Interesting comment, 'liberal overreach'. I think that is no more than following Christ and where he is leading.

By following the liveblogs, I estimate that about 90% of the discussion was about homosexual rights. Regardless, of how one feels about the issue, shouldn't the church be talking about something else, say, like that Jesus character?

Another 9% of the talk was about the budget crisis. Think these are unrelated issues? They eliminated the entire evangelism budget! And the fastest growing budget item? Money going to lawyers to sue Christians. Ms Schori has instigated so many lawsuits (over 50) that she has had to hire her own personal litigator.

There are two sort of liberals in the Episcopal denomination: the institutional liberals and the ideological liberals who would sacrifice the institution to advance the homosexual cause (Gene Robinson used these very words). There was some thought that they institutionalists could put the brakes on somewhat for the survival of the denomination. Nothing doin'. The ideologues are firmly in control. One of the other things that happened is that disciplinary canons were loosened. This will make it easy for the pogrom to eliminate conservatives to be finished.

They refused to talk about Jesus, in fact disavowing him by "discharging" (rejecting, killing) a resolution that affirmed traditional church statements about him:

http://northernplainsanglicans.blogspot.com/2009/07/using-gays-as-human-shields-heres-what.html

Now that the left has gotten so much out of this General Convention perhaps pecusa can talk about something else besides human sexuality in the future. But, given the Presiding Bishop's statement about personal salvation I wouldn't expect much from pecusa that would please evangelicals.

This is not a statement of opinion (I am not a gay rights activist)but context: What some conservatives don't understand is that many Episcopalians fighting for gay rights and gay marriage within the church sincerely believe that they are following Jesus in protecting a group of human beings against discrimination much in the way progressive Christians of previous generations fought against slavery or civil rights violations. They are not only trying to defeat conservatives, they believe they are doing what Christ would do if He were walking the earth today. So for many of them, fighting this fight is ALL about Jesus, not just pursuing some ideology that is divorced from Christ. If you talk to an Episcopalian or other Christian who is as proponent of gay rights with this understanding, you might find yourself being able to actually listen and discuss the issue in a Christ-like manner, even if you fundamentally disagree. Going at this from a perspective of "I'm the REAL Christian, and THEY are just liberal ideologues" is a ticket to nowhere.

Pam, I agree completely and I have no problems with that kind of liberal. However, what we have is that the people now in control of the Episcopal denomination are homosexual advocates first and Christians second. In other words, if having to choose between advancing the homosexual agenda and the Gospel, they choose the homosexual agenda. A great example are the lawsuits. Paul was horrified at the people in the Corinthian church for bring suits against each other for they bring dishonor to the church, "The very fact that you have lawsuits among you means you have been completely defeated already. Why not rather be wronged? Why not rather be cheated?"

And these people have made a deal with the devil. That devil is the one of incendiary bombs. We have the following "conversation":

Traditionalist: "I look around and see the degradation that so called sexual freedom has given us: abortion for birth control, children out of wedlock, pornography, teen and pre-teen sexuality and sexualization, etc. I simply say enough. We need to go back to what has worked for 5,000 years: Sexual relations are reserved for marriage and marriage is for a man and woman."

Liberal: "YOU HATEFUL, BIGOTED HOMOPHOBE."

The liberals that you allude to, should be loudly objecting to this Perez Hilton style attack. But they don't. They refuse to criticize, even participate in the "hateful" slurs themselves. Why? Because it works to marginalize the traditionalist and advance the homosexual agenda. But the Gospel suffers.

Within the Episcopal Church polity and General Convention Rules of Order, "discharging" a resolution could be because of any number of reasons. Regarding the resolution concerning Jesus which Timothy mentions, the resolution was discharged not because they "disavowed Jesus (rejecting, killing)," but because the content of the resolution had already been dealt within the current or previous Conventions. The initial Committee dealing with the resolution did not dispatch the resolution out of Committee to one of the governing Houses, and with this resolution dischargement was not because the committee members did not believe in Jesus.

The proposing of these kinds of resolutions makes for great canon fodder for reactionaries (of the left or right) to blast those they don't like theologically or pietistically.

