An Early Christmas Present

Fr. Kimel's blog Pontifications is back. God is good.

From the most recent posting:

I do not fear the God who is Holy Trinity. I fear my own freedom to turn from this God, to hide myself in an impenetrable egotism and despair which will forever close me to the roar of his love. I fear that my self-will will ultimately triumph over my desire for the supreme and ultimate Good. I fear that I am becoming, have become, a person who declares to infinite Love, “My will, not thine, be done.” I fear also the purifying suffering that I must endure, both in this life and beyond, to free me from my bondage to self and the goods of this world. But I do not fear the God of Jesus Christ. I know that if God does truly exist, then at the moment of my death he will meet me as the Crucified, still bearing the marks of his sacrifice on his hands. Judge and Judged, Priest and Victim, absolver of sins and victor over death—to this Jesus I entrust my future; to his Father I commend my spirit. Amen.

Amen. Amen.

An Early Christmas Present

Fr. Kimel's blog Pontifications is back. God is good.

From the most recent posting:

I do not fear the God who is Holy Trinity. I fear my own freedom to turn from this God, to hide myself in an impenetrable egotism and despair which will forever close me to the roar of his love. I fear that my self-will will ultimately triumph over my desire for the supreme and ultimate Good. I fear that I am becoming, have become, a person who declares to infinite Love, “My will, not thine, be done.” I fear also the purifying suffering that I must endure, both in this life and beyond, to free me from my bondage to self and the goods of this world. But I do not fear the God of Jesus Christ. I know that if God does truly exist, then at the moment of my death he will meet me as the Crucified, still bearing the marks of his sacrifice on his hands. Judge and Judged, Priest and Victim, absolver of sins and victor over death—to this Jesus I entrust my future; to his Father I commend my spirit. Amen.

Amen. Amen.

And the Point Being, Your Grace?

From the Telegraph:

The Archbishop of Canterbury said yesterday that the Christmas story of the Three Wise Men was nothing but a 'legend'.

Dr Rowan Williams has claimed there was little evidence that the Magi even existed and there was certainly nothing to prove there were three of them or that they were kings.

He said the only reference to the wise men from the East was in Matthew's gospel and the details were very vague.

Dr Williams said: "Matthew's gospel says they are astrologers, wise men, priests from somewhere outside the Roman Empire, that's all we're really told. It works quite well as legend."He said the only reference to the wise men from the East was in Matthew's gospel and the details were very vague.

(Thanks to Bro. G)

And the Point Being, Your Grace?

From the Telegraph:

The Archbishop of Canterbury said yesterday that the Christmas story of the Three Wise Men was nothing but a 'legend'.

Dr Rowan Williams has claimed there was little evidence that the Magi even existed and there was certainly nothing to prove there were three of them or that they were kings.

He said the only reference to the wise men from the East was in Matthew's gospel and the details were very vague.

Dr Williams said: "Matthew's gospel says they are astrologers, wise men, priests from somewhere outside the Roman Empire, that's all we're really told. It works quite well as legend."He said the only reference to the wise men from the East was in Matthew's gospel and the details were very vague.

(Thanks to Bro. G)

This Holiday Season, Don't Forget Universal Pre-K!

Update: Banished Child of Eve writes, "Normally one puts the name of the gift recipient on the card, not the contents of the gift box. Otherwise, the card is at cross-purposes with the wrapping paper. Possibly Hillary has little experience giving gifts."

Excellent point, Eve! Also note most of these "gifts" are actually vast, expensive entitlement programs of unproved merit, to be paid for by the giftees--oh, except for Hillary's "gift" of surrender in Iraq.



It makes a perfect stocking stuffer!

This Holiday Season, Don't Forget Universal Pre-K!

Update: Banished Child of Eve writes, "Normally one puts the name of the gift recipient on the card, not the contents of the gift box. Otherwise, the card is at cross-purposes with the wrapping paper. Possibly Hillary has little experience giving gifts."

Excellent point, Eve! Also note most of these "gifts" are actually vast, expensive entitlement programs of unproved merit, to be paid for by the giftees--oh, except for Hillary's "gift" of surrender in Iraq.



It makes a perfect stocking stuffer!

Run for Your Lives

An Episcopalian writes:

To talk theologically [sic] about women's right to choose is to talk about justice, equality, health and wholeness, and respect for the full humanity and autonomy of every woman. Typically, as moral theologians, we discuss the value of potential life (the fetus) as against the value of lived life - the mature and relational life of a woman deciding her capacity to continue or terminate a pregnancy. And we believe that, in general, the value of that actual life outweighs the value of the potential.

Well so what, you may ask, how does the self-centered twaddle above differ from what spews forth everyday from the Episcopal Church? Here's how: the woman who wrote it is a "priest" and she herself had an abortion while studying for the priesthood; a result of a roll in the hay with a fellow of whom she said "was not someone I would have married" and not "a candidate for fatherhood." She does not regret her decision. She had a kid earlier with her now ex-husband but chose to abort the next one, explaining: "Both choices were choices for life: in the first instance, I chose for the life of the unborn child; in the second, I chose for my own vocational life, my economic stability, and my mental and emotional health and wholeness."

These are the narcissists who become priests these days in the Episcopal Church. I should think this woman "priest," along with ex-governor of New Jersey and turnpike restroom aficionado, James "Knees" Mcgreevey, now a candidate for the Episcopal priesthood, ought to persuade any remaining orthodox Episcopalians still wavering to flee. Can anyone now doubt the institution is finished?

(h/t StandFirm)

Run for Your Lives

An Episcopalian writes:

To talk theologically [sic] about women's right to choose is to talk about justice, equality, health and wholeness, and respect for the full humanity and autonomy of every woman. Typically, as moral theologians, we discuss the value of potential life (the fetus) as against the value of lived life - the mature and relational life of a woman deciding her capacity to continue or terminate a pregnancy. And we believe that, in general, the value of that actual life outweighs the value of the potential.

Well so what, you may ask, how does the self-centered twaddle above differ from what spews forth everyday from the Episcopal Church? Here's how: the woman who wrote it is a "priest" and she herself had an abortion while studying for the priesthood; a result of a roll in the hay with a fellow of whom she said "was not someone I would have married" and not "a candidate for fatherhood." She does not regret her decision. She had a kid earlier with her now ex-husband but chose to abort the next one, explaining: "Both choices were choices for life: in the first instance, I chose for the life of the unborn child; in the second, I chose for my own vocational life, my economic stability, and my mental and emotional health and wholeness."

These are the narcissists who become priests these days in the Episcopal Church. I should think this woman "priest," along with ex-governor of New Jersey and turnpike restroom aficionado, James "Knees" Mcgreevey, now a candidate for the Episcopal priesthood, ought to persuade any remaining orthodox Episcopalians still wavering to flee. Can anyone now doubt the institution is finished?

(h/t StandFirm)

How it Came to This

On December 14th, the Archbishop of Canterbury issued his annual Advent Letter to the Anglican Communion in which he stated (if I may distill it, boldly and crassly, to a few words): "The Communion is in a mess, something should be done but I'm not sure what. Whatever is done, however, nothing more may be asked of the Episcopalians, they've already yielded as much as they can. To ask for more would be most unfair." The Rev. Canon J. Gary L'Hommedieu of the Cathedral of St. Luke, Orlando, FL. has read the letter and writing on VirtueOnLine, explains lucidly how the Archbishop's letter betrays all that is wrong with Anglicanism and why her prospects for survival are dim indeed. Some excerpts:

The long bluff of the Anglican Communion has been called. There is not a conformity of faith, but at any given moment one might observe parallel expressions of faith. Thus, while we may be joint partners in specific ventures or rejoice in a common heritage, we have no basis to call ourselves a Communion. We are simply a gathering of national or regional corporations that share some things in common -- almost by coincidence. We may cheer each other on, but does that make us a Communion?

///

Communal Anglicanism has come to the birthing stool and given up the ghost. If it was ever anything besides the religious mode of the British Empire (before the sun finally set on it), Anglicanism has devolved into a set of rubrics. The genius of the English Reformation is that it was not a confession, like the great Lutheran and Reformed confessions, but a permissive settlement in which the catholic heritage of Christendom might be interpreted within specified parameters. This free acting out of a common heritage is apparent in the construction of the 1979 American Prayer Book. However, the "permissiveness" is not now that of the Common Prayer tradition, but of the 70's American popular culture.

