid-Atlantic faux thingy that is part of the pretend church in America -- Yep, ACNA.  To read his submissions to the selection committee reads like any other anxious, ambitious, over-reaching priest with a need to be a bishop.  Clearly not satisfied with his work as a pastor, even in a huge flock, loved by most of that group, his need to be a bishop has driven him, just like so many others in that fakeAnglican group.  Names like Minns and Thompson and yes, even in our own circle,  Daniel Martins. 

It is interesting to note that in John's most recent missives he needed to be a bishop, consecrated in the United States.  Why, I have no real idea other than ambition and perhaps envy.

"Such men as he be never at heart's ease whiles they behold a greater than themselves, and therefore are they very dangerous."

Congratulations John, you finally got what you have sought most of your ordained life.

The Elasticity of the Anglican Communion

There are segments still debating the Anglican Covenant prior to a vote at Convention.  Folks are still looking for reasons to either support or defeat the Covenant.  If there are pros and cons; if there are good things and bad things about the covenant then I believe less is more.

Let us begin with putting lipstick on a pig.  Many claim that the "new" version of the covenant is so much better than the old version.  That the basis for creating the covenant, namely Windsor 1.10 and the actions of both TEC and the Anglican Church in Canada in their radical inclusivity are no longer the point.  Well, I think a bad idea is a bad idea no matter how one dresses it up.  The pig, is still the pig.

Let us talk about the "consequences" clause of the covenant.  Better to be on the inside working to moderate those issues than to be on the outside?  What a waste of time and by the way, there will be times when one is not the majority nor could one swing a majority and then what?  We argue and we fight and we discuss and we debate and we endlessly struggle when our energy should/could be better spent working Christ's saving grace in the world. Why would anyone in their right Christian mind stop to argue about issues that have absolutely no bearing on our work in the world?  We have already spent way too much time on a document that has no real flavor and we must be about God's work in the world.  If we want to spend this much time on a concept how about we figure out what we, the Episcopal Church in the United States really do stand for and articulate that in some form of a strong, loving, Christian statement that brings people to TEC and through TEC to the saving grace of our Lord and Savior.  Wow! what a concept.

Finally, the Anglican communion is incredibly elastic.  For years we have struggled with evangelical, orthodox, liberal, high church and low church and all sorts of issues have come and gone.  Some times we hug everyone and sometimes we don't.  We have done this without benefit of primates and archbishops handing down their brand of Christianity.  The idea of "take it or leave it" is a false dichotomy that no one needs to subscribe to, lest of all us. Let's not take the elasticity out of the Anglican Communion and replace it with some half baked notion that if one archbishop is good than two must be better and a gaggle of archbishops must be best.Let us reject this document because we are much more open to God's word and much more able to move with the Spirit, that is what the elasticity does for all of us. 

The Anglican Covenant began as a bad idea, it continues to be a bad idea, and it continues to occupy our time way out of proportion.  We do not NEED a covenant, no one does.  Let us continue just as we are and get on with our Savior's business.  As Jesus once said, "Let the dead bury the dead."

Here We Go Again

The Anglican Covenant just will not go away.  Here is the latest from Tobias Haller and In a Godward direction.  His latest is Capacity and Potentiality.  One of the drawbacks of the three-legged stool approach is rational people can disagree and must discuss.  Tobias says we should support the covenant because it does not mean what it set out to mean and because it is better to be a part of the process where a process is inevitable. (Sure hope I got that right).  I think Tobias Haller is a clear, rational, logical thinker who explores all avenues and comes to well-thought out conclusions.  This time, he is just wrong.

The Anglican Covenant is a bad idea.  If the Anglican Communion wants to stay together it has all the wherewithal right now.  Been together since 1878 or so been functioning just fine for lo these many years.  Did I mention that the Anglican Covenant is a bad idea?  We can put lipstick on that pig but whose gonna kiss the pig?  A bad idea is a bad idea and no amount of ribbons and bows is going to make it more attractive.  You want a covenant? See the baptismal covenant?  You want a covenant, see the two great commandments?  You want to use and abuse people?  See GAFCON/FCA/CANA and the rest of the alphabet soup. 

Being a part of the process merely legitimizes the process, especially for those that look to The Episcopal Church of the Untied States for Leadership?  Being a part of the process compromises the Episcopal Church's stance on inclusivity.  Being a part of the process sounds a little like 1939, especially as it involves the LGBT community.

