Wednesday, June 13, 2007

Braxton's Lear - It takes a pillage

Fr. Jake cranks it up to '11':
So now Rwanda, Nigeria and Kenya are being allowed to consecrate bishops for North America, to better facilitate their pillaging of parishes. None of the entities will be recognized by Canterbury, of course, but I'm not sure that matters to them anymore. Any means, including invasions, to justify their ends; the expansion of their personal kingdoms, which more and more appear to have nothing to do with Anglicanism.

It appears once again that the Telegraph attempted to make much ado about nothing. Just another Primatial Pirate on the horizon, who has decided this is the time to unfurl his Jolly Roger. He condemns himself by his unethical behavior.
A year ago, it was only "sheep-stealing". Now we're up to "pillaging", and you all know what that leads to. The idea of Anglicans, Anglicans, for God's sake! "pillaging" and plundering and swinging cutlasses and generally running amok, is so ridiculous I hardly know what to say. It's like those websites where people dress their kitties up in pirate costumes for Halloween.

Mark Steyn has written a few times about how, the truculence of the language is in inverse proportion to the amount of physical risk on the Left.
These days, your average Chief of the defence Staff is a meek, mild-mannered, caring general who speaks softly and explains that the purpose of the highly limited bombing is to make it safe for our planes to go in and drop TV dinners....As the memory of real war recedes, the ersatz warriors of the political ops rooms have eagerly appropriated the martial imagery.
This sort of talk doesn't come well from people who think a "broadside" is something you pay your lawyer to come up with in court.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

The thing that irritates me about this kind of talk is that the parishes in question voluntarily WANT to escape TEC. It's not like anybody is being oppressed or deposed or anything. Ugh, definitely Braxton material.

Anyway, I thought liberals approved of rebelling against the establishment.

12:30 am  
Blogger Dr. Mabuse said...

I would have thought that would make a difference too, but apparently not in this case. It's like blaming battered women's shelters for undermining the family.

7:41 am  
Blogger Jake said...

You're a little late on picking up on the pirate language. My personal favorite was from some time ago:

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 theft. And, since they must cross oceans to accomplish it, they are pirates. Primatial pirates in purple shirts, pillaging and plundering parishes.

Glad to see you enjoyed the image. Please carry on; just make sure you get the link to Jake's place right.

1:36 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I'd like to say, 'Jake, there are always two extremes on a spectrum by which you can err, and you're not arguing clearly about where TEC is on that spectrum and why. For example, you wouldn't want to reconcile with a Satanist Bishop, would you?'

But maybe at this point such reductio ad absurd arguments are impossible. After all we've had the atheist pisky (Spong), the wiccan pisky, the bozo the clown pisky, and now the muslim pisky. Maybe TEC no longer has any conception of the absurd, and you do think a Satanist Episcopalian Bishop is someone an orthodox congregation ought to reconcile with.

"This is theft"
No, that is your ipse dixit.

2:08 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Doc, is all this making you nostalgic for Anglicanism? Remember, we've kept the light on and the door open.

2:30 pm  
Blogger Dr. Mabuse said...

anon - Just like Motel Six!

2:38 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is nothing but rubbish. I left the Episcopal Church because of doctrinal reasons. I joined a congregation of like-minded Anglicans, and WE sought oversight from Kenya. The Archbishop of Kenya, as well as our specific Bishop (of Thika) are NOT actively attempting to get people to leave the Episcopal Church. They are merely providing protection and oversight for those of who are not receiving protection and oversight from the Episcopal Church or the Archbishop of Canterbury. (Witness the lack of Lambeth invitations to anyone who has separated from the Episcopal Church.) Moreover, the Episcopal Church has made concerted efforts to impugn, sanction and drive out anyone who disagrees with the party line.

We are definitely left out in the cold. Even though the Windsor Report stated that provision for groups like us would be made, absolutely nothing has been done. I am so glad that Kenya is taking care of us!

The Kenyans I know have such a pure faith and are full of happiness and joy because of their relationship with our Lord. It is truly a blessing.

3:38 pm  
Blogger Jackie said...

Jake says: There have always been congregations in some kind of dispute with their bishop. The goal has been reconciliation.

Cough. Choke. Cough, Choke, fall down and laugh hysterically.

Some kind of dispute. You mean like the Bishop out in California who is allowing Susan Russell's parish to call God a child abuser? Oh yeah, that's rich.

How can it be pirating when they aren't the ones asking to be involved? When they are the ones who are simply offering shelter to the weak and under-represented, just like that very same parish did yesterday with the illegal immigrant.

Let's get real. If ECUSA would man up to the fact that their real purpose is conversion to Unitarianism, all these problems would just go away.