The official beliefs of the Church are spelled out in the Book of Common Prayer, which states very clearly that Jesus is savior and lord, even though gobs of people on the left and right extreams want to assert otherwise.

In addition, if Robroy has the impression that 90% of the discussion at General Convention was about homosexuality, he is incorrect. The two resolutions that eventually passed and the "Committee of the Whole" discussion took up perhaps a full day and a quarter all together out of 10 days of business. Of course, the blogs that were read may well have focused 90% of their attention on the homosexual issue, but the Convention did not. I was there.

Robroy - Your description of a discussion between a "traditionalist" and a "liberal" is a caricature of those who support inclusion of Christian gay people and is disingenuous. I could easily turn the conversation around and make the slur come from the "traditionalist." I've heard them, too.

If you want a reasoned and civil discussion, the majority of Episcopalians will sit down and have it. Reactionary "liberals" and "traditionalists/conservatives" will not - both sides act the same, but come from opposite sides of the spectrum. Both sides would rather see the Church destroyed than to give an inch of their ideo-theological assertions.

Most of these comments keep talking about the homosexual issue. But that isn't why the people who have chosen to leave have left. Also I hope it's not what the "conservatives" majorly object to. The problem is the theology that is being preached alongside it, and by the same people. A theology that doesn't place enough importance on what makes Christianity different, things like the trinity, and the resurection.
The schism, the fights, they have caused great pain to many, and can we really think that anyone would pick these fights just because of an issue such as Sexual orientation? I think not.

Bob Griffith writes, "The two resolutions that eventually passed and the "Committee of the Whole" discussion took up perhaps a full day and a quarter all together out of 10 days of business."

But the two resolutions weren't the only ones about GLBTQ advocacy. In fact, there were more resolutions on this than any other subject. Dozens went through world mission committee, so many that I heard a quote of a member of the committee who expressed relief to finally discuss a resolution that pertained to world mission. Bp Lawrence reports that other committees were similarly stacked. There was transgender resolution that required the denomination to keep track of gender and gender preference, nickname preference, etc.

My characterization of the traditionalist is not a caricature. It is an actual one (me). I am not saying that the liberal response is universal. I am saying that those on the liberal side should be publicly rebuking the "hateful" and "bigoted" slurs. They are not because it is expedient not to.

Well, I guess the homosexuals now have their own national church with all the buildings and the organization setup that goes with it.
All the people who did the generations of work building up and carrying on this church have been kicked out or to the side. How these homosexuals think that they are the ones following Jesus is beyond me since they are still sinning, remember Jesus told the prostitute to go and sin no more. The homosexuals are still climbing in bed with each other, doing the carnal act, not saying no to it, not abstaining from it. Hey the prostitute had to change, what makes the homosexuals think they don't have to. They are following the devil not Jesus. We'll wait and see when the name of the Church gets changed to the Homosexual Church of America. I wonder how fast the name change will come because the sinners love to flaunt their sin and now with a major church under their control they can flaunt their sin even more and totally change the makeup of the beliefs of the church. I say church, but it will no longer be a church. It will be a devil's nest, a new religion based on sex not Jesus. Oh, there's already a religion based on sex, its paganism.

Victoria H - Read Original Anna's post above as an indication that there are those who left because of the homosexual issue. Anna - the way you describe the situation is simply inaccurate. I'm sorry that this is how you perceive things.

Robroy - It is true that a couple of the Committees had to sift through several resolutions that dealt with gay issues. Many of them were discharged (there is that word again). There are, however, 25 Committees of General Convention. The vast majority of time within all those committees was not spent on gay issues.

The whole gay issue is an important one for those who favor and those who oppose inclusion. For some people in both camps, they are nearly one-issue people, and as a result are acting very un-Anglican. If all we want to do is focus on one (or two) issue(s) whether within certain committees or on certain blogs, we can, but we will get a very skewed view what what is going on or what went on.

As I said, if we want a reasoned and civil discussion, we sit down and have it. Reactionary "liberals" and "conservatives" will not. Too bad, because "iron sharpens iron" and keeps us in balance. From an Anglican perspective, the Episcopal Church is now more unbalanced without as many conservatives. The Anglican Church in North America is even more unbalanced because the allowance for liberals is not there.