Sometimes a little rebellion is a good idea, just ask Thomas Jefferson.  If the only choice is the Anglican Covenant with the Anglican Communion or no Anglican Communion.  Well, to the Anglican Communion I will say, "Don't let the door hit you on the way out."


H/T Tobias Haller

Absolutely, Positively, The Last Time I Will Write About the Anglican Covenant (Until Next time)

The REAL Anglican Covenant:  "Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’^{[a] 38} This is the first and greatest commandment. ³⁹ And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’^{[b] 40} All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”  Matthew 22:37-40.  This passage also appears in Mark and Luke in slightly different language but the same covenant. 

Once again, many of our most learned members of the Episcopal Church continue to grind on the Anglican Communion Covenant.  Is this not a waste of time, talent, and treasure?  Could these folks better spend their time figuring out "how many angels can dance on the head of a pin"? 

We are the Episcopal Church of the United States of America and by now, it is clear to the international community that the covenant we follow is summed up in the two great commandments.  Nothing is going to change that.  Nothing is going to somehow magically change the voices of those who would punish and kill those members of our community that wish to "have life abundantly".  We work on our relationship with God and our neighbor virtually everyday and nothing he Global south or the folks that like to confess everything but their sins against their fellow man/woman can say or do to stop us. 

So I ask, why all the "deep and serious" writing about "The Anglican Covenant"?  If it is because the Archbishop of Canterbury "asked" us to I need to say why?  The last time that happened in any serious vein I think we formed and Army and beat the snot out of Cornwallis.  Do we think that somehow the "Anglican Communion" in all it's glory outweighs the message in Matthew, Mark, and Luke?  I certainly hope not.  Does it make any sense at all to "review and discuss and vote" on a covenant that will set up the primates so that they can then be the new and improved Matthew, Mark, Luke and John? For my money, I have heard nothing from a single one of them, including the Archduke of ACNA and the Global South that even closely approximates the message Jesus gave us.  Why then would we allow this bigoted, mean-spirited, evil group of men "run the Anglican Communion" let alone tell us how and what to think.

This covenant deserves no time, no energy, no more paper and ink and no more thought.  We need to use our precious resources to serve the hungry, needy, naked, and imprisoned. We need to be about "our Father's business."

De Plan(e) ... De Plan(e) ... De Plan(e)

As the scene opens there is a plane circling Heathrow Airport and a former bishop from San Joaquin is waiting with a limousine and a driver.  Suddenly, John David looks up, sees the plane with faux bishop Martyn Minns on board and begins to yell ... well you know how that story goes, we've seen it on TV about a few hundred times, except that life is frequently stranger than fiction.

What seems like 20 years ago was only 2007 when former bishop, now Mr. Schofield, announced that he was taking his diocese with him to get closer to Canterbury.  He made the rounds to virtually every parish in the San Joaquin Diocese and explained that for many reasons, but chiefly the issue of remaining close to the archbishop of Canterbury and "our" Anglican history, it was necessary to break away from the apostate Episcopal Church of the United States in order to stay in communion with the Anglican Communion. 

So Mr. Schofield took a large chunk of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin into what could only be called "purgatory" (the place between heaven (Canterbury) and hell (TEC,)).  Note that until now, and despite the many and varied lies being told by not only John David but Bob Duncan and Jack Iker as well as others the ACNA, the breakaway diocese of San Joaquin, Quittsburgh, and Fort Wrath, have never been recognized or accepted (tacitly or other wise) by Canterbury.  That means that their orders are still not valid and the sacraments they have tried to confer, including ordination and consecration are not valid. I mention that in passing for our laity in these diocese who some how think they have been receiving valid sacraments lo these last few years.

Now, the plan, ah yes, the ever changing always one step ahead plan of these neer-do-wells has brought them a fake bishop in a real place in England.  How much more clever of a ruse can one get than to set up their version of the Anglican Communion in of all places, Anglicanland!  Yep, Martyn Minns is going to head up the new GAFCON/FCA version of the Anglican Communion in merry olde England.  How much better can it get?  The global south gets rid of the millstone (and the charge of incursions), the silly little people who still think they are bishops in some branch of the church get to claim they are Anglican, Martyn Minns gets as much power (maybe more) than Archduke Duncan and all the laity gets to finally be claimed by someone in England as being part of some version of the Anglican Communion.  Yep, it can only be minutes before Minns recognizes the ACNA as part of the world wide Anglican Communion, whopee!  Or better, abracadabra, open your eyes and see we are now the Anglican Communion.