4:35 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jake simply does not understand and does not realise that he is not a Christian - and that ECUSA is not a Christian Church

We should not be surprised: some are predestined for salvation, some to damnation, all show the Glory and Grace of God. ECUSA is just full of people clearly destined for damnation

Liberals - such as Jake - are by definition racists: they do not listen or care about what the African Churches say.Such people have no part in the Kingdom of God.

4:39 pm  
Anonymous ellie m said...

"Any means, including invasions, to justify their ends; the expansion of their personal kingdoms, which more and more appear to have nothing to do with Anglicanism."

Because Anglicanism more and more has nothing to do with Christianity.

8:49 am  
Blogger Min O'Pause said...

"I am so glad that Kenya is taking care of us!

The Kenyans I know have such a pure faith and are full of happiness and joy because of their relationship with our Lord. It is truly a blessing."

I hear AirTran is having a big sale on domestic and foreign flights. Why don't you pack up and move to Kenya?

Just a thought...

11:39 am  
Blogger Jake said...

Not a Christian...playing God now, are we?

Racist...sorry, but a thief is a thief. The color of the skin has nothing to do with it.

Pretty weak arguments. Hardly worth the trouble of responding.

Enjoy your day in court, folks.

4:40 pm  
Blogger Craig said...

Jake asks, "Not a Christian...playing God now, are we?"

Nope. Anon above wasn't deciding whose souls are saved; he was simply asserting that words have meaning. To say that Mormons or Buddhists are not Christians isn't an arrogant judgment; it's simply insisting that words be used accurately.

ECUSA's GC thinks it has both the right and the duty to redefine "Christianity" every triennium in the name of Peace, Justice, and the Editorial Page of the New York Times. Now there is an institution that makes arrogant judgments...

9:05 pm  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Jake? Are you getting nervous?

Enjoy what's left of your pension once they pay Beers' legal fees and your ASA dwindles.

"Liberal armchair theologian polemical blogger seeks position as ..."

9:28 pm  
Blogger Dr. Mabuse said...

We're back to what C.S. Lewis observed in 'God in the Dock', when he gave his list of definitions in popular parlance:

"CHRISTIAN. Has come to include almost no idea of belief. Usually a vague term of approval. The question 'What do you call a Christian?' has been asked of me again and again. The answer they wish to receive is 'A Christian is a decent chap who's unselfish etc.'."

To people who think like this, to say "You're not a Christian" is an insult, in a way that "You're not a Hindu" would not be. Yet they're no different. A Christian is a person who believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, that he lived on Earth, died, came back to life, and because of that has saved everyone who believes this from eternal damnation. That's really what a Christian is. If you can't believe these things, you're not one.

In the same way that "Christian" keeps getting flattened and stretched to cover all sorts of meanings that don't apply, so the details of the belief keep being rejiggered. "Well, what do you mean by "rose again"? Isn't a continuation of the memory of Jesus another way of saying he rose from the dead? Can't that also be considered Christianity?"

In the end, all sorts of mutually exclusive things are said to be "Christian", to the point where it's never considered proper to say that someone could be outside the definition. I think G.K. Chesterton wrote somewhere, "It's as if I said, 'There are many types of cats. Some cats are brown, and some cats are white, and some cats have four legs, and some cats have 2 legs, and some cats have fur, and some cats have scales, and some cats have wings, and some cats swim underwater.' At which point, you'd be justified in asking, 'Well, then, exactly what do you mean by "a cat"?'

9:59 pm  
Blogger C. Andiron said...

Out of curiosity, do you have cat, Doc? I know, off topic, but you seem like a cat person.

10:55 pm  
Blogger Dr. Mabuse said...

No, we have a dog - just got her as a puppy at Christmastime! But we used to have cats, and we love them. But Dean is allergic to cat fur (asthma), and it's gotten worse as he's gotten older, so we can't have one anymore. Yin is a poodle-spaniel mix, and has that non-shedding poodle-type fur, so she's alright.

6:24 am  
Blogger C. Andiron said...

Just fyi, they recently developed hypoallergenic cats - So much for Ec 1:9.

The prices are ridiculous right now, but they've got to come down eventually (else I doubt they could stay in business).

7:58 am  
Anonymous ellie m said...

Dr Mabuse, if you can find the source of that Chesterton quote please post it! I'd like to read the rest.

I adore Chesterton. If he and Lewis were only living now, they'd make mincemeat out of all the revisionists' silly illogical arguments.

10:13 pm  
Blogger Dr. Mabuse said...

ellie, I'll start hunting for it! I've been a collector of Ignatius Press's Complete Works of G.K. Chesterton since they started publishing (of course, it's not complete yet). I think we're up to 25 volumes or so at the moment.

7:42 am  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home