Come Home to Rome!

Here is an LTTE that is of interest..

Although sexuality, decreased membership and money were indeed the hot items of media reporting, the concerns I expressed in my almost 1.5 hour interview were primarily theological and spiritual.

First among them: The Episcopal Church has officially repudiated the Authority of Scripture and the historic understanding of the most basic doctrines of the faith. As someone who has served and loved the church --knowing both its glories and failings -- its most recent actions display the degree to which deeply confused thinking and misplaced pride, even arrogance, are destroying it. The Episcopal Church is not only separating itself from the vast majority of Anglicans throughout the world, but is widening the chasm with the Roman and Orthodox Communions, to say nothing of those faithful Christians in the Protestant traditions.

Some examples that do not deal with sex or money but reflect a profoundly careless handling of truth:

Official rejection of the uniqueness of Christ in the God's plan providence (resolution C069). Official declaration that Scriptures are in places "anti-semitic" (A089).

The removal of "commonality" of clergy within the Anglican Communion itself (changes in Title IV). It is crucial (of the Cross) that a Christian church be able to clearly state, if not proclaim, the Jesus revealed by the Father in the Scriptures.

This is core of my concern, if Jesus is not identified rightly -- then how will we would profess to follow him know when our lives are in accord with his will? God loves and accepts all people, but he does not approve of all that we do. Humility before God and his word is a gift of grace which allows us to recognize and accept his rights and our duties in faith.

Fr. Carl Eyberg Rector St. Thomas Anglican Church, ACNA, Springfield

http://www.news-leader.com/article/20090722/OPINIONS03/907220392/0/OPINIONS/Most+concerns+were+theological++spiritual

To David Hardly (and anyone else who is interested) - We have to be honest and truthful, else we violate our witness of Christ's Gospel. The Episcopal Church has not repudiated the Authority of Scripture! Again, the official teaching of the Church is that the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments are authoritative.

Now, it is true that you and other groups may well disagree with the interpretation or application of those Scriptures by some (even a majority in some cases) within the Church, but that does not mean that the Church has repudiated the Authority of the Scriptures. That kind of reporting makes great headlines and is very convenient for those who disagree with many of the positions taken by people or groups within the Church (as I do, too!), but it is not an honest description of the Church’s position.

It is true that many of the theological positions being pushed by certain groups and individuals are outside the traditional understanding of Scripture for certain topics (like same-sex relationships or “open communion” or salvation in Jesus Christ alone). Many in the Church think that some of the positions being pushed are wrongheaded and/or heretical, as I do. Many believe that the means by which the goals are pushed are not productive. Yet, we are Anglicans and the Church universal throughout its history has gone through tumultuous challenges and changes to its doctrine and understanding of Scripture - historic fact. We are in such a time, again, and Anglicanism traditionally is a bit unique in that it allows for such argument, debate, and change without splitting. More…

Regarding David's post from Fr. Eyberg considering Resolution C069. Fr. Eyber’s interpretation of the event is not correct. First of all, the resolution was "Discharged," so it was never considered. The wording of the resolution bears little resemblance to the conclusion drawn. The resolution was primarily a call of the Bishops to study the issue and report back to the next general convention. There was no rejection of the uniqueness of Christ. There was a decision not to consider a resolution. Here is the actual resolution:

“Resolved, the House of _______ concurring, That this 76th General Convention of this church affirm the conclusion of the Church of England at its February General Synod and direct the House of Bishops' Committee on Theology to report back to the 77th General Convention on "their understanding of the uniqueness of Christ in the United States multi-faith society, and offer examples and commendations of good practice in sharing the gospel of salvation through Christ alone with people of other faiths and of none."

EXPLANATION
Indicative of our support and appreciation for the presence of the Archbishop of Canterbury at this General Convention and his leadership of the Church of England in Christian witness within the multi-faith culture of the United Kingdom, this resolution affirms that the Episcopal Church is in substantial agreement with the Church of England General Synod which directed its House of Bishops at their February 2009 meeting to report back on "their understanding of the uniqueness of Christ in Britain's multi-faith society, and offer examples and commendations of good practice in sharing the gospel of salvation through Christ alone with people of other faiths and of none."

