The Church's One Foundation

image

About the legal division of assets of the Diocese of Pittsburgh:
"The buildings and the bank accounts are the legacy of generations before us. I don't have the right to give those away for other purposes. My fiduciary responsibility, my moral responsibility, is to see that those gifts are used for the ministry to which God calls us in the Episcopal Church. I can't give it away to the Methodists or the Orthodox Church or a Jewish synagogue," she said.

We should have sung that hymn, but alas, I do not pick the music. At any rate, it'd be ironic given it comes from the hands of a Wesley.

The PB was sitting directly behind Michael and me at the cathedral (where we also happen to attend church) and I leaned over before the service and said to her, "Save us from Duncan". She seemed quite surprised at my candor. Later, at the reception, she told me not to lose faith. She mentioned the quiet conversations between the two battling groups which take place behind closed doors. I then said that what we need is a come-to-Jesus and a full laying of the cards out on the table. We need someone to kick some balls.

From my favorite hymn:
Let goods and kindred go, This mortal life also;
The body they may kill: God's truth abideth still,
His kingdom is forever

Comments

  • Some context, if you please.
  • The original Diocese of Pittsburgh, which had 74 congregations at the time of the split, had become more theologically conservative since the 1970s, due partly to the influence of nearby Trinity School for Ministry. Many of its leaders believed that its leadership failed to uphold classical doctrines, such as salvation through Christ alone, but the largest flashpoint came with the 2003 consecration of a partnered gay bishop in New Hampshire. The Pittsburgh diocese refused to recognize Bishop Jefferts Schori's 2006 election, largely because she had supported the consecration of the gay bishop.

    Despite Turmoil, Presiding Bishop Believes Anglican Communion Stronger Than Ever
  • Don't get me wrong. I'm not liberal in my doctrine. But I think it's even more abhorant that the church would be split, and by a man wich such egocentric tendencies.
  • said:

    Don't get me wrong. I'm not liberal in my doctrine. But I think it's even more abhorant that the church would be split, and by a man wich such egocentric tendencies.

    Got it. You won't be surprised that I am on the other side, sort of.

    Episcopal church endowment funds and beautiful stained glass and stone churches were built by broad church episcos who were morally and socially conventional.

    It doesn't seem correct that the church leadership should feel free to elect the likes of Gene Robinson so that normal people can't take their children to church without worrying about having to explain homosexuality to them, or be publicly opposed completely novelties in the priesthood.

    It isn't nice to see these fights, but it also isn't nice to bring those political fights into the church.
  • said:

    Some context, if you please.

    Balls are slang for testicles.
  • said:

    said:

    Don't get me wrong. I'm not liberal in my doctrine. But I think it's even more abhorant that the church would be split, and by a man wich such egocentric tendencies.

    Got it. You won't be surprised that I am on the other side, sort of.

    Episcopal church endowment funds and beautiful stained glass and stone churches were built by broad church episcos who were morally and socially conventional.

    It doesn't seem correct that the church leadership should feel free to elect the likes of Gene Robinson so that normal people can't take their children to church without worrying about having to explain homosexuality to them, or be publicly opposed completely novelties in the priesthood.

    It isn't nice to see these fights, but it also isn't nice to bring those political fights into the church.
    Very much agreed. I'm so offended by liberal bishops the likeness of Spong who have rammed homosexuality down the throats of the faithful. I just hate that both sides are so involved in their own agenda that they don't care that the church is being ripped in two. Gene Robinson should have stepped aside and refused the election for the good of the church.

    Likewise, I'm so infuriated by how lovely Bishop Cox was treated by TEC.

    http://toalltheworld.blogspot.com/2008/03/rt-rev-william-j-cox-bishop-in-christs.html

    If anyone was a truer man of God, I could not believe it.

    I'm so discouraged about the general state of the church that for a long time I could not stand to go anywhere.
  • Bishop Cox:
    image

    For decades while he was Episcopal bishop of Newark, N.J., the Right Rev. Jack Spong attracted international attention, massive news coverage – and substantial income – by writing books and making TV appearances in the cause of what many in Big Media welcomed as the clever trashing of numerous Christian doctrines to which his fellow Episcopalians are devoted.

    Spong, now retired, was never brought to ecclesiastical trial for any of this. And that helped substantially in causing the Episcopal Church to lose more than one million members.

    Now, in what is absolutely stupendous hypocrisy, the Episcopal House of Bishops – which has just announced its intention to defy the rest of the 77-million Anglican Communion by supporting consecration of a self-announced sodomist bishop – is preparing to bring to ecclesiastical trial – and possible deposition (unfrocking) – a retired Episcopal bishop in Topeka, Kansas.

    Can you imagine subjecting an 86-year old bishop to an ecclesiastical trial and possible unfrocking?

    (Column continues below)

    Bishop William Cox is the one-time vicar and then rector of the Episcopal Church of the Holy Cross in Cumberland, Md., after which he was elected Suffragan (assistant) Bishop of the Diocese of Maryland.

    After eight years, he was called to be assistant bishop of Oklahoma for eight more years. He then became an assistant bishop to two bishops of Texas; and also served the parish of St. Matthews in Austin, Texas.

    Now, the Episcopal magazine, The Living Church, has reported from a meeting of the House of Bishops in Navasota, Texas, that Bishop Cox will be put on trial by a court of other Episcopal bishops – on charges that he illicitly performed sacramental acts without the permission of the Episcopal Bishop of Kansas, the Rt. Rev. Dean Wolf.

