Friday, June 15, 2007

Nothing new under the sun

Jake's gracious acceptance speech for his Braxton's Lear award (I'm assuming it's THE Jake - I don't usually get top-drawer revisionists here, so I'm a bit wary that someone may just be posing as him, to make a fool out of me) illustrated an argument I made last year. He wrote
There have always been congregations in some kind of dispute with their bishop. The goal has been reconciliation. But now, with foreign bishops standing in the wings wooing them, and their nice assessments, away, such reconciliation doesn't have a chance. This behavior encourages congregationalism. Don't like your bishop? Then just choose another.
This is the sophisticated man-of-the-world pose, otherwise known as the "there is no new thing under the sun" ploy. Yes, there have always been congregations in some kind of dispute with their bishop. That doesn't mean that this is one of those cases. Just because in the past parishes have gotten into arguments with their bishops over trivial things doesn't mean that all arguments with bishops are trivial. This is like telling a beaten woman, "Oh, all couples have their little arguments!" Yes, they do, but that doesn't adequately cover her current situation. ALL little arguments don't end in fisticuffs; ALL women don't end up black and blue; and ALL bishops haven't tried to force sub-Christian, degenerate theology on their congregations.

It has to be made clear; we are not living in a Trollope novel. This is not going to end with some gentle head-shaking over the length of a chasuble or an inch of lace. This is life and death stuff for people who are thinking of eternity.

Let's not forget that the first revisionists weren't people who wanted to update church music or language - they were historians, who wanted history to be read differently based on their current political prejudices. Episcopal revisionists follow the same path. Dangerous ideas are "domesticated" and rendered harmless by pretending that this has all be discussed and decided long ago. So a hamfisted lawsuit by a Bishop Bruno is not an outrageous exercise of clerical tyranny; it's just a reprise of that quaint old comedy of the Bishop of High Dudgeon versus the Vicar of Puddington-on-the-Crawly over the date of the church fête.

7 Comments:

Blogger C. Andiron said...

Oh, I'm pretty sure it's the same Jake. He posted almost verbatim the same drivel on Stand Firm:
http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/3651/

If the battle hardened veterans there accept him as the real thing, it's a pretty safe bet.

12:53 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Isn't Stand Firm some sort of breast augmentation cream, which I saw advertised on QVC?

I think it was Linda Evans who hosted.

Ayn

1:32 pm  
Blogger AQuinault said...

"It is worth asking why liberals feel compelled to put on this clumsy charade, especially as it fools no one. Of course, they could be doing it just to be annoying. But I think there is a deeper impulse at work."

In this case, it's a tough call :p

1:48 pm  
Blogger Nicholodeon said...

One of the Fathers wrote: 'Where the bishop is, there is the Church.' Of course, I understand this in a Russian Orthodox context.

Among us, the people don't mix with 'electing' the bishops. The other bishops take care of this, and they discern from among the clergy those who are 'episcopabile'. Priests have to have chosen to live as monks before they can be considered for consecration to the episcopacy.

So cannot understand what 'youse guys' mean by choosing another bishop.

11:47 am  
Anonymous ellie m said...

And since we're on the topic of reappraiser nuttiness, I simply have to share the following quote from the Episcopal Majority site:

"As the 20/20 Task Force recognized in 2001, growth is concerned with more than merely numbers."

We're not shrinking, we're - uh - growing! Yes, that's it: growing in a nifty new kind of way! Mere numbers are double-plus ungood!

12:14 pm  
Blogger The Bovina Bloviator said...

Ellie M, let's call it "differently growing."

8:39 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Over-the-top rhetoric seems to be standard fare in revisionist circles. I posted a relatively mild refutation of a revisionist assertion at Jakes a few months ago and one commenter said she felt as if she had been "raped" reading it. I kid you not.

Should we start a pool to see how long it takes Jake to stick Kolini, Akinola, et al. into Panzers beseiging the righteous and their leader, St. Kate?

Jeffersonian

1:14 pm  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home