What started out as a stupid little movement in the United States by a few men who could not stand to be given orders by a woman and who wanted more and more power has turned into a colossal cluster "****" involving the entire Anglican Communion and making most of that communion irrelevant, including themselves.

Mr. Schofield, Mr. Chapman, Mr. Duncan, thanks so very much, we find your plan to be unacceptable.  Please do not go away mad, just go away!

More later.


H/T Fr. Mark

What Is The Mightest Navy In The World Afraid Of? Hint: Initials stand for Republican

Well, what do you think would scare the stuffing out of the United States Navy?  The Iraqi navy?  No way1  The Russian Navy?  Absolutely not!  How about the maritime marauders of the world, the British?  Nope, it ain’t them at all!  So who do you think would scare the strongest, mightiest, bravest Navy in the world?  Yep, it is the Republican Party.  Specifically, you may remember that the Navy only a few days ago approved the use of Navy base chapels for same-sex blessings.  Now, there were some caveats, but none the less the Navy’s highest authority approved this.  See my blog Is Hate A Republican Value?.  In that same article the Christian right-wing tea-party folks raised objections.  The same old tired garbage, the Defense of Marriage Act. (Never mind that their own justice department will not defend against suits brought in opposition to the Defense of Marriage Act, just ask Eric Holder, Attorney-General.)   

Well, the mightiest Navy in the world has “cowtowed” to the Republican Christian right.  And, here is what was said,

"There was some attention on the Hill," Pentagon spokesman Col. Dave Lapan told reporters Wednesday morning. "That raised the issue so that the (Pentagon) legal counsel then again took a look (and) determined it needed further review."

I particularly like the segment, “there was some attention on the Hill” .  That is akin to saying that Japan had an earth tremor last month.  The pleasant euphemism for the Christian right is “attention on the Hill”. 

At this point I would like to point out the Navy Seal Team 6 flew into Pakistan with no prior warning, one helicopter crashed, and still they took out Osama bin Laden, about three other bad guys, and left as quietly as they came in.  How could this same group, albeit on a larger scale, be so concerned about a little attention on the Hill as to make a public reversal on a huge public statement that came from the highest authority in the Navy? 

On the other side of the issue, Servicemembers United Executive Director Alexander Nicholson insisted the Navy was within its rights on same-sex marriage policy.

 Nicholson said the Pentagon should not be distracted by "pressure from reactionaries."

 "At a time when the economy still needs attention, Osama bin Laden was just killed, and revolution and conflict continue to rage across a fragile Middle East, having policy makers spend valuable and limited time on whether a few gay couples may or may not use a Navy facility for a private ceremony at some point in the future is just plain silly," Nicholson said in a statement sent to CNN.

 "The Navy was right in their analysis last month that nothing stands in the way of operating facilities without discrimination, and further review will no doubt validate that position," said Michael Cole-Schwartz, a spokesman for the Human Rights Campaign, which supports same-sex marriage.

 So, like the incursion into Pakistan, if they got it right, what is the problem?  (hint: money)

Is HATE the Real Republican Agenda?

Since the election of last fall and the entry of the "T-party" folks it seems that the real agenda for the Republicans is HATE!  They hate the poor, because the poor need help like food stamps, health care and head start.  The Republicans hate the the middle class.  All those civil servants giving up a lifetime to serve the needs of the people and then expecting a pension?  Well, no T-party person worth their salt is going to let that happen!  They hate the unions because the unions have brought better wages, better working conditions and better retirement systems.  They hate kids otherwise why would they try to educate a student on no revenue in order to protect the rich?  And they certainly hate the LGBT community, especially the part where everyone is treated with equity.

The US Navy announced recently that they were going to allow same-sex weddings to take place on/in Navy chapels in places that do not violate state laws. See Navy Allows to read the whole article.  This is all in response to the DADT change in policy.  But,

A letter from Rep. Todd Akin, R-Missouri, to the secretary of the Navy asking him to block the change has been signed by 63 members of Congress, according to Akin's website.

Akin says the Navy's permission for gay weddings in military chapels, once the current policy formally is ended, would violate the federal Defense of Marriage Act.

Now, we already know that the Department of Justice will refuse to defend this silly and hateful law but apparently the T-party doesn't care about that, or anything else.  C;learly the Republican party simply want to pursue their agenda of HATE.

