You are here . on the pale blue dot


'Anonymous' comments without a pseudonym are not published.
(See Introduction note in right hand column)

Comments for publication should be 'on topic' and not involve third parties please.
If pseudonyms are linked to commercial sites the comments will be removed as spam.

Wednesday, 4 July 2012

Is this to be the fate of the Church of England?


"Therefore everyone who hears these words of mine and puts them into practice is like a wise man who built his house on the rock...But everyone who hears these words of mine and does not put them into practice is like a foolish man who built his house on sand.  Matthew 7:24-26
    
From the American Anglican Council:
 "The leadership of the Episcopal Church is considering disciplinary action against 9 bishops. These nine bishops are: Bishops Edward Salmon, Peter Beckwith, Bruce MacPherson, Maurice Benitez, John Howe, Paul Lambert, James Stanton, Daniel Martins, and William Love. 

Essentially, The Episcopal Church is investigating them for providing testimony in lawsuits that supported the rights of dioceses to disaffiliate from the church. Find out more about this sad story here. Canon Phil Ashey analyzes the events in the video report here."   

[Apologies for the unexplained disappearance of the video which appeared here, now accessed via the above link - Ed]

    The uncompromising attitude of Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori is already in evidence in the Church of England where women demanding so called equality show no quarter to those who simply want to keep the faith. Complaining that concessions to traditionalists would make senior female clergy second class citizens they have threatened to vote against the measure to ordain women bishops - but purely as a temporary strategy of course. In their latest move, WATCH seek to intimidate those whom they regard as weak-kneed bishops with a petition signed by more than 4,000 'people' calling for the withdrawal of Clause 5(1)(c). It would be interesting to know the theological position of the 4,000+ signatories, many of whom I suspect take a purely secular position while some of the signatories already have their names in the frame to be the first woman bishop in the Church of England which could be seen as an exercise in self advancement. As recent figures show, female clergy now have considerable muscle and are not afraid to use it threatening strike action if their demands are not met. Let's hope the bishops of our church have more resolve than Adam!

A further worrying sign is the appointment of the Presiding Bishop's disciple Dr Barry Morgan, Archbishop of Wales, to the Crown Nominations Commission tasked with finding a replacement Archbishop of Canterbury following the departure of Archbishop Rowan Williams. Whereas ++Rowan has worked tirelessly to find a workable solution to our troubles, Dr Morgan is resolutely opposed to any concessions to traditionalists, so much so that he lost the vote to appoint women bishops in Wales because of his intransigence. He is now seeking a second bite of the apple to achieve his cherished ambition of appointing the first woman bishop in the land, ignoring 'the work of the Holy Spirit' which is claimed only if a favourable vote is achieved. He may yet succeed. I hear of persistent rumours rife in Wales following the retirement of his Dean suggesting that a sideways move could be made to clear the way for the appointment of the first woman assistant bishop if the Governing Body of the Church in Wales can be persuaded to give him the vote on the second time of asking. He has already taken over as Dean pro tem, apparently much to the chagrin of the Cathedral Chapter suggesting some truth in the rumour!

So the signs are plain to see. Manipulation, scheming, deception, anything and everything is offered to the false god of so-called 'equality' no matter what the cost. Is that what the church is? In response to my previous entry one of Dr Morgan's few admirers (but perhaps not for long!) took me to task with the comment: "Your phrase 'immature schoolgirls' is at best a tautology, at worst an example of the very misogyny you deny in the previous paragraph. Don't write off schoolgirls so cavalierly; after all, the mother of our Lord was one!" Ignoring the 'schoolgirl' suggestion Mary is quite rightly used as an example. She was humble and accepted the will of God. Some  of the women (and men) who strive for supposed 'equality' in the church as though it does not exist might well say that they too are "doing God's will" but Mary went about her work for God in a very quiet way. No shouting, no bullying, no self advancement, just simply and bravely doing what God asked of her. She let our Lord shine out, never wanting to be recognised as anything other than being His mother, even watching Him die on the cross. That is true service. Not shouting, manipulating, blaming others, wanting everything at any cost, disregarding the needs of others. The true sign of Mary which the Church has recognised for two millennia. Why the pressure to change?

2 comments:

  1. It is a great sadness that a person's genitalia (or lack thereof) is the single most important standard by which fidelity to the teaching of Our Lord and Savior can be measured...particularly inasmuch as the male episcopate of the C of E has presided over its devolution and losses lo these many years. Perhaps we need less Mary and more Martha and for that matter more women at the wells and less old boys club in the Church? Thoughts oh Ancient one?

    ReplyDelete
  2. Small Farmer, "my thoughts are not your thoughts, neither are your ways my ways" (Isaiah 55:8).
    God chose Mary as Christ chose His Apostles to carry out His work. If you believe this you must accept God's way, not man's.

    ReplyDelete