///

...When Gene Robinson's election was approved, this was the trumping of holy writ by the mandate of culture. No amount of acknowledging the good intentions of the national church community could fudge this.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has tried to do just that -- fudge the crisis of Anglican self-definition. Perhaps he has done so with all the best intentions, or then again, perhaps with sheer political calculation. He is clever enough make a go of either. The one thing he has certainly done in his long awaited letter is bear witness to the self-validating quality of personal experience -- and that of those who otherwise would be disciplined! -- and he has declared their experience inviolable. Experience is now the one transcendent reality remaining after the disappearance of Anglicanism.

L'Hommedieu's essay (and the ensuing comments) is well-worth reading in its entirety, by Anglicans and Catholics alike: Anglicans, so they may understand why that noble Church was nonetheless fundamentally flawed; that she could survive the many controversies over the centuries (albeit often by resort to famous Anglican fudging) so long as the combatants were agreed on the basics of Scripture and tradition, but is utterly helpless against the present assailants who reject even those. Catholics should read it to be reminded once again be on guard against those innovators in Holy Mother Church who would be pleased to follow the Anglicans. They know all to well they are constrained by Pope and Magisterium so work non-stop undermining and thwarting them.

The devil is patient and persevering.

How it Came to This

On December 14th, the Archbishop of Canterbury issued his annual Advent Letter to the Anglican Communion in which he stated (if I may distill it, boldly and crassly, to a few words): "The Communion is in a mess, something should be done but I'm not sure what. Whatever is done, however, nothing more may be asked of the Episcopalians, they've already yielded as much as they can. To ask for more would be most unfair." The Rev. Canon J. Gary L'Hommedieu of the Cathedral of St. Luke, Orlando, FL. has read the letter and writing on VirtueOnLine, explains lucidly how the Archbishop's letter betrays all that is wrong with Anglicanism and why her prospects for survival are dim indeed. Some excerpts:

The long bluff of the Anglican Communion has been called. There is not a conformity of faith, but at any given moment one might observe parallel expressions of faith. Thus, while we may be joint partners in specific ventures or rejoice in a common heritage, we have no basis to call ourselves a Communion. We are simply a gathering of national or regional corporations that share some things in common -- almost by coincidence. We may cheer each other on, but does that make us a Communion?

///

Communal Anglicanism has come to the birthing stool and given up the ghost. If it was ever anything besides the religious mode of the British Empire (before the sun finally set on it), Anglicanism has devolved into a set of rubrics. The genius of the English Reformation is that it was not a confession, like the great Lutheran and Reformed confessions, but a permissive settlement in which the catholic heritage of Christendom might be interpreted within specified parameters. This free acting out of a common heritage is apparent in the construction of the 1979 American Prayer Book. However, the "permissiveness" is not now that of the Common Prayer tradition, but of the 70's American popular culture.

///

...When Gene Robinson's election was approved, this was the trumping of holy writ by the mandate of culture. No amount of acknowledging the good intentions of the national church community could fudge this.

The Archbishop of Canterbury has tried to do just that -- fudge the crisis of Anglican self-definition. Perhaps he has done so with all the best intentions, or then again, perhaps with sheer political calculation. He is clever enough make a go of either. The one thing he has certainly done in his long awaited letter is bear witness to the self-validating quality of personal experience -- and that of those who otherwise would be disciplined! -- and he has declared their experience inviolable. Experience is now the one transcendent reality remaining after the disappearance of Anglicanism.

L'Hommedieu's essay (and the ensuing comments) is well-worth reading in its entirety, by Anglicans and Catholics alike: Anglicans, so they may understand why that noble Church was nonetheless fundamentally flawed; that she could survive the many controversies over the centuries (albeit often by resort to famous Anglican fudging) so long as the combatants were agreed on the basics of Scripture and tradition, but is utterly helpless against the present assailants who reject even those. Catholics should read it to be reminded once again be on guard against those innovators in Holy Mother Church who would be pleased to follow the Anglicans. They know all to well they are constrained by Pope and Magisterium so work non-stop undermining and thwarting them.

The devil is patient and persevering.

I'm Dreaming of a White-Trash Christmas

(h/t Binky the WebElf)

I'm Dreaming of a White-Trash Christmas

(h/t Binky the WebElf)

The Beers Motel: Christians Check In But They Don't Check Out

Deposition testimony from Motel Manager & Chief Exterminator David Booth Beers, Chancellor of the Episcopal Church:

Question: Does a parish have the authority under any circumstances to withdraw from the Diocese?

Beers: No.

Question: Does the parish have any authority to decide to be part of a different diocese?

Beers: No.

Question: Does the Diocese have any authority to withdraw from the Episcopal Church?

Beers: No.

Question: Are there any circumstances under which the parish would have the authority to withdraw from the Diocese?

Beers: Not as a parish. The congregants could leave.

Question: Are there any circumstances under which a diocese could withdraw from the Episcopal Church?

Beers: No. Oh, with consent. I'm sorry.

Question: You're talking about without consent.

Beers Without consent.

Question: On its own, unilaterally?

Beers: Right. My answer stands.

Question: So if, for example, the -- the National Church would adopt a non-Christian faith and declare holy war on the United States, the Diocese would not have the authority to withdraw?

Beers: No. [emph.added]

Question: And the same thing, if the National church would adopt a non-Christian faith and declare holy war on the United States, a parish would not have the authority to withdraw, is that ---

Beers: That's correct.

(h/t VirtueOnLine)

The Beers Motel: Christians Check In But They Don't Check Out

Deposition testimony from Motel Manager & Chief Exterminator David Booth Beers, Chancellor of the Episcopal Church:

Question: Does a parish have the authority under any circumstances to withdraw from the Diocese?

Beers: No.

Question: Does the parish have any authority to decide to be part of a different diocese?

Beers: No.

Question: Does the Diocese have any authority to withdraw from the Episcopal Church?

Beers: No.

Question: Are there any circumstances under which the parish would have the authority to withdraw from the Diocese?

Beers: Not as a parish. The congregants could leave.

Question: Are there any circumstances under which a diocese could withdraw from the Episcopal Church?

Beers: No. Oh, with consent. I'm sorry.

Question: You're talking about without consent.

Beers Without consent.

Question: On its own, unilaterally?

Beers: Right. My answer stands.

Question: So if, for example, the -- the National Church would adopt a non-Christian faith and declare holy war on the United States, the Diocese would not have the authority to withdraw?

Beers: No. [emph.added]

Question: And the same thing, if the National church would adopt a non-Christian faith and declare holy war on the United States, a parish would not have the authority to withdraw, is that ---

Beers: That's correct.

(h/t VirtueOnLine)

Department of Redundancy Department

Kentucky Fried Chicken is promoting a new offering called the "Festive Feast" and it's chock full of poultry chicken.

Department of Redundancy Department

Kentucky Fried Chicken is promoting a new offering called the "Festive Feast" and it's chock full of poultry chicken.

Safe Harbor

Update: The Common Cause Partners, an umbrella group of various disaffected Anglican organizations, including Forward in Faith, an Anglo-Catholic association, have just announced "December 18, 2007 will mark the formal beginning of a 'separate ecclesiastical structure' in North America." This is all to the good, it will provide refuge for all those Christian Episcopalians whose dioceses have no intention of leaving. The concerns I express below about the fate of Anglo-Catholics still stand, however. (h/t the Newbie Anglican)

Over the weekend came the heartening news the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin (Central California), lead by the estimable +John-David Schofield, voted overwhelmingly at its annual convention, for the second and final time, to disassociate itself from the Episcopal Church, making it the first diocese to hightail it from that woebegone institution. As of Saturday, December 8th, the Diocese of San Joaquin is no longer part of the Episcopal Church but is aligned with the colorfully named Province of the Southern Cone, which consists of Anglican parishes found in the southern half of South America (the pointy part). The archbishop of that province, the Most Reverend Gregory Venables (now there's a fine Anglican name), only a couple of months ago extended an invitation to disaffected Episcopal Dioceses in the United States to come unto his fold. We may expect to see within the next year or so three more dioceses, Quincy (Illinois) and Fort Worth, both Anglo-Catholic, and Pittsburgh, evangelical, to follow the San Joaquians to South America. That may seem a good solution for those few Episcopal dioceses remaining which profess Christianity but there is, unfortunately, a fatal flaw and that is the possible inclusion of the Diocese of Pittsburgh; less because it is evangelical than that it permits the ordination of women, unlike the other three dioceses. Indeed, its ordinary, +Robert Duncan (who is a good and decent man), has stated he has no problem with it.

