January 28, 2013

The Overflow of the Heart

Image

The Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, recently addressed a gathering in the rump Diocese of South Carolina. Angry that most of the original Diocese of South Carolina has quit the Episcopal Church because of its theological liberalism, Jefferts Schori sermonized the following:

…I tell you that story because it’s indicative of attitudes we’ve seen here and in many other places. Somebody decides he knows the law, and oversteps whatever authority he may have to dictate the fate of others who may in fact be obeying the law, and often a law for which this local tyrant is not the judge. It’s not too far from that kind of attitude to citizens’ militias deciding to patrol their towns or the Mexican border for unwelcome visitors. It’s not terribly far from the state of mind evidenced in school shootings, or in those who want to arm school children, or the terrorism that takes oil workers hostage. (Entire transcript here)

In this week’s Anglican Perspective, Canon Ashey discusses the nature of these intemperate remarks, comparing the leadership of the Diocese of South Carolina’s state of mind to that of a school-shooter or terrorist.

H/T: American Anglican Council 
[youtube http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MiBxgBZdES4&w=560&h=315]


Topic:
  • J S Lang

    It’s amusing, and sad, that she refers to “healing the breach.” Does she have a clue about what caused the breach – namely, abandoning Christian morality? When she ends up preaching in an empty church, will she catch on?

    Sad situation, but it does make me feel good about abandoning that denomination long ago.

  • Ray Bannister

    You have to hand it to liberals, they do know how to manipulate words. She refers to the “Mexican border,” as if the nasty Americans are trespassing. She didn’t dare call is the “American border” or “U.S. border with Mexico.” I’m guessing she doesn’t own a vacation home in southern Arizona or New Mexico where illegals regularly trespass and vandalize the property of American citizens.

  • http://www.facebook.com/johnjwilks John Wilks

    So this pro-abortion “Bishop” thinks orthodox believers are like child killers? Oh, the irony…

  • http://www.classicalarminian.com/ William W. Birch

    This is almost unbelievable, except that her comments are so very typical regarding anyone who opposes her agenda.

    I can also imagine Rome making some of the same types of comments during the Protestant Reformation. Oooops!

  • Paul Hoskins

    Revelation 2:20:
    “I have this against you, that you tolerate the woman Jezebel, who calls herself a prophetess and is teaching and beguiling my servants to practice immorality.”

  • Mark

    “Somebody decides he knows the law, and oversteps whatever authority he may have to dictate the fate of others who may in fact be obeying the law…”

    That “somebody” sounds very much like Ms. Jefferts-Schori, and those “obeying the law” sound very much like orthodox Christians.

    More evidence that the psychological phenomenon of projection finds its natural home among modern liberals.

  • Eric Lytle

    It appears the Presiding B has 2 goals:
    1) Do what the UCC did in the 1990s, drive out the remaining Christians in the denomination, while pinning the label “divisive” on them, and
    2) Retain as many church buildings as possible, particularly the historic and/or upscale ones.

    Is that a spiritual legacy or what?

  • R Brown

    Not only committing a straw man attack on the leadership of South Carolina, the presiding bishop blotches and twist Acts 15.
    “Today is the feast day for Timothy, Titus, and Silas. They were early disciples of the Jesus movement, and they offer a constructive example of the same issues. The early Christian community has been wrestling with what it means to be a faithful follower of the law as a Gentile – how much of the Jewish law applies to these new followers of Jesus? Paul and Barnabas set out to visit Antioch, sent by the group of leaders in Jerusalem, who have chosen Silas and a couple of others to go with them. ”

    Oh really, struggles with the faithful followers of the (TEC) law? she tally skipped a few parts; how does her assertion and vague reference to Act 15 compare to the reading of Acts 15 in context.

    Acts 15

    English Standard Version (ESV)

    The Jerusalem Council

    15 But some men came down from Judea and were teaching the brothers, “Unless you are circumcised according to the custom of Moses, you cannot be saved.” 2 And after Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and debate with them, Paul and Barnabas and some of the others were appointed to go up to Jerusalem to the apostles and the elders about this question. 3 So, being sent on their way by the church, they passed through both Phoenicia and Samaria, describing in detail the conversion of the Gentiles, and brought great joy to all the brothers. 4 When they came to Jerusalem, they were welcomed by the church and the apostles and the elders, and they declared all that God had done with them. 5 But some believers who belonged to the party of the Pharisees rose up and said, “It is necessary to circumcise them and to order them to keep the law of Moses.”

    6 The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. 7 And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. 8 And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, 9 and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith. 10 Now, therefore, why are you putting God to the test by placing a yoke on the neck of the disciples that neither our fathers nor we have been able to bear? 11 But we believe that we will be saved through the grace of the Lord Jesus, just as they will.”

    12 And all the assembly fell silent, and they listened to Barnabas and Paul as they related what signs and wonders God had done through them among the Gentiles. 13 After they finished speaking, James replied, “Brothers, listen to me. 14 Simeon has related how God first visited the Gentiles, to take from them a people for his name. 15 And with this the words of the prophets agree, just as it is written,

    16 “‘After this I will return,
    and I will rebuild the tent of David that has fallen;
    I will rebuild its ruins,
    and I will restore it,
    17 that the remnant of mankind may seek the Lord,
    and all the Gentiles who are called by my name,
    says the Lord, who makes these things 18 known from of old.’

    19 Therefore my judgment is that we should not trouble those of the Gentiles who turn to God, 20 but should write to them to abstain from the things polluted by idols, and from sexual immorality, and from what has been strangled, and from blood. 21 For from ancient generations Moses has had in every city those who proclaim him, for he is read every Sabbath in the synagogues.”

    The issue is not that how the ” what it means to be a faithful follower of the law as a Gentile ” but how some in the party of the Pharisees try to say the gentiles need to be under the Mosaic Law to be say, Verses 10-11 are the key refutation of the change gentles need to be under the Law to be saved.

  • Rebecca Alford

    Incredible amount of assumption going on here. What made you think she was referring to anyone in particular? It is a sermon, a message nothing more. Why jump to the assumption she is directing this message towards a particular group or persons? Psychological projection is usually due to one’s own suppressed guilt.

    • http://www.classicalarminian.com/ William W. Birch

      Rebecca,

      I think you fail to consider the context of this visit. The PB was in South Carolina, addressing those who decided to stay with the national church, instead of leave as did the majority with Bishop Lawrence.

      If she were not referring to the current situation in South Carolina, or to anyone in particular (i.e., Bishop Lawrence and/or his ilk), then what on earth was she raving on about? Do you think that your own conscience is being stirred here?

      • Alex Soderberg

        William, I don’t think liberals are big on self-analysis. Obviously Schiori WAS throwing a lot of mud at Lawrence, on the assumption some would stick. To drag the issue of school shootings into her rant was disgusting, ditto for the border issue. She figured her fan club would approve of any reference to gun violence (bad, but killing fetuses is cool) and immigration (God mandates open borders). What a pitiful excuse for the head of a denomination, the woman has no shame at all.

      • http://www.classicalarminian.com/ William W. Birch

        Alex,

        I could not agree with you more! Well stated.