Hat Tip To CNN

Osama bin Laden: A Birdwalk

So very much has been written about the killing of Osama bin Laden and I think I have read most of the work.  Most recently the work of NT Wright in the Church Times: The US plays with myths of heroism
and I think I am sorry I have.  There is way too much hand wringing and worrying over the surgical strike that killed Osama bin Laden. Wright discusses the perceived need for a international body to "handle" these types of situations.  I think not,  the interests of a nation are far to important to water down and trust to an international group that has politics as its basic mode of operation.  Nations are from time to time required to act in their own best interests.  This was one of those cases.

Wright then goes on to talk about the Christian gospel still "waiting".  This will not garner me any friends but I would choose for this world to be not ruled by a faith based process.  The problem with theocracies is that it becomes a matter of interpretation and I am unimpressed with any one's interpretation  of "God's will" on this earth -- be it God or Allah or Shiva or Confucius or any other "god".  I am willing to allow for those things to be rendered to Caesar and those things rendered to God, so as to speak.

Finally, Wright ways, ": (a) the forces of law and order are weak and in­efficient; (b) the bad guys are getting away with it; (c) the hero has to act outside the law, under cover, to perform the redemptive violence that will restore order to the embattled community. "

So we can set the record straight, the international forces of law and order are weak and inefficient. The bad guys do get away with it, even God admits that.  And, it is a matter of interpretation if the hero has to act outside the law, under cover to perform redemptive violence that will restore order. 

And yes, if there was a group of "pick your favorite terrorist group" was hiding out in the United States and the US refused to do anything about it after a significant terrorist act was performed by this group, then another country could swoop in and resolve the issue and I do not think I would mind nor do I think our government would mind. 

What the Untied States did after September 11 was promise that the perpetrators would be found and captured or killed.  We simply fulfilled on that promise.  To do less would have given license to the forces of evil to do it all over again.  Action with consequence is a basic disciplinary rule.

This is Real Anglicans and this post is a basic bird walk from my usual stuff, I apologize.

Real Anglicans ARE Fully Inclusive

This is right from the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin. 

Dear Friends,




This Friday Reflection contains the Authorization for the Blessing of Sacred Union. I commend this to the Diocese of San Joaquin.

AUTHORIZATION FOR THE BLESSING OF SACRED UNIONS

Since its reorganization in March 2008, the Diocese of San Joaquin has made incredible progress in recognizing a basic truth expressed in 1976 in Resolution A069 of the 65th General Convention, which stated in part, "That it is the sense of this General Convention that homosexual persons are children of God who have a full and equal claim with all other persons upon the love, acceptance, and pastoral concern and care of the Church."

Since that time the Church has continued to examine what that full and equal claim means. In 2009, the 76th General Convention passed Resolution C056, which directed the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music to "collect and develop theological and liturgical resources" as they relate to the blessing of same gender relationships. That task is in progress and the results are to be reported to the 77th General Convention in 2012. In the interim, Resolution C056 stated that, "bishops, particularly those in dioceses within civil jurisdictions where same-gender marriage, civil unions, or domestic partnerships are legal, may provide generous pastoral response to meet the needs of members of this Church." With respect to the nature of the relationships being considered, they are described in Resolution D025, a related resolution as, "lifelong committed relationships 'characterized by fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God' (2000-D039)."

In 2009, at its Annual Convention, the Diocese of San Joaquin adopted a resolution supporting C056. Further, following the Annual Convention in 2010, the Commission on Equality, along with Bishop Lamb, hosted a forum on the issue of blessing same gender unions. The forum was well attended and the sense of the forum was that the Diocese is ready to take the next step in full inclusion and support the blessing of these unions.

California currently finds itself in an odd position regarding same gender marriage and unions in that for a short time in 2008, same gender marriages were lawful. The passage of Proposition 8 in November 2008 added a provision to the California Constitution which limited marriages to the union of a man and a woman. This was swiftly challenged. The California Supreme Court, in the case Strauss v. Horton, ruled that Proposition 8 was valid, but would not apply to those same gender couples who were lawfully married prior to the November 2008 general election. This constitutes approximately 18,000 couples whose marriages are legally recognized despite Proposition 8.

California also permits the formation of Domestic Partnerships under state law for same gender couples as well as opposite sex couples if one or both of the persons is 62 years of age or older. These Domestic Partnerships confer upon the couple all of the rights and responsibilities which pertain to marriage under California law.[1]

We must also recognize that there are same gender couples in relationships which reflect the characteristics set forth above who have not entered in Domestic Partnerships, perceiving them to be inferior to marriage, and who, for various reasons, did not or could not marry during the brief time when same gender marriages were legal.

