March 27, 2017

July 9, 2012

The Spoiled Child of the Anglican Communion Wants It All

The current General Convention at Indianapolis is fast becoming like Dennis the Menace at Christmas-time: “I want it all!

Consider: on Sunday, July 8, when everyone else was at worship, the huge majority of Episcopal Bishops attending GC77 voted in favor of preventing their parishes from refusing to hire any cross-dressers, or even people who refuse to identify as either male or female (because they reject being forced to come down on one side or the other), as (a) their priests, (b) their deacons, (c) their Senior or Junior Wardens, (d) their Sunday School teachers, (e) their Youth Group leaders, or (f) any other positions—voluntary or paid—in their parish. You name it, and they have to be hired if there is no other reason to refuse them the position. (At least, that is what the Canons of General Convention will now say.)

Having passed the House of Bishops with an overwhelming majority, these soon-to-be canonical amendments are certain to pass the House of Deputies, with nary a whisper of objection. So thanks to the Bishops whom you elected to uphold “the faith of Christ crucified,” and whom you paid to attend General Convention, the Episcopal Church (USA) will soon be a haven for sex perverts and psychological basket cases, among others, who cannot even decide whether God intended to make them in any model, and who absolutely refuse to accept society’s labels describing them as, “male or female.”

Such people are really in a dilemma, if one thinks about it. They say that they cannot let God dictate what they are, by the outward form in which He clothed them at birth; but they also contend that God ordained that they should have equal opportunities for employment throughout the Episcopal Church (USA). In other words: they get to choose (or reserve a decision on) how society must regard them, but all the rest of us cannot choose whether we want them to work for us. The “choice”, in their view, runs only in their favor: heads they win, and tails the rest of us lose.

I realize that is strong language. But—dammit! This occasion calls for the strongest kind of condemnation of those in authority whom we trusted to know better. I feel completely betrayed by my Bishop, and by the deputies from my diocese who will choose “to follow their own consciences” in this matter, rather than the will of the vast majority of pew sitters who elected them, and who will be stuck with the bills for their lark. In so acting on their own, those deputies repudiate the naïve expectation that they could be counted on to represent, at least on these matters of substance, the overwhelming consensus of the diocese that sent them off to Indianapolis.

The same must hold true of other dioceses, as well, or else I no longer know my Episcopal Church (USA).

To those Episcopleft sympathizers and enablers of these abominable resolutions, I ask: who appointed less than one-half of one percent of the population to dictate to local parishes what they can and cannot do, in hiring people to work with their souls and with their children?

Why would you ever support such a minuscule minority in dictating what the rest of us must do, under your increasingly irrelevant Canons? (I say that the Canons are “irrelevant,” because you will not apply them as written to all Church offenders whom they were intended to place under your control.)

I remind such persons that the word “canon” comes from the Greek word meaning “measure”, or “rule.” Well, if you take less than one-half of one percent of the population and apply them as the “measure” or “rule” by which all others are to be weighed, haven’t you just turned things on their head? Since when did such a “measure” for the many ever, in any society, become the norm?

Have you no clue whatsoever as to the impact this idiotic stand will cost you back home, when you have to face the ordinary pewsters who make up the majority of your contributors? How are you ever going to defend—except perhaps in San Francisco, Los Angeles, New York, Chicago, and Newark—such an imposition upon your constituents’ common sense? 

I am tempted, in my sheer curmudgeonly ire, to invoke the curses of Mark Twain upon you clueless Bishops. I paraphrase, but even in his original, Mark Twain had it right:

First God made imbeciles. That was for practice. Then He made Episcopal Bishops and deputies to General Convention.

What—you still don’t think I have made my case, and that I am simply indulging in curmudgeonly calumny and vituperation, for the sheer joy of it?  Think again. Consider:

—Yesterday, at General Convention in Indianapolis, you deputies rejected signing on to the Anglican Covenant, as presented. In effect, you decided to sign on to the nice-sounding platitudes in Articles I-III, but said you wanted no part with the provisions of Art. IV that could have held you accountable to the rest of the Communion for your waywardness and pig-headed insistence on your own autonomy from the rest of the Communion.

—And today, also, as just noted, your Bishops decided to surrender their local authority to the self-judgment (nonexistent, of course, and that is precisely the joke) of individuals who cannot, and do not want to be told, to make up their minds.

—Finally, you expect the rest of us pew-sitters to go along with your idiotic resolutions, just because you supposedly speak for “the Episcopal Church in the United States of America.” Well, you don’t—and now you are going to find that out.