    Wolf and another prelate, Robert Moody, Bishop of Oklahoma, preferred charges against Bishop Cox.

    And for what has he been theologically indicted?

    At Christ Church in Overland Park, Kan., in June, 2005, Cox ordained two priests and a deacon. One month later he officiated at a service of confirmation. Bishop Cox was asked to ordain these three clergy by the ranking bishop of Uganda.

    Since the Episcopal Diocese of Kansas has accepted an agreement from Christ Church – of $1 million to pay for church property and clergy release from any obligation to the Episcopal Bishop of Kansas – this putting of Bishop Cox on trial might well result in a lawsuit for breach of contract.

    I telephoned this wonderfully congenial former Maryland bishop.

    He said he had not yet received any formal charges from the House of Bishops – but only a notification from The Living Church about what will take place.

    He seemed entirely unshaken, as he did to Episcopal columnist David Virtue, who reported the following on the Internet: "I will face an ecclesiastical trial because I confirmed and ordained two faithful priests in 2005."

    He went on to note the irony of no such trial for heretical Bishop Spong, "but they want to go after an old bishop who wants only to remain faithful to the faith once delivered."

    Asked where they would hold his trial, Bishop Cox said he didn't know. "I haven't been notified but I am sure it has happened. The Pony Express has not arrived!"

    "This is not a question of the violation of the faith but a question of geographic jurisdictions and pure legalism. It is about process, not the faith.”

    "I am 86, and they are trying to hound me into the grave, but I am going to outlive them," he said with a chuckle.

    "If I am found guilty they can't put me in jail, they can't strip me of my bishopric; orders are for life. All they can do is prohibit me from ministering in the Episcopal Church. The real and deeper question is, who is going to be left to minister to faithful orthodox believing Episcopalians in the coming months and years?"

    The bishop said that retired bishops can no longer minister to people without the permission of the sitting diocesan bishop. "That is too much. The House of Bishops needs to look at that. We should be able to minister to the needs of orthodox folk with the authority of the Primates."

    Bishop Cox, during my telephone conversation with him, recalled with joy his life of ministering in Maryland, both as priest and bishop.

    He made no mention of having received any expression of support from the Diocese of Maryland’s present bishop, Robert Ihlof. For all Maryland Episcopalians who knew and loved this good man William Cox, their denomination's incredible treatment of him must be appalling.


    Read more: 86-year-old on trial for ministering to faithfu:
    http://www.wnd.com/index.php?pageId=40792#ixzz1K70yGCMY

  • There's no such thing as coincidence.
    said:

    image

    image
  • said:

    The original Diocese of Pittsburgh, which had 74 congregations at the time of the split, had become more theologically conservative since the 1970s, due partly to the influence of nearby Trinity School for Ministry. Many of its leaders believed that its leadership failed to uphold classical doctrines, such as salvation through Christ alone, but the largest flashpoint came with the 2003 consecration of a partnered gay bishop in New Hampshire. The Pittsburgh diocese refused to recognize Bishop Jefferts Schori's 2006 election, largely because she had supported the consecration of the gay bishop.

    Despite Turmoil, Presiding Bishop Believes Anglican Communion Stronger Than Ever
    Laura, I hope you don't mind me kicking this around a bit. From your cited article:
    said:

    The second principle "is that we shouldn't be in the business of setting up competing ecclesiastical interests with Episcopal Church resources."

    She can't simply give the property to the people who want to leave the Episcopal Church, because that would violate her responsibility to guard the inheritance of the denomination that she leads, she said.

    "The buildings and the bank accounts are the legacy of generations before us. I don't have the right to give those away for other purposes. My fiduciary responsibility, my moral responsibility, is to see that those gifts are used for the ministry to which God calls us in the Episcopal Church. I can't give it away to the Methodists or the Orthodox Church or a Jewish synagogue," she said.

    Since her election as presiding bishop in 2006, Bishop Jefferts Schori has walked her own painful path, filled with ecclesiastical battles and some direct insults. The leadership of several dioceses -- including the original diocese of Pittsburgh -- refused to recognize her. For some it was because she was a woman, though for Pittsburgh is was because she had supported the consecration of a partnered gay bishop three years earlier.

    She believes that rejection reflected the views of a few bishops and activists, not the people of those dioceses. "There were some bishops who were annoyed that I was elected," she said, shrugging it off.

    If she believed the bolded language, I don't think she could shrug off the concerns of traditional christianity as a mere annoyance. If she really believed the bolded language, she might have avoided the schismatic course of a female "priest"hood.

    I found a snippet of an article for which I can find no citation:

    Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori told delegates to the group’s triennial meeting July 8 in Anaheim, Calif., that the overarching connection to problems facing Episcopalians has to do with “the great Western heresy—that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God.”

    Read more: http://www.city-data.com/forum/christianity/701632-episcopal-high-priestess-reinvents-christianity-doctrine.html#ixzz1KAQjhqjg

    That someone attributes that to her on a board isn't proof she said it.


    I do view her efforts as part of a larger problem of PLUs. During the cold war, episcopal bishops like Sponge and Burt could not shut up about the transcendant injustice of paying for defense while our poor had to live in not as nice houses, while they metaphorically flushed the cultural assets of western civilsation down church toilets. PLUs are at fault for tolerating that nonsense as a matter of social tolerance that the innovators have never shown.
Sign In or Register to comment.