Couples in such relationships are part of the Diocese of San Joaquin. They are in our congregations and in positions of leadership. They are our friends, neighbors, and brothers and sisters in Christ. It is now time, to the extent permitted by California law and the Canons of The Episcopal Church, to extend to these couples the "generous pastoral response" necessary to meet their needs as members of this Church.

Effective on Pentecost, June 12, 2011, clergy in the Diocese of San Joaquin may perform blessings of same gender civil marriages, domestic partnerships, and relationships which are lifelong committed relationships characterized by "fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God."[2] Said relationships shall be called "Sacred Unions" for purposes of the blessing and recognition of these relationships. A liturgy authorized for use within the Diocese will be published separately.

It must also be recognized that the Canons of the Church currently limit marriages to opposite sex couples[3], as does California law. Accordingly, until such time as both the Canons and state law permit the solemnization of the marriage of a same gender couple, and specific authorization of the bishop is given, no priest of this Diocese shall attempt to solemnize a marriage between two persons of the same gender.

It is to be understood that no clergy will be required to perform these blessings in contravention of his or her beliefs and conscience. However, prior to June 12, 2011, all clergy are encouraged to engage in open discussion of this matter with members of their congregations, particularly those who are members of Vestries or Bishop's Committees.

May the grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit, brothers and sisters,

+Chet

It is not perfect, but it is not complete either.  And for the Epsicopal Diocese of San Joaquin this is a huge step into Christ's ever-present love.

Rattle Your Windows and shake Down Your Walls!

I was lucky enough to live in So Cal and saw these guys when they were a "warm up" group.  A warm up group?!

Random Thoughts On The Covenant This Holy Week

As we move into the the most sacred time of the year I offer some random thoughts on our proposed covenant.  I am hopeful they are not lost in some morass of global warfare.

Jesus allowed both Judas and Peter to exercise their free will and pick what they would do?  Both picked wrong but, when one asked for forgiveness was not denied the love no one deserves but everyone gets.

Jesus instituted the Eucharist and gave it freely to all the disciples, men and women.  And, to punctuate the need to be a servant, washed everyone's feet.  Not only did one servant need to wash but all servants needed to allow their feet to be washed.  Not some, all.

Jesus was not very popular, especially among the orthodox members of the Jewish tradition.  The Pharisees and Sadducee's grew to hate him for hanging out with sinners, tax collectors, all the general riffraff of the day.  But they condemned him to death when he told them they ought to do the same.

Jesus wept. Jesus asked for everyone to weep for the world.  Is it possible that death and destruction should be met with tears rather than death and destruction? 

Do you suppose Simon of Cyrene would have preferred justice to mercy?

What better covenant do we have, do we need, should we build than the cross and the tomb?  A death he freely accepted so that we might all have life.

The Orthodox Way of Counting

Our friend over in virtueless land is making things up once again.  Much as the orthodox folks like to "count" the "billions and billions served" by way of the Global south/GAFCON he has now published a letter "demanding" that the Episcopal Church 'splain all the litigation dollars spent.  Never mind that those Anglicans that have lost their way are spending millions and millions of hard earned and hard saved dollars they took with them and believe they can spend any old way they want (see old what's his name in Colorado) including suing every Episcopalian in sight.  These folks had a chance to consolidate several cases in California and thereby cut costs and they fought the saving of funds every inch of the way.  Not because they think they can win, but rather the goal is to attempt to run the Episcopal Church out of funds.

So, what gives now? Well there is this letter from a group supposedly attached to the Episcopal Church:

The Trust Fund Coalition

c/o American Anglican Council of Washington, Inc.
and the Anglican Laity Fellowship, Inc.
email: info@aac-washington.net
301-542-343


So I decided to go and see just who this group is?  Far as I can tell it is nothing more than a front group for our favorite virtueless writer.  For example, here is one of the groups "supporting" this Trust Fund Coalition.

The American Anglican Council of Washington (AAC-W) is a non-profit 501-(3)-(c) Church organization with Clergy and Lay members in the Episcopal Church (TEC) or the Anglican Communion-North America (AC-NA).

Now, when was the last time you saw ACNA and TEC in the same 501(c)(3)?  Never would be a pretty good guess.