But it is still a problem. Back in the 'seventies, women's ordination was the camel's nose under the tent, the means by which the innovators were able to establish residency in the Episcopal Church. Once inside the host, which was a healthy and thriving institution, they set about the work of its destruction. The Province of the Southern Cone does not permit the ordination of women but by inviting the Diocese of Pittsburgh to join it, it imports the same virus that is leading to the demise of the Episcopal Church. Pittsburgh may claim it is "orthodox" in its beliefs but permitting the ordination of women betrays it as latitudinarian, willing to jettison those parts of orthodoxy that offend contemporary mores. His Grace Venables ought to remember the whole mess began in 1976, in Minneapolis, when the General Convention of the Episcopal Church voted to make legal the illegal ordination of women that had taken place a few years earlier. It was the beginning of the end.

The three Anglo-Catholic dioceses that have left or will leave the Episcopal Church no doubt concur with the Holy Father John Paul II when he wrote :

Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.

How do you compromise with that? You can't and sharing digs with those who think they can dooms the arrangement from the onset as it does, in time, the entire Anglican Communion. Bishop Schofield and his diocese, as well other Anglo-Catholic bishops and flocks who flee, should keep that in mind and, as I have written before, come to regard the Southern Cone as a most welcome but temporary refuge; where they may regroup and be restored before heading off, one more time, to the only safe and logical destination left these days for Anglo-Catholic conservatives.

Safe Harbor

Update: The Common Cause Partners, an umbrella group of various disaffected Anglican organizations, including Forward in Faith, an Anglo-Catholic association, have just announced "December 18, 2007 will mark the formal beginning of a 'separate ecclesiastical structure' in North America." This is all to the good, it will provide refuge for all those Christian Episcopalians whose dioceses have no intention of leaving. The concerns I express below about the fate of Anglo-Catholics still stand, however. (h/t the Newbie Anglican)

Over the weekend came the heartening news the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin (Central California), lead by the estimable +John-David Schofield, voted overwhelmingly at its annual convention, for the second and final time, to disassociate itself from the Episcopal Church, making it the first diocese to hightail it from that woebegone institution. As of Saturday, December 8th, the Diocese of San Joaquin is no longer part of the Episcopal Church but is aligned with the colorfully named Province of the Southern Cone, which consists of Anglican parishes found in the southern half of South America (the pointy part). The archbishop of that province, the Most Reverend Gregory Venables (now there's a fine Anglican name), only a couple of months ago extended an invitation to disaffected Episcopal Dioceses in the United States to come unto his fold. We may expect to see within the next year or so three more dioceses, Quincy (Illinois) and Fort Worth, both Anglo-Catholic, and Pittsburgh, evangelical, to follow the San Joaquians to South America. That may seem a good solution for those few Episcopal dioceses remaining which profess Christianity but there is, unfortunately, a fatal flaw and that is the possible inclusion of the Diocese of Pittsburgh; less because it is evangelical than that it permits the ordination of women, unlike the other three dioceses. Indeed, its ordinary, +Robert Duncan (who is a good and decent man), has stated he has no problem with it.

But it is still a problem. Back in the 'seventies, women's ordination was the camel's nose under the tent, the means by which the innovators were able to establish residency in the Episcopal Church. Once inside the host, which was a healthy and thriving institution, they set about the work of its destruction. The Province of the Southern Cone does not permit the ordination of women but by inviting the Diocese of Pittsburgh to join it, it imports the same virus that is leading to the demise of the Episcopal Church. Pittsburgh may claim it is "orthodox" in its beliefs but permitting the ordination of women betrays it as latitudinarian, willing to jettison those parts of orthodoxy that offend contemporary mores. His Grace Venables ought to remember the whole mess began in 1976, in Minneapolis, when the General Convention of the Episcopal Church voted to make legal the illegal ordination of women that had taken place a few years earlier. It was the beginning of the end.

The three Anglo-Catholic dioceses that have left or will leave the Episcopal Church no doubt concur with the Holy Father John Paul II when he wrote :

Wherefore, in order that all doubt may be removed regarding a matter of great importance, a matter which pertains to the Church's divine constitution itself, in virtue of my ministry of confirming the brethren (cf. Lk 22:32) I declare that the Church has no authority whatsoever to confer priestly ordination on women and that this judgment is to be definitively held by all the Church's faithful.

How do you compromise with that? You can't and sharing digs with those who think they can dooms the arrangement from the onset as it does, in time, the entire Anglican Communion. Bishop Schofield and his diocese, as well other Anglo-Catholic bishops and flocks who flee, should keep that in mind and, as I have written before, come to regard the Southern Cone as a most welcome but temporary refuge; where they may regroup and be restored before heading off, one more time, to the only safe and logical destination left these days for Anglo-Catholic conservatives.

Cardinal Kasper: "Wouldn't You Rather Swim the Bosphorus?"

The Catholic Herald (UK) reports that

One of the Vatican’s most senior cardinals has dismissed the idea that a breakaway group of Anglicans might be received into the Catholic Church en masse – despite Benedict XVI’s personal support for such a move. Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, told The Catholic Herald: “It’s not our policy to bring that many Anglicans to Rome.” The cardinal’s comments refer to the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), a rebel group which claims to represent 400,000 people. Its bishops sent a letter to Rome last month requesting “full, corporate and sacramental union”.

But the bishops did not send their letter to Cardinal Kasper. Instead they addressed it to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), where, it is understood, they expected a warmer reception.

It has been claimed that 60 Anglican parishes have joined the rebel group since their request became public. Vatican insiders say that Benedict XVI is scrutinising the matter very closely and believes that the TAC is setting out a path that other Anglicans will follow.

Cardinal Kasper may speak more hopefully than descriptively: it is hardly in his and other liberal Catholics' best interests for a large influx of Anglican traditionalists being received into the Holy Catholic Church, especially now, knowing most of them are hardly disposed toward the post-Vatican II radical reforms of the past thirty years. For at the same time the Roman Church was going through the wrenching and destructive reforms which she is only now beginning to shake off and reverse, so too, the Anglican Church, particularly in England and in North America, has undergone similarly destructive innovations. The outcome of the battle for the Anglican Communion as a whole, while not favorable, is still not determined but for England the battle is all but lost and for North America it is lost, decisively.

Weary Anglicans who flee the heresies of the past thirty years and relievedly embrace the full Catholic Faith and her undisputed sacraments, will cast a jaundiced eye upon those in Holy Mother Church who insist she must take the same broad path the Episcopalians and others took, leading to their perdition. Anglicans who pope may be battle weary but they are also battle hardened and are not likely to stand by (as many of us did in the early years of the assault on our former Church) to see a similar fate befall the One True Church, indeed they will fight more fiercely than ever. Innovators in the Catholic Church have good reason to fear and lobby against their en masse reception for they will present formidable and spirited opposition to their heterodoxy.

(h/t Creative Minority Report.)

Cardinal Kasper: "Wouldn't You Rather Swim the Bosphorus?"

The Catholic Herald (UK) reports that

One of the Vatican’s most senior cardinals has dismissed the idea that a breakaway group of Anglicans might be received into the Catholic Church en masse – despite Benedict XVI’s personal support for such a move. Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Christian Unity, told The Catholic Herald: “It’s not our policy to bring that many Anglicans to Rome.” The cardinal’s comments refer to the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC), a rebel group which claims to represent 400,000 people. Its bishops sent a letter to Rome last month requesting “full, corporate and sacramental union”.

But the bishops did not send their letter to Cardinal Kasper. Instead they addressed it to the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), where, it is understood, they expected a warmer reception.

It has been claimed that 60 Anglican parishes have joined the rebel group since their request became public. Vatican insiders say that Benedict XVI is scrutinising the matter very closely and believes that the TAC is setting out a path that other Anglicans will follow.