Considering Resolution A089, Fr. Eyberg wrote that the result of the resolution passing was an,"Official declaration that Scriptures are in places "anti-semitic."

Is is true that there are those who believe that certain portions of the Scriptures are anti-Semitic, as we understand the term today. There are obviously portions of Scripture that do not speak well of the Jews of that time, but we cannot assume that what what was going on within the early Church was as we conceive of things today. It is also quite true that Christians of varying types over the ages have used the Scriptures to justify their very real anti-Semitic attitudes.

The resolution was not declarative, but directive for the Commission on Liturgy and Music to study and develop materials regarding the issue and to report back to the next General Convention. The wording was a bit to presumptive, IMHO, but it did not declare anything.

Here are the relative portions of Resolution A089:

"Resolved, That the 76th General Convention direct the Standing Commission on Liturgy and Music to continue to collect, develop and disseminate materials that assist members of the Church to address Christian anti-Judaism expressed in and stirred by portions of Christian scriptures and liturgical texts, including the preparation of a pamphlet explaining Christian anti-Judaism and ways to address it in teaching, evangelism, and congregational life; the development of age-appropriate educational materials for children; the identification and evaluation of available resources pertaining to liturgy and music, giving special attention to Holy Week and Easter liturgies and to the diverse traditions of song in The Episcopal Church; and to report the results of its efforts to the 77th General Convention; and be it further

"Resolved, That the 76th General Convention request that the Standing Commissions on Liturgy and Music and on Ecumenical and Interreligious Relations, develop a statement defining Christian anti-Judaism and why it demands our attention, and to report to the 77th General Convention;"

The problem with the discussion is we are discussing a symptom and not the disease. Those people advocating a normalization of homosexuality are also the same people who, in general, deny all sorts of other basic tenents of Faith. Witness Bishop Spong, Marcus Borg and even PB Scori. They deny the bodily resurection of Christ, the uniqueness of Christ as the way to God; maybe not in resolutions, but in their books and speeches. One sin leads to another and the wish to normalize homosexualism is just the latest symptom. A symptom of the deeper disease of sin and rebellion against God. It is an outward manisfistation of an inner sickness. By their fruits you shall know them.

Give me a break and stop playing me for an especially gormless kid. I'm getting old and cranky, I admit, and what I missed or have forgotten, I have comprehensively cataloged for me in a large, convenient research library, not to mention the internet. In fact, the next book I plan on reading during my commute (I love public transportation, can't do that driving to work), is on the Massive Resistance movement (though it's in my personal library and this will be the second time I've read it).

Posted by: Gregory Peterson at July 28, 2009

From what I have seen of your ability to rewrite the Bible to suit your homosexual agenda.. Your "large, convenient research library," of which you are obviously very proud, is more than likely filled with very convienient "fact(oid)s" that support your homosexuality...

.

We looking for AID in telling others of what is happening on the NET.
This is the short story:
I am using lots of personal time to be ON-LINE to share and aid others.
These call themselves “EXCHRISTIANS”.
They can be found here: http://exchristian.net

They are actively recruiting, encouraging and enticing others to step away from a relationship with the Lord.
I am amazed. There are others ON-Line on the NET that are supporting each other that don’t want to be Christians anymore. This just blows me away. I am well trained and know what to do and how to LOVE them. These hurt and broken people need to be loved and cared for. We as the CHURCH and BODY of CHRIST need to love and care for these people and ask for the Lord to aid us as we love them back HOME.

Please PRAY with my wife and we care for these 400 to 500 people or more on the NET.
My background is in software and I understand the INTERNET very well. We have been believers for over 30 years. We know the WORD and how important prayer is. In this case massive PRAYER is good. Please HELP get the word out for these lost little ones. The LEFT hitting HOME????
Thank Everyone SO MUCH!!!!!
Don C. Hanich
Of the OC
Write if you care to: donh466@hotmail.com

Who's on FRIST? What's on scount?
Yes yes There is olny one TRUTH not PB....
Love you guys!!!!
DH

Kids Grace 1Pter look here 1Peter 4:7 - 19.... Notice LOVE. SO COOL. DH