And here are the "resources" cited:

AMERICAN ANGLICAN COUNCIL OF WASHINGTON, INC. www.aac-washington.net


AMERICAN ANGLICAN COUNCIL www.americananglican.com

VIRTUEONLINE www.virtueonline.org

So, let's just say that perhaps the first step in resolving this difficulty would be for the various diocese in ACNA that have taken the property (cash included) to reveal how much they have spent on litigation and perhaps share with the Episcopal Church why they fought the consolidation of court cases that would have saved them time and money and saved the Episcopal Church the same.

Conelonialists Must Come Clean!

The "orthodox" Anglican Conelonialists have harped on "just how much is TEC spending on litigation?"  and I find that question to be laughable.  Why?  Well, one need look no further than the "Anglican Defense Fund".  This is the brainchild of Mr. John David Schofield.  He has decided that his brand of distinctly "non-anglican" worship coupled with the stolen property of The Episcopal Church is worthy of folks sending Mr. Schofield much money to "fight the evildoers". 

Here is the problem with that.  First it is important that he, Mr. Schofield, come clean on just how much money has been collected through this defense fund (though I think it is more offensive rather than defensive).  In addition, how much of the funds collected through this fund were spent specifically on the legal fees incurred by the various parishes within his faux diocese to keep their stolen property.  Also, Mr. Schofield has absconded with millions of dollars of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin cash reserves.  How much of those has Mr. Schofield spent on legal fees and how much has he spent on his crystal and china?  Assuming that the real Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin has found most if not all of the funds Mr. Schofield shoved in his pockets while heading to South America and that those funds are tied up in the legal battle, just where is the legal defense fund coming from?  Are they/he mortgaging the property that is not theirs in order to fund the defense of their ill-gotten gain? 

And, how much of this defense fund is going to other diocese with in the Continental United States?  How much of these funds have gone to Archduke Venables and the sad story of his personal residence?

Mr. Schofield, Mr. Duncan, Mr. Venables how much have you shared with your own mis-guided parishioners?  Or maybe this is too sensitive to share with just lay people?!

The Bible Says It, I Believe It, Don't Talk To Me!

As I view the current political landscape I am growing frightened by the lack of real dialogue that goes on these days.  While clearly there is this problem in the House of Representatives, specifically those newcomers to the House, it's presence is significantly felt in our Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion.

There is a post over at a not-to-be-named "Orthodox" website by a priest that clearly sets the tone and tenor of Christian apology at angry.  The post goes from 0 to angry in about two lines and then he sets himself up against any discussion by saying that Jesus would truck no discussion why should we?  Well, words to that affect.

From a theoretical perspective, the folks over there would have us believe that this is Biblical anger, not unlike that which Jesus undertook in the Temple.  But look more closely, please, it is hatred "justified" by biblical anger.  It sounds to me like the same rationale used by the Ku Klux Klan for over a century and it smacks of the same approach that Hitler used to attempt to eradicate the Jews.  And how does this play out practically? 

First, that seems to be in line with the lack of reason that the new Anglicans wish to promote inside our communion.  The three-legged  stool no longer exists for this group.  Solo Scriptura is the only thing that matters and discussion and true discernment can ONLY be what an elite few say it can be (if you don't believe that read the proposed Anglican Covenant).  But they take this hard edge, this anger against the world and promote it.  The "I'm mad as hell and I'm not going to take it any longer" only works in movies folks.  It has no place in society, certainly not a free and democratic one.  And yet, this same group of people that now occupy a small corner of the House of Representatives is not only saying that but practicing it as well.  It is this type of anger that fuels the murders of men and women both here at home and worldwide.  They will argue against it but the fact remains that this hatred leads to violence. Don't believe me see Uganda, Nigeria, Rwanda, Wyoming, Oxnard, Texas and just about everywhere.

The current climate both in and out of our Communion is growing in anger and hatred.  If that is what the new Anglican Communion is all about, if it is only a little about, if there is only a small circle of people who "stand firm" then there is no doubt in my mind not only MUST we reject the Anglican Covenant but it is time to leave the Anglican Communion.

How About A Simple No?

We continue to struggle and search and research and study and re-study the proposed Anglican Covenant.  This transparent document is designed to punish the Episcopal Church in the United States of America for all the perceived mis-guided antics we have perpetrated on the Anglican Communion since 1979.

The GAFCON/Global South continues to search for the latest and greatest way to ostracize the Episcopal Church from the Anglican Communion. In addition, the Conelonialists want to set up a tribunal of sorts made of those primates who believe that only they can interpret what God wants us to do and to assure themselves that something like what has happened in the Episcopal Church never ever happens again. 