Cardinal Kasper may speak more hopefully than descriptively: it is hardly in his and other liberal Catholics' best interests for a large influx of Anglican traditionalists being received into the Holy Catholic Church, especially now, knowing most of them are hardly disposed toward the post-Vatican II radical reforms of the past thirty years. For at the same time the Roman Church was going through the wrenching and destructive reforms which she is only now beginning to shake off and reverse, so too, the Anglican Church, particularly in England and in North America, has undergone similarly destructive innovations. The outcome of the battle for the Anglican Communion as a whole, while not favorable, is still not determined but for England the battle is all but lost and for North America it is lost, decisively.

Weary Anglicans who flee the heresies of the past thirty years and relievedly embrace the full Catholic Faith and her undisputed sacraments, will cast a jaundiced eye upon those in Holy Mother Church who insist she must take the same broad path the Episcopalians and others took, leading to their perdition. Anglicans who pope may be battle weary but they are also battle hardened and are not likely to stand by (as many of us did in the early years of the assault on our former Church) to see a similar fate befall the One True Church, indeed they will fight more fiercely than ever. Innovators in the Catholic Church have good reason to fear and lobby against their en masse reception for they will present formidable and spirited opposition to their heterodoxy.

(h/t Creative Minority Report.)

A Religion of Peace

Calls in Sudan for execution of Briton

By MOHAMED OSMAN, Associated Press

KHARTOUM, Sudan - Thousands of Sudanese, many armed with clubs and knives, rallied Friday in a central square and demanded the execution of a British teacher convicted of insulting Islam for allowing her students to name a teddy bear "Muhammad."

In response to the demonstration, teacher Gillian Gibbons was moved from the women's prison near Khartoum to a secret location for her safety, her lawyer said.

The protesters streamed out of mosques after Friday sermons, as pickup trucks with loudspeakers blared messages against Gibbons, who was sentenced Thursday to 15 days in prison and deportation. She avoided the more serious punishment of 40 lashes.

They massed in central Martyrs Square outside the presidential palace, where hundreds of riot police were deployed. They did not try to stop the rally, , which lasted about an hour...

D'ya suppose, in light of this utterly preposterous but frightening incident, the nutroot organizations might reconsider casting as moral equivalents deranged, murderous Islamic thugs and Christian fundamentalists?

Yeah, I know. Stupid question.

A Religion of Peace

Calls in Sudan for execution of Briton

By MOHAMED OSMAN, Associated Press

KHARTOUM, Sudan - Thousands of Sudanese, many armed with clubs and knives, rallied Friday in a central square and demanded the execution of a British teacher convicted of insulting Islam for allowing her students to name a teddy bear "Muhammad."

In response to the demonstration, teacher Gillian Gibbons was moved from the women's prison near Khartoum to a secret location for her safety, her lawyer said.

The protesters streamed out of mosques after Friday sermons, as pickup trucks with loudspeakers blared messages against Gibbons, who was sentenced Thursday to 15 days in prison and deportation. She avoided the more serious punishment of 40 lashes.

They massed in central Martyrs Square outside the presidential palace, where hundreds of riot police were deployed. They did not try to stop the rally, , which lasted about an hour...

D'ya suppose, in light of this utterly preposterous but frightening incident, the nutroot organizations might reconsider casting as moral equivalents deranged, murderous Islamic thugs and Christian fundamentalists?

Yeah, I know. Stupid question.

Betty Butterfield and the Roman Catholic Church

I don't care much for female impersonators but I find hard to resist the character of Betty Butterfield, an addled working-class gal who is tirelessly shopping for a church that fits her style. Here she recounts a visit to the local Catholic church and I'm pleased to report she finds it mostly favorable.

Betty Butterfield and the Roman Catholic Church

I don't care much for female impersonators but I find hard to resist the character of Betty Butterfield, an addled working-class gal who is tirelessly shopping for a church that fits her style. Here she recounts a visit to the local Catholic church and I'm pleased to report she finds it mostly favorable.

N.O.W. ♥ Islamo-Fascists

From Fox News:

Sudan Charges British Teacher With Insulting Religion

KHARTOUM, Sudan — Sudan on Wednesday charged a British teacher with insulting religion and inciting hatred, a crime punishable by up to 40 lashes, six months in prison or a fine, after she named a class teddy bear "Muhammad."

The charges come a day after a 7-year-old Sudanese boy said Gilliam Gibbons, 54, asked him as part of a school assignment what he wanted to call the stuffed animal and he said, 'Muhammad,' after his name.

A spokeswoman for the National Organization for Women said the situation "is definitely on the radar, and N.O.W. is not ignoring it.

But she added that the U.S.-based organization is "not putting out a statement or taking a position."

No surprise there, the dedicated freedom lovers at N.O.W. could hardly be expected to take a stand against the stupefyingly barbaric treatment of women in Islamic countries. While they will trot out the usual Newspeak justifications, blathering about "cultural hegemony" and such to rationalize their silence, there is a far more critical purpose to their remaining mum: avoiding even the merest soupçon they--radical feminists--endorse the policies of the Bush administration; the enemy of their enemy is their friend. To the brave gals at N.O.W., it's better the schoolmarm's flogging goes unprotested than risk the sin of leftist apostasy. Besides, it happens in a part of the world in which they would never, ever dream of finding themselves.

(h/t The Jawa Report)

N.O.W. ♥ Islamo-Fascists

From Fox News:

Sudan Charges British Teacher With Insulting Religion

KHARTOUM, Sudan — Sudan on Wednesday charged a British teacher with insulting religion and inciting hatred, a crime punishable by up to 40 lashes, six months in prison or a fine, after she named a class teddy bear "Muhammad."

The charges come a day after a 7-year-old Sudanese boy said Gilliam Gibbons, 54, asked him as part of a school assignment what he wanted to call the stuffed animal and he said, 'Muhammad,' after his name.

A spokeswoman for the National Organization for Women said the situation "is definitely on the radar, and N.O.W. is not ignoring it.

But she added that the U.S.-based organization is "not putting out a statement or taking a position."

No surprise there, the dedicated freedom lovers at N.O.W. could hardly be expected to take a stand against the stupefyingly barbaric treatment of women in Islamic countries. While they will trot out the usual Newspeak justifications, blathering about "cultural hegemony" and such to rationalize their silence, there is a far more critical purpose to their remaining mum: avoiding even the merest soupçon they--radical feminists--endorse the policies of the Bush administration; the enemy of their enemy is their friend. To the brave gals at N.O.W., it's better the schoolmarm's flogging goes unprotested than risk the sin of leftist apostasy. Besides, it happens in a part of the world in which they would never, ever dream of finding themselves.

(h/t The Jawa Report)

The Archbishop of Canterbury Enclowns Himself

From the Times of London

US is‘worst’ imperialist: archbishop

The Archbishop of Canterbury has said that the United States wields its power in a way that is worse than Britain during its imperial heyday.

Read it all to learn His Grace is as facile as an Oxbridge poli-sci prof when spewing forth anti-American twaddle (in this instance, in a feeble attempt to earn street creds with the Muslims). I suspect the dwindling number of Anglicans who pin their hopes on +Williams holding the unravelling Communion together may find their ranks even further reduced following this embarrassment.

The Archbishop of Canterbury Enclowns Himself

From the Times of London

US is‘worst’ imperialist: archbishop

The Archbishop of Canterbury has said that the United States wields its power in a way that is worse than Britain during its imperial heyday.

Read it all to learn His Grace is as facile as an Oxbridge poli-sci prof when spewing forth anti-American twaddle (in this instance, in a feeble attempt to earn street creds with the Muslims). I suspect the dwindling number of Anglicans who pin their hopes on +Williams holding the unravelling Communion together may find their ranks even further reduced following this embarrassment.

Yet Another Bishop Popes...

This time His Grace John Lipscomb of Southwest Florida. I think his departure for Rome from the Episcopal Church is the most significant in years. Lipscomb and his counterpart +Herzog of Albany, who took the swim last March, could hardly be considered Anglo-Catholic. Both of them, egregiously, supported women's ordination (unlike +Steenson, whose leaving for Rome in September was not a huge surprise) but Herzog at least was Roman Catholic well into adulthood before converting to the Episcopal Church. Holy Mother Church has an uncanny ability at luring back even the most wayward members of her flock (think Lord Marchmain in "Brideshead"). Lipscomb has been Episcopalian for many years (coming from a Baptist upbringing) and his Tiber crossing serves as a clarion call to Anglicans everywhere: it is not just Anglo-Catholics who are embracing the full Catholic Faith, unable to abide the new-age, Gnostic cultists proliferating in the Anglican Communion, but also more mainstream protestants who realize only the Holy Catholic Church can fend off the onslaught of the heathen.

Yet Another Bishop Popes...

This time His Grace John Lipscomb of Southwest Florida. I think his departure for Rome from the Episcopal Church is the most significant in years. Lipscomb and his counterpart +Herzog of Albany, who took the swim last March, could hardly be considered Anglo-Catholic. Both of them, egregiously, supported women's ordination (unlike +Steenson, whose leaving for Rome in September was not a huge surprise) but Herzog at least was Roman Catholic well into adulthood before converting to the Episcopal Church. Holy Mother Church has an uncanny ability at luring back even the most wayward members of her flock (think Lord Marchmain in "Brideshead"). Lipscomb has been Episcopalian for many years (coming from a Baptist upbringing) and his Tiber crossing serves as a clarion call to Anglicans everywhere: it is not just Anglo-Catholics who are embracing the full Catholic Faith, unable to abide the new-age, Gnostic cultists proliferating in the Anglican Communion, but also more mainstream protestants who realize only the Holy Catholic Church can fend off the onslaught of the heathen.

De Profundis Clamo ad te Domine

Madam Schori on the current unpleasantness in the Episcopal Church:

"I'm not sure it is a stalemate," she said. "I think this church and others may just be becoming clearer about who they are."

"I believe we only know the fullness of God's truth at the end of time," she said. "And in the meantime, we have to be careful about being so sure that we understand it all."

"I think there are many in our church who feel beleaguered, and often they don't hear from other parts of the church that they, too, are beloved," the bishop said during the conversation with diocesan leaders in the sanctuary of St. Stephen's in the Field Church. "If we can ratchet it down a little, we may find a way to live together even if we don't agree.

And, for good measure, one from one of Madam's friends:

"She speaks from a very deep place," said Valerie Valle, a priest from Arroyo Grande near San Luis Obispo. "She listens to everything that's said, then goes deep."

Very, very deep. If you must have more, take a gander as the Los Angeles Times plants a full-on-the-mouth, sloppy wet kiss on on Mrs. Schori or spare yourself that excruciation by reading David Trimble's crisp and excellent summation on his blog, Still on Patrol. I advise the latter.

De Profundis Clamo ad te Domine

Madam Schori on the current unpleasantness in the Episcopal Church:

"I'm not sure it is a stalemate," she said. "I think this church and others may just be becoming clearer about who they are."

"I believe we only know the fullness of God's truth at the end of time," she said. "And in the meantime, we have to be careful about being so sure that we understand it all."

"I think there are many in our church who feel beleaguered, and often they don't hear from other parts of the church that they, too, are beloved," the bishop said during the conversation with diocesan leaders in the sanctuary of St. Stephen's in the Field Church. "If we can ratchet it down a little, we may find a way to live together even if we don't agree.

And, for good measure, one from one of Madam's friends:

"She speaks from a very deep place," said Valerie Valle, a priest from Arroyo Grande near San Luis Obispo. "She listens to everything that's said, then goes deep."

Very, very deep. If you must have more, take a gander as the Los Angeles Times plants a full-on-the-mouth, sloppy wet kiss on on Mrs. Schori or spare yourself that excruciation by reading David Trimble's crisp and excellent summation on his blog, Still on Patrol. I advise the latter.

A Temporary Measure

Jack Leo Iker, Bishop of the Diocese of Fort Worth in the Episcopal Church, made a bold observation and pronouncement yesterday in his address to the delegates at the diocese's annual convention.

And then just last week, the Presiding Bishop sent me an open letter, that she quickly posted on the internet, threatening disciplinary action against me if I did not prevent this Convention from acting on certain legislative proposals. I believe all of you have seen my reply. What you may not have seen is the Episcopal News Service story saying that if I did not heed her warning it would (and I quote) “force her to take action to bring the diocese and its leadership into line with the mandates of the national Church.” Now hold on there a minute. I don’t want to force her to do anything, but I must object to the claim that the Presiding Bishop has any canonical authority in this Diocese or any legitimate power over the leadership of this Diocese. She has no authority to bring Fort Worth into line with the mandates of a so-called “national Church.” There is no such thing as “the national Church.” We are a confederation of Dioceses, related to each other by our participation in General Convention. From the earliest days of the beginnings of the Episcopal Church in this country, including the formation of dioceses and eventually the creation of the General Convention itself, there has been a strong mistrust of centralized authority that is deeply rooted in our history as Episcopalians. We do not have an Archbishop in this Church, who has authority over other Bishops and their Dioceses. Instead, we have a Presiding Bishop, with very limited canonical responsibilities, mainly administrative in nature. We must object to the tendency in recent years in this Church to create some sort of central bureaucracy at the top that holds power and authority over the various Dioceses of this Church. We do not have a Curia that dictates policy and dogma in this Church. We do not have a Presiding Bishop with papal authority over us, nor do we believe in the infallibility of any Bishop or any council or, indeed, of any General Convention. If I may be so bold to speak on your behalf, dear friends: the leadership of this Diocese does not need to be brought into line with the mandates of some mythical “national Church.”

Well done, your Grace. The loose structure of the Episcopal Church would indeed seem to make it difficult for Katharine the Great, along with her Imperial Chancellor, to swoop down from New York and crush dissension in your diocese. Sadly and ironically however, it is that same lack of powerful central authority that permitted egregious innovations to irreversibly corrupt the Episcopal Church and will, I fear, do same to the entire Anglican Communion, owing to its own lack of central authority. Bishop Iker, along with (should they join him) his worthy counterparts Ackerman and Schofield of Quincy and San Joaquin respectively and the only Episcopalian dioceses remaining that may make any claim to Catholicity, ought to regard alignment with the Province of the Southern Cone as a lifeboat: welcome, to be sure, and on which their dioceses will thankfully remain afloat, yet still only a temporary vessel upon which they must continue the journey to the only seaworthy craft extant.

A Temporary Measure

Jack Leo Iker, Bishop of the Diocese of Fort Worth in the Episcopal Church, made a bold observation and pronouncement yesterday in his address to the delegates at the diocese's annual convention.

And then just last week, the Presiding Bishop sent me an open letter, that she quickly posted on the internet, threatening disciplinary action against me if I did not prevent this Convention from acting on certain legislative proposals. I believe all of you have seen my reply. What you may not have seen is the Episcopal News Service story saying that if I did not heed her warning it would (and I quote) “force her to take action to bring the diocese and its leadership into line with the mandates of the national Church.” Now hold on there a minute. I don’t want to force her to do anything, but I must object to the claim that the Presiding Bishop has any canonical authority in this Diocese or any legitimate power over the leadership of this Diocese. She has no authority to bring Fort Worth into line with the mandates of a so-called “national Church.” There is no such thing as “the national Church.” We are a confederation of Dioceses, related to each other by our participation in General Convention. From the earliest days of the beginnings of the Episcopal Church in this country, including the formation of dioceses and eventually the creation of the General Convention itself, there has been a strong mistrust of centralized authority that is deeply rooted in our history as Episcopalians. We do not have an Archbishop in this Church, who has authority over other Bishops and their Dioceses. Instead, we have a Presiding Bishop, with very limited canonical responsibilities, mainly administrative in nature. We must object to the tendency in recent years in this Church to create some sort of central bureaucracy at the top that holds power and authority over the various Dioceses of this Church. We do not have a Curia that dictates policy and dogma in this Church. We do not have a Presiding Bishop with papal authority over us, nor do we believe in the infallibility of any Bishop or any council or, indeed, of any General Convention. If I may be so bold to speak on your behalf, dear friends: the leadership of this Diocese does not need to be brought into line with the mandates of some mythical “national Church.”

Well done, your Grace. The loose structure of the Episcopal Church would indeed seem to make it difficult for Katharine the Great, along with her Imperial Chancellor, to swoop down from New York and crush dissension in your diocese. Sadly and ironically however, it is that same lack of powerful central authority that permitted egregious innovations to irreversibly corrupt the Episcopal Church and will, I fear, do same to the entire Anglican Communion, owing to its own lack of central authority. Bishop Iker, along with (should they join him) his worthy counterparts Ackerman and Schofield of Quincy and San Joaquin respectively and the only Episcopalian dioceses remaining that may make any claim to Catholicity, ought to regard alignment with the Province of the Southern Cone as a lifeboat: welcome, to be sure, and on which their dioceses will thankfully remain afloat, yet still only a temporary vessel upon which they must continue the journey to the only seaworthy craft extant.