We in the Episcopal Church, and elsewhere, take this so very seriously that we have read and studied and written and researched until that is just about all we do.  After all, we do not want the world to think that we are not taking the Global South seriously, do we?

Think of all the time, staff power, paper, blogs, parishes and diocese that have been consumed by this antic.  Then think of what we could have been doing in the world had we simply said NO.  Think of all the people we could have helped, all the work we could have put into ERD and the earthquake in Haiti and Japan and all the work needed in Africa.

The answer to the Anglican Covenant is simply, No.Now, let's get on with what  Jesus wants us to do.

The Faith Once Handled

I find it amazing that the Southern Cone/GAFCON/Great Pretenders/Conelonialists work so hard to make their points.  They have conferences and secret meetings and Primates meetings and all sorts of meetings to lay their claim to the faith once handled. 

Do you suppose that Jesus worked this hard?  He wandered from place to place usually at a leisurely pace (save perhaps the meeting of the Samaritan woman at the well) and managed to grow the faith with out counting how many bishops and followers he had.  Do you suppose there is a missing gospel where Jesus is found to spend each evening counting the number of followers he has or picked up that day.  He fed 5,000 people with a couple of loaves and some fish and sent everyone home with leftovers.  Would Mr. Duncan or Mr. Minns try something like that he would need Bill Gandenberger to count up the number of people sitting on the hill, estimate those that would eat and those that would fast and then subtract the number of gays and lesbians and go shopping to get the necessary food.  In the meantime they would teach the Alpha Course to all those on the hill while making sure that no one had an original thought.

Or how about when Jesus turned water into wine.  Mom came and talked with her son and the next thing there was more wine.  I wonder what would happen if Bishop Orombi's mom came up to him and asked him to play nice.   There would be renting of garments, reading of scriptures, two conferences (one in Australia and the other in Jerusalem), three Primate meetings of which four Primates would attend one while seven missed that one but made the third one but only because they all stayed in separate rooms and no one touched anyone else (or talked to Bishop Robinson). 

It appears that the faith once handled by the GAFCONeers has been massaged and kneaded and left to mold for a while until Jesus and the faith he left to them is unrecognizable.

Is Springfield Getting Ready to Leave The Episcopal Church?

Well, much to the chagrin of many people in the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, the Reverend Dan Martins become a bishop.  Over the course of the last few months he was questioned about whether he would leave the Episcopal Church for some other brand of "Anglicanism" and he has said he would not.

What do the signs say?  By signs I mean who Bishop Martin hangs with, who trained him and what are his past practices.

Past practice.  He was vehemently in favor of the Diocese of San Joaquin leaving the Episcopal Church.  I do not care what he says now, I do not care what others have said, I know what I heard him say.  He was Mr. John David Schofield's righthand man.  He did Mr. Schofield's bidding.  He met on at least one occasion and debated with our Remain Episcopal group.  It was not long after that, that Fr. Miller left the diocese, chased out by hurtful and despicable clergy.  At that meeting, that night, then Fr. Martins clearly and unequivocally stated the only thing that could be done was the leave the Episcopal Church.  And, he wrote the canons that took the diocese out of the the Episcopal Church.  He says he left because he was not in favor of the move.  What typically happens is Mr. Schofield finally double-crosses his underlings and they leave.  I  believe that is what happened here, to Fr. Martins.

Mentoring/training.  Bishop Martins was mentored by Mr. Schofield.  Mr. Schofield on many occasions, stated he would never leave the Episcopal Church, yet he did.  Mr. Schofield sent at least two pastoral letters indicating he would not leave the Episcopal Church. Then, he said it was the Episcopal Church that had left him.  Then, much like Pilate, on the day of the convention in which the convention voted to leave, Mr. Schofield rent his garments and said, "My flock has spoken. What can I do but continue to lead them in the path of righteousness."  Bishop Martins has learned these lessons well.  Read his statements.  Check out the Communion Partners website.  I have to say, it sounds just like the early days of John David Schofield.

The company he keeps.  The Presiding Bishop was at his consecration.  But then, she is the Presiding Bishop.  But who else was there? The ENS news article read like the Communion Partners website.  This included Bishop Ed Little and Bishop Mark Lawrence, both tutored by John David Schofield.  Other bishops present included Bishop Beckwith and a bunch of the clergy also signed on the Communion Partners website.