Now This Ought to be Fun

BOSTON (AP) - Sen. John Kerry, whose 2004 presidential campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record, said Friday he has personally accepted a Texas oilman's offer to pay $1 million to anyone who can disprove even a single charge of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

(h/t Patterico)

Now This Ought to be Fun

BOSTON (AP) - Sen. John Kerry, whose 2004 presidential campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record, said Friday he has personally accepted a Texas oilman's offer to pay $1 million to anyone who can disprove even a single charge of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth.

(h/t Patterico)

Sanity from a Most Unlikely Source

The most left-wing by far of the courts of appeals, the wackadoodle 9th Circuit, ruled today in favor of the Bush Administration that "a lawsuit challenging the government's warrantless wiretapping program could not go forward because of the 'state secrets' privilege." The lawsuit was filed by one of those Arab "charities" that in reality served as a money-washing machine for Al Qaeda . "In a 3-0 decision, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the government, which had argued that allowing an Islamic charity's claims that it was illegally spied upon to go forward would threaten national security."

It is a dark day for the nutroot organizations. The 9th Circuit for years has served as Old Reliable for those itching for a ruling against the Bush Administration, no matter how barmy the complaint. Even more galling for the MoveOners, Democratic Undergrounders and Kossacks, one of the three judges was a favorite of theirs, lefty Harry Pregerson. I guess now if they want to get their way on this issue they'll be forced to have a stab at the quaint and old-fashioned method known as legislation. I'm sure Speaker Pelosi will be happy to accommodate them but then, unlike judicial edicts, it will have to be voted on.

More here and here.

Sanity from a Most Unlikely Source

The most left-wing by far of the courts of appeals, the wackadoodle 9th Circuit, ruled today in favor of the Bush Administration that "a lawsuit challenging the government's warrantless wiretapping program could not go forward because of the 'state secrets' privilege." The lawsuit was filed by one of those Arab "charities" that in reality served as a money-washing machine for Al Qaeda . "In a 3-0 decision, the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals sided with the government, which had argued that allowing an Islamic charity's claims that it was illegally spied upon to go forward would threaten national security."

It is a dark day for the nutroot organizations. The 9th Circuit for years has served as Old Reliable for those itching for a ruling against the Bush Administration, no matter how barmy the complaint. Even more galling for the MoveOners, Democratic Undergrounders and Kossacks, one of the three judges was a favorite of theirs, lefty Harry Pregerson. I guess now if they want to get their way on this issue they'll be forced to have a stab at the quaint and old-fashioned method known as legislation. I'm sure Speaker Pelosi will be happy to accommodate them but then, unlike judicial edicts, it will have to be voted on.

More here and here.

This Guy Means Business

Damian Thompson, in the Telegraph, writes His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI has big plans.

The 80-year-old Pontiff is planning a purification of the Roman liturgy in which decades of trendy innovations will be swept away. This recovery of the sacred is intended to draw Catholics closer to the Orthodox and ultimately to heal the 1,000 year Great Schism. But it is also designed to attract vast numbers of conservative Anglicans, who will be offered the protection of the Holy Father if they covert en masse

The underlying motive:

The liberation of the Latin liturgy, the rapprochement with Eastern Orthodoxy, the absorption of former Anglicans - all these ambitions reflect Benedict's conviction that the Catholic Church must rediscover the liturgical treasure of Christian history to perform its most important task: worshipping God.

Duh. Read it all. Naturally, the liberals are livid.

(Thanks to William Tighe.)

This Guy Means Business

Damian Thompson, in the Telegraph, writes His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI has big plans.

The 80-year-old Pontiff is planning a purification of the Roman liturgy in which decades of trendy innovations will be swept away. This recovery of the sacred is intended to draw Catholics closer to the Orthodox and ultimately to heal the 1,000 year Great Schism. But it is also designed to attract vast numbers of conservative Anglicans, who will be offered the protection of the Holy Father if they covert en masse

The underlying motive:

The liberation of the Latin liturgy, the rapprochement with Eastern Orthodoxy, the absorption of former Anglicans - all these ambitions reflect Benedict's conviction that the Catholic Church must rediscover the liturgical treasure of Christian history to perform its most important task: worshipping God.

Duh. Read it all. Naturally, the liberals are livid.

(Thanks to William Tighe.)

Balls in Baltimore

From the Baltimore Sun

Funeral prompts firing of priest
S. Baltimore pastor joined by Episcopal priest during Mass

Baltimore's new Roman Catholic archbishop removed a priest who was pastor of three South Baltimore parishes for offenses that include officiating at a funeral Mass with an Episcopal priest, which violates canon law.

Archbishop Edwin F. O'Brien personally ordered the Rev. Ray Martin, who has led the Catholic Community of South Baltimore for five years, to resign from the three churches and sign a statement yesterday apologizing for "bringing scandal to the church."

Martin led the funeral Mass on Oct. 15 for Locust Point activist Ann Shirley Doda at Our Lady of Good Counsel with several clergy, including the Rev. Annette Chappell, the pastor of the Episcopal Church of the Redemption in Locust Point, Martin said.

Good for his Grace. Naturally, the Sun (and sadly, too: it was once edited by H. L. Mencken, one of my favorite atheists) the entire slant of the story, from the headline on down, is of the mean old bishop of the mean old Catholic Church victimizing a dedicated, if idealistic priest and includes a few sob quotes from the plantee's survivors who are stunned the bishop could be so cruel. Never mind Fr. Martin has repeatedly pulled stunts likes this, has repeatedly been counselled not to and has repeatedly ignored that counsel; never mind the survivors' upset could have been avoided if Fr. Martin had simply followed the Church teachings he vowed to uphold at his ordination. A spokesman for the Archdiocese of Baltimore couldn't have stated Bishop O'Brien's case more clearly: "How can we expect our own people to follow the teachings of the church if the priests don't?" Indeed, sir and a word to the wise: if you don't nip these things in the bud you must nip them in full flower and that is far messier.

(h/t Creative Minority Report)

Balls in Baltimore

From the Baltimore Sun

Funeral prompts firing of priest
S. Baltimore pastor joined by Episcopal priest during Mass

Baltimore's new Roman Catholic archbishop removed a priest who was pastor of three South Baltimore parishes for offenses that include officiating at a funeral Mass with an Episcopal priest, which violates canon law.

Archbishop Edwin F. O'Brien personally ordered the Rev. Ray Martin, who has led the Catholic Community of South Baltimore for five years, to resign from the three churches and sign a statement yesterday apologizing for "bringing scandal to the church."

Martin led the funeral Mass on Oct. 15 for Locust Point activist Ann Shirley Doda at Our Lady of Good Counsel with several clergy, including the Rev. Annette Chappell, the pastor of the Episcopal Church of the Redemption in Locust Point, Martin said.

Good for his Grace. Naturally, the Sun (and sadly, too: it was once edited by H. L. Mencken, one of my favorite atheists) the entire slant of the story, from the headline on down, is of the mean old bishop of the mean old Catholic Church victimizing a dedicated, if idealistic priest and includes a few sob quotes from the plantee's survivors who are stunned the bishop could be so cruel. Never mind Fr. Martin has repeatedly pulled stunts likes this, has repeatedly been counselled not to and has repeatedly ignored that counsel; never mind the survivors' upset could have been avoided if Fr. Martin had simply followed the Church teachings he vowed to uphold at his ordination. A spokesman for the Archdiocese of Baltimore couldn't have stated Bishop O'Brien's case more clearly: "How can we expect our own people to follow the teachings of the church if the priests don't?" Indeed, sir and a word to the wise: if you don't nip these things in the bud you must nip them in full flower and that is far messier.

(h/t Creative Minority Report)

Shooting the Moon

A while back the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church sent the Rt. Reverend Jack Iker of the Diocese of Fort Worth, an Anglo-Catholic stronghold, a snippy letter suggesting she would larn him good, via ecclesiastical discipline, if he didn't toe the line. The good bishop replied to that threat over the weekend in a letter that is a masterpiece of clarity, so unlike the usual unctuous goo which oozes from the new religionists running the Episcopal Church. It is worth quoting in its entirety.