The signs all point to a delayed "adios".  But time will tell.  I do wish the laity on Springfield all the best because those who never thought about leaving he Episcopal Church.

And now, the icing on the cake:

The Illogic of the "Christian Right"

Every now and then I wander from my base of Episcopalianism to think about other things.  Sometimes it is politics and sometimes it is culture and some times it is education.  The last few days I have been "cogitatin'" on the idea of the new right and their brand of moral legislation.

The new right steadfastly opposes abortion -- for any reason at any time and for no reason at all times.  So, everybody is forced to have children regardless of the circumstances.

Then, in order to remain perfectly faithful to their logic the new right is trying to eliminate WIC and Food Stamps and medical for children.  That way we make sure no baby grows up well fed and healthy.

Then, the new right wants to help children out by denying them Head Start programs and Free and Reduced Lunches.  After all, why should children have pre-school and learning and good food.

Then, the locals have decide that public K-12 education should be reduced to large class sizes, no special education, no free and reduced  lunches, no special programs (GATE as well ass Special Education).  After all, who needs education when we have sweatshops and 80 hour work weeks.

Once that child has grown up they are denied an opportunity to go to college or university when the new right eliminates Pell grants and other financial aid.

So that child goes to work but is denied the opportunity to be represented by a group that will assure clean and safe working conditions, fair pay, overtime, health and welfare benefits. Why would anyone need health and welfare benefits since each woman is going to have every baby and die in child birth.

 Why Oh Why
by Holly Near

They say there was a baby

Born with a special calling
Laid him in the manger
And then took him before his time

And I want to know why oh why oh why
If you care about life, why don't you care about mine?
Why oh why oh why
If you care about life, why don't you care about mine?

Look at all the babies
They ain't got no mangers
Lying in the doorway
And dying before their time


Comes along another baby
If I have it I can't feed it
I got the thing about my other children
Six hungry ones in all

Do you care about the babies
Or just the wars that keep them hungry?
I'm lying in the back alley
And I'm thinking about my right to life
So I died on Christmas morning
Leaving all my babies
Now they ain't got no mama
And ain't that a pity and a shame

And I want to know why oh why oh why
If you care about life, why don't you care about mine?
Why oh why oh why
If you care about life, why don't you care about mine?

Maybe this group should be called the new wrong?

The Methodology of the NEW Anglican Communion

Many years ago Mr. John David Schofield was asked whether he was going to leave the Episcopal Church. There are at least two (2) "pastoral letters" Mr. Schofield in which he clearly stated that he would not (I think he said never but who knows) be leaving the Episcopal Church.

By the time the year 2007 rolled around Mr. Schofield was preaching that the Episcopal Church had shifted so far to the left that in point of fact, the Episcopal Church has left the Anglican Communion.  For several months he hammered at this message.  2008 comes to convention and the convention votes to "remain with the Archbishop of Canterbury".  When queried about all his prior statements about not leaving the Episcopal Church Mr. Schofield said, "I did not leave the Episcopal Church. The people have spoken.  I must follow what my people have done."  

I believe that this process now gives us a glimpse of what is/will happen with the "Anglican Communion".   I first refer you to Off-Topic,  I also refer you to Preludium, and with great trepidation I refer you to "The Oracle of Delphi.   There are others and I am sure you can find them and read them.  Here is the catch, read not just the original posting, but read the comments, particularly the comments at the oracle.  Mr. Kennedy's are most illuminating (if not totally anti-Christian).  The laity is building a case to leave the Anglican Communion.  Provinces like Nigeria, Uganda, Australia, and the Global south in general do not need to have the laity say or do anything -- since the laity there has no say in anything they do.  But ACNA, the great Archduke Ferdinand Duncan needs to build a ground swell of laity to leave the Archbishop of Canterbury. 

By the end of this year (2011) the GAFCON members of Confessing Anglicans of the African Mission in America etc. will restructure their version of the Anglican Communion into a Jerusalem centered Anglican Communion and probably with Mr. Mouneer Anis as it's titular leader.  Briefly, least controversial, the "home of Christianity" and it keeps it away from the strife of Africa.  Lots of folks will vie for the Archbishop role next but for the first say, three years this appointment seems least controversial.  The long and the short of it is it  will be the "will of the laity" and not the clergy.  

I would also add Lionel Deimel's blog for some additional background on this issue.

What we need to do to get ready is the subject for the next posting.  Let's digest this for a moment and let me know what you all think.