The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori
815 Second Avenue
New York, NY 10017

Dear Katharine,

I have received your letter of November 8th and am rather surprised by your suggestion that I have somehow abandoned the communion of the church and may be subject to ecclesiastical discipline. Such a charge is baseless. I have abandoned nothing, and I have violated no canons. Every year at our Chrism Mass, I very happily reaffirm my ordination vows, along with all our clergy, that I will be “loyal to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them.” (BCP, pages 526 and 538)

It is highly inappropriate for you to attempt to interfere in the internal life of this diocese as we prayerfully prepare to gather in Convention. The threatening tone of your open letter makes no attempt to promote reconciliation, mediation, or even dialogue about our profound theological differences. Instead, it appears designed to intimidate our delegates and me, in an attempt to deter us from taking any action that opposes the direction in which you are leading our Church. It is deeply troubling that you would have me prevent the clergy and laity of this diocese from openly discussing our future place in the life of the wider Anglican Communion, as we debate a variety of proposals. As you well know, the polity of this Church requires the full participation of the clergy and lay orders, not just bishops, in the decision making process. It grieves me that as the Presiding Bishop you would misuse your office in an attempt to intimidate and manipulate this diocese.

While I do not wish to meet antagonism with antagonism, I must remind you that 25 years ago this month, the newly formed Diocese of Fort Worth voluntarily voted to enter into union with the General Convention of the Episcopal Church. If circumstances warrant it, we can likewise, by voluntary vote, terminate that relationship. Your aggressive, dictatorial posturing has no place in that decision. Sadly, however, your missive will now be one of the factors that our Convention will consider as we determine the future course of this diocese for the next 25 years and beyond, under God’s grace and guidance.

In closing, let me be very clear. While your threats deeply sadden us, they do not frighten us. We will continue to stand firm for the unchanging truth of the Holy Scriptures and the redeeming Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, whatever the costs. I shall continue to pray for you, as I trust you will pray for me, in the difficult days ahead.

Faithfully in Christ,

The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth

Isn't that just fine? It always warms my heart seeing someone stand up to a bully.

Bishop Iker will likely pull his diocese from the rapidly failing Episcopal Church and align it with the Most Reverend Gregory J. Venables and his Province of the Southern Cone, which by the way is not an exotic ice cream treat but refers to the lower part of South America. The Southern Cone is probably a safe harbor for Bishop Iker and his diocese but I wonder, since Iker and virtually all of the Diocese of Fort Worth are Anglo-Catholics and ardently opposed to the "ordination" of women (and other innovations), whether he shouldn't yank his flock entirely from the Anglican Communion, which is getting increasingly soft world-wide on women's ordination, and consider a different tack. The Pope has just announced he will be visiting New York next spring. His Grace just might want to consider making a trip to NYC at that time and petition his Holiness to receive his entire diocese into the Holy Catholic Church: a slightly audacious suggestion, to be sure, but it would make a splendid fit.

Shooting the Moon

A while back the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church sent the Rt. Reverend Jack Iker of the Diocese of Fort Worth, an Anglo-Catholic stronghold, a snippy letter suggesting she would larn him good, via ecclesiastical discipline, if he didn't toe the line. The good bishop replied to that threat over the weekend in a letter that is a masterpiece of clarity, so unlike the usual unctuous goo which oozes from the new religionists running the Episcopal Church. It is worth quoting in its entirety.

The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori
815 Second Avenue
New York, NY 10017

Dear Katharine,

I have received your letter of November 8th and am rather surprised by your suggestion that I have somehow abandoned the communion of the church and may be subject to ecclesiastical discipline. Such a charge is baseless. I have abandoned nothing, and I have violated no canons. Every year at our Chrism Mass, I very happily reaffirm my ordination vows, along with all our clergy, that I will be “loyal to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them.” (BCP, pages 526 and 538)

It is highly inappropriate for you to attempt to interfere in the internal life of this diocese as we prayerfully prepare to gather in Convention. The threatening tone of your open letter makes no attempt to promote reconciliation, mediation, or even dialogue about our profound theological differences. Instead, it appears designed to intimidate our delegates and me, in an attempt to deter us from taking any action that opposes the direction in which you are leading our Church. It is deeply troubling that you would have me prevent the clergy and laity of this diocese from openly discussing our future place in the life of the wider Anglican Communion, as we debate a variety of proposals. As you well know, the polity of this Church requires the full participation of the clergy and lay orders, not just bishops, in the decision making process. It grieves me that as the Presiding Bishop you would misuse your office in an attempt to intimidate and manipulate this diocese.

While I do not wish to meet antagonism with antagonism, I must remind you that 25 years ago this month, the newly formed Diocese of Fort Worth voluntarily voted to enter into union with the General Convention of the Episcopal Church. If circumstances warrant it, we can likewise, by voluntary vote, terminate that relationship. Your aggressive, dictatorial posturing has no place in that decision. Sadly, however, your missive will now be one of the factors that our Convention will consider as we determine the future course of this diocese for the next 25 years and beyond, under God’s grace and guidance.

In closing, let me be very clear. While your threats deeply sadden us, they do not frighten us. We will continue to stand firm for the unchanging truth of the Holy Scriptures and the redeeming Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, whatever the costs. I shall continue to pray for you, as I trust you will pray for me, in the difficult days ahead.

Faithfully in Christ,

The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth

Isn't that just fine? It always warms my heart seeing someone stand up to a bully.

Bishop Iker will likely pull his diocese from the rapidly failing Episcopal Church and align it with the Most Reverend Gregory J. Venables and his Province of the Southern Cone, which by the way is not an exotic ice cream treat but refers to the lower part of South America. The Southern Cone is probably a safe harbor for Bishop Iker and his diocese but I wonder, since Iker and virtually all of the Diocese of Fort Worth are Anglo-Catholics and ardently opposed to the "ordination" of women (and other innovations), whether he shouldn't yank his flock entirely from the Anglican Communion, which is getting increasingly soft world-wide on women's ordination, and consider a different tack. The Pope has just announced he will be visiting New York next spring. His Grace just might want to consider making a trip to NYC at that time and petition his Holiness to receive his entire diocese into the Holy Catholic Church: a slightly audacious suggestion, to be sure, but it would make a splendid fit.

Nipping it in the Bud (What Took So Long?)

Excommunication looms for would-be women priests

St. Louis, Nov. 8, 2007 (CWNews.com) - Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis has warned two local women that they face excommunication if they go through with plans for a Sunday ceremony at which they will claim to be ordained as priests.

The archbishop sent personal letters by courier to Rose Marie Dunn Hudson and Elsie Hainz McGrath, reminding them that they would incur the "censure of excommunication" if they participated in the ceremony, which is being held at a Jewish synagogue under the auspices of the "Womenpriests" organization.

Archbishop Burke noted that the fraudulent "ordination" ceremony, held in direct violation of Church teaching and authority, would constitute an "act of schism." He warned the women that additional penalties could be used against them, along with the excommunication that would be automatically imposed.

Well, of course and bravo! It's nice to see a bishop showing spine: no "listening process," just plain clear (but respectful) English laying down the law. We need to see more of this. If we don't, before long we will hear from men demanding they should be nuns.

Nipping it in the Bud (What Took So Long?)

Excommunication looms for would-be women priests

St. Louis, Nov. 8, 2007 (CWNews.com) - Archbishop Raymond Burke of St. Louis has warned two local women that they face excommunication if they go through with plans for a Sunday ceremony at which they will claim to be ordained as priests.

The archbishop sent personal letters by courier to Rose Marie Dunn Hudson and Elsie Hainz McGrath, reminding them that they would incur the "censure of excommunication" if they participated in the ceremony, which is being held at a Jewish synagogue under the auspices of the "Womenpriests" organization.

Archbishop Burke noted that the fraudulent "ordination" ceremony, held in direct violation of Church teaching and authority, would constitute an "act of schism." He warned the women that additional penalties could be used against them, along with the excommunication that would be automatically imposed.

Well, of course and bravo! It's nice to see a bishop showing spine: no "listening process," just plain clear (but respectful) English laying down the law. We need to see more of this. If we don't, before long we will hear from men demanding they should be nuns.

Who Says Germans Don't Have a Sense of Humor?

He's making a list
And checking it twice
Gonna find out who's naughty or nice.

(h/t Creative Minority Report)

Who Says Germans Don't Have a Sense of Humor?

He's making a list
And checking it twice
Gonna find out who's naughty or nice.

(h/t Creative Minority Report)

Urgent Prayer Request...

For the parents of these morons (from the New York Sun):

Five students at Columbia University are staging a hunger strike to protest what they say is a Eurocentric core curriculum and a growing climate of racism on campus. They are also protesting the university's Harlem expansion plan, calling it disruptive.

Two sophomores at Barnard College and three Columbia students last ate Tuesday evening and said they would not break their fast until the school committed to a core curriculum that includes a seminar addressing issues of "racialization and colonialism," among their other demands.

I'm already hungry," a senior at Columbia, Bryan Mercer, 22, said yesterday, less than 24 hours into the strike. Mr. Mercer, who is majoring in anthropology and comparative ethnic studies, said he has been scaling back his diet for weeks in preparation for the strike. His said his last meal was a sparse helping of fruit and bread...The strikers said they would stop attending classes when they felt too weak to concentrate.

I wonder the outrage the progenitors of these cub Marxists feel after shelling out $45,095 (tuition and fees for this year alone) to learn their precious ones have stopped eating, stopped going to class and ditched their expensive dorms to encamp al fresco on the steps of Low Library; especially when they read their inchoate babblings to the press. On the other hand, these parents are boomers (like me), quite possibly of the socialist millionaire class (assuredly not like me) and perhaps feel nostalgia and a vicarious thrill as their little ones form ad-hoc coalitions and compose their very own "hey, hey, ho, ho" chants; the same jejune behavior Mommy and Daddy sported in when they were undergraduates.

Meanwhile, the reaction from the Columbia administration is depressingly familiar:

"Columbia encourages students to express their points of view and supports their right of public protest," a spokeswoman for Columbia, LaVerna Fountain, said in a statement. Administrators are planning to meet with striking students this week, and the health center will be monitoring students' vital signs.

We need to face up to the fact America's leading colleges and universities, public and private, are lost to the Marxists. While football is still played, beer is still slogged and the halls still ivy-covered, it is all a facade; they are utterly transformed within. Poll after poll reveals the overwhelming leftist slant of most college faculties and administrations. Opinions even slightly contrary to the leftist canon are ruthlessly suppressed while at the same time dreary noisome protests for every leftist cause, no matter how inane, are openly or tacitly encouraged.

One fine day, maybe, many more parents in this country not embarrassed to call themselves Americans (in other words the vast majority of them) will realize superb educations can be had at the numerous small, often religiously affiliated, non-name brand liberal (in the true sense of the word) arts colleges throughout our land: institutions they can confidently send their kids to knowing they will not come home Christmas break as brainwashed Marxist automatons. Let us pray that day comes and the oligopolistic Marxist factories like Yale, Harvard, Columbia et al. will be driven out of business; by forces of the market, no less.

Oh well, it's fun to imagine.

Urgent Prayer Request...

For the parents of these morons (from the New York Sun):

Five students at Columbia University are staging a hunger strike to protest what they say is a Eurocentric core curriculum and a growing climate of racism on campus. They are also protesting the university's Harlem expansion plan, calling it disruptive.

Two sophomores at Barnard College and three Columbia students last ate Tuesday evening and said they would not break their fast until the school committed to a core curriculum that includes a seminar addressing issues of "racialization and colonialism," among their other demands.

I'm already hungry," a senior at Columbia, Bryan Mercer, 22, said yesterday, less than 24 hours into the strike. Mr. Mercer, who is majoring in anthropology and comparative ethnic studies, said he has been scaling back his diet for weeks in preparation for the strike. His said his last meal was a sparse helping of fruit and bread...The strikers said they would stop attending classes when they felt too weak to concentrate.

I wonder the outrage the progenitors of these cub Marxists feel after shelling out $45,095 (tuition and fees for this year alone) to learn their precious ones have stopped eating, stopped going to class and ditched their expensive dorms to encamp al fresco on the steps of Low Library; especially when they read their inchoate babblings to the press. On the other hand, these parents are boomers (like me), quite possibly of the socialist millionaire class (assuredly not like me) and perhaps feel nostalgia and a vicarious thrill as their little ones form ad-hoc coalitions and compose their very own "hey, hey, ho, ho" chants; the same jejune behavior Mommy and Daddy sported in when they were undergraduates.

Meanwhile, the reaction from the Columbia administration is depressingly familiar:

"Columbia encourages students to express their points of view and supports their right of public protest," a spokeswoman for Columbia, LaVerna Fountain, said in a statement. Administrators are planning to meet with striking students this week, and the health center will be monitoring students' vital signs.

We need to face up to the fact America's leading colleges and universities, public and private, are lost to the Marxists. While football is still played, beer is still slogged and the halls still ivy-covered, it is all a facade; they are utterly transformed within. Poll after poll reveals the overwhelming leftist slant of most college faculties and administrations. Opinions even slightly contrary to the leftist canon are ruthlessly suppressed while at the same time dreary noisome protests for every leftist cause, no matter how inane, are openly or tacitly encouraged.

One fine day, maybe, many more parents in this country not embarrassed to call themselves Americans (in other words the vast majority of them) will realize superb educations can be had at the numerous small, often religiously affiliated, non-name brand liberal (in the true sense of the word) arts colleges throughout our land: institutions they can confidently send their kids to knowing they will not come home Christmas break as brainwashed Marxist automatons. Let us pray that day comes and the oligopolistic Marxist factories like Yale, Harvard, Columbia et al. will be driven out of business; by forces of the market, no less.

Oh well, it's fun to imagine.

Telling it Like it is

Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee has created a stir over a speech he gave a few weeks ago to the Family Research Council, at which he addressed the abortion issue. From the Jewish Daily Forward:

Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee emerged from the recent Values Voter Summit with a new wave of support from Christian conservatives, but he also garnered some unwanted attention from Jewish leaders incensed over his use of the word “holocaust.”

...“Sometimes we talk about why we’re importing so many people in our work force,” Huckabee said. “It might be for the last 35 years, we have aborted more than a million people who would have been in our work force had we not had the holocaust of liberalized abortion under a flawed Supreme Court ruling in 1973.”

Some Jewish leaders have taken exception to Huckabee's use of "holocaust," Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League in particular. He fired off a letter of protest to Huckabee claiming use of the word “only trivialize[s] and diminish[es] the horror." I am sympathetic with Mr. Foxman. There are cranks and nut jobs out there who complain, "the Jews think they own the Holocaust" but they do, really; we must remember in six years the Germans wiped a third of them off the earth. Huckabee would be wise to find other words to describe the horror of abortion: "wholesale slaughter" or "genocide" would do just fine. That said, however, Huckabee also earns my huge respect for at least calling abortion for what it is, not dancing around it and mincing words as do many of the Republican presidential candidates; not to mention all the Democratic candidates for every office from president to county clerk.

(h/t Creative Minority Report.)

Telling it Like it is

Presidential Candidate Mike Huckabee has created a stir over a speech he gave a few weeks ago to the Family Research Council, at which he addressed the abortion issue. From the Jewish Daily Forward:

Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee emerged from the recent Values Voter Summit with a new wave of support from Christian conservatives, but he also garnered some unwanted attention from Jewish leaders incensed over his use of the word “holocaust.”

...“Sometimes we talk about why we’re importing so many people in our work force,” Huckabee said. “It might be for the last 35 years, we have aborted more than a million people who would have been in our work force had we not had the holocaust of liberalized abortion under a flawed Supreme Court ruling in 1973.”

Some Jewish leaders have taken exception to Huckabee's use of "holocaust," Abraham Foxman of the Anti-Defamation League in particular. He fired off a letter of protest to Huckabee claiming use of the word “only trivialize[s] and diminish[es] the horror." I am sympathetic with Mr. Foxman. There are cranks and nut jobs out there who complain, "the Jews think they own the Holocaust" but they do, really; we must remember in six years the Germans wiped a third of them off the earth. Huckabee would be wise to find other words to describe the horror of abortion: "wholesale slaughter" or "genocide" would do just fine. That said, however, Huckabee also earns my huge respect for at least calling abortion for what it is, not dancing around it and mincing words as do many of the Republican presidential candidates; not to mention all the Democratic candidates for every office from president to county clerk.

(h/t Creative Minority Report.)