To sum up: On the one hand, you declared yourselves resolutely opposed to surrendering to the dictates of the majority of the Anglican Communion, should they decide that you were just wrong.

But on the other hand, you kowtow and make yourselves entirely subservient to the smallest minority of all those who claim membership in the Anglican Communion, regardless of whether that tiny minority is right or wrong about Holy Scripture.

The Protestant Episcopal Church, consisting of the people who pay for you to have your triennial fun and fantasies, hereby protests against you ignorant Bishops and deputies who voted to secure passage of such claptrap, with scarcely a peep of opposition.

A pox, we say, on both your benighted Houses.

P.S.: Think this curmudgeon has vented all his spleen? Wait until you read the forthcoming post about the whitewashing going on in the House of Bishops over the lawsuits against departed dioceses, in an attempt to make it seem as though All Is Well.™As Mark Twain says: “This was just for practice.”

Share this story:

Recent Related Posts



Uh oh, I was hoping you were feeling a bit better having vented over this issue.  Deciding not to sign on to the Anglican convenient in it present form is a good thing IMVHO. Without article IV, the convenant has “no teeth” which is exactly what TEC leaders want. All nice and affirming language about how much we love being Anglicans but put some accountability in the document and oh no we can’t be part of that!! now can we?

Try to find some peace my friend. We need you to be around for awhile longer to document what is going on in the Episcopal Church.

[1] Posted by SC blu cat lady on 7-9-2012 at 11:07 AM · [top]


Obviously I share your frustration, but in keeping with our discipline around here to always place blame first where it originates, the answer to your question ” who appointed less than one-half of one percent of the population to dictate to local parishes what they can and cannot do, in hiring people to work with their souls and with their children?” is:



We did not guard our church with the same zeal with which we did other things - whatever those things were that were more important than standing for vestry, volunteering to be on the rector search committee, putting ourselves up for GenCon delegations, etc.

Had we been as vigilant about those things as were about other things, we wouldn’t be in this situation.

That said, though, it is remarkable the disconnect between what the gay-obsessed leadership of the Episcopal Church says it wants in the way of tolerance and diversity, and what it actually does: For a movement that says it values all points of view, it sure does have a narrow agenda, and is fixated on codifying it, and is punitive in the extreme whenever anyone deviates from it.

[2] Posted by Greg Griffith on 7-9-2012 at 11:12 AM · [top]

Truth is, the TEC leadership is doing whatever in the h*≪ it wants to and there isn’t anything anyone can do about it - for now.  Passing these resolutions is just giving them further “air cover” for what they are going to do anyway. 

I too am frustrated - but don’t forget we are fighting THE DEVIL…not just flesh and blood “imbeciles”.  THE DEVIL wants to devour the church; we must continue to resist him with all that we have and are.  Yet we must focus our attention on Christ and His saving grace.

Praise Him, through which all was and is created; who gives us our very breath; and for His greatest gift of all - LOVE.  Praise Him from the highest mountains, with song, music and dance.  Praise Him - for HE is Lord of all - even the imbeciles.  wink


[3] Posted by B. Hunter on 7-9-2012 at 11:33 AM · [top]

I do believe TEC is do for another name change.  A resolution to change it to “The Church of the Transgender Nation” is in order…  Very sad.

[4] Posted by bob+ on 7-9-2012 at 11:39 AM · [top]

Bravo Zulu, Curmudgeon.

[5] Posted by Bob Livingston on 7-9-2012 at 12:29 PM · [top]

TEo delenda est.

[6] Posted by Jeffersonian on 7-9-2012 at 12:33 PM · [top]

B. Hunter captured my thoughts and I will amplify that this is the work of Satan going on through these people that fashion themselves as Christians.  Satan has a full grip on what was the Protestant Episcopal Church of the United States.  I am sure that there is rejoicing in Hell over what has happened with sure pleasant anticipation of the further descent into Satan’s grip over these souls.

My prayer is that they will see what they are doing, repent of this evil and return to being Christians.

[7] Posted by BillB on 7-9-2012 at 12:48 PM · [top]

They want to be “free” to express who they really are, or so we are told.  If you take a train off it’s tracks, it is free.  It can’t go anywhere but it is free from the constraints of the tracks.  If you take the rudder off a ship it is free, it has no control of it’s course but it is free, from control of the wheel.  So without moral constraints drawn from the authority of scripture, they are free.  Sadly they are useless to anybody now, but they are free.

[8] Posted by ty1028 on 7-9-2012 at 01:02 PM · [top]


As Timothy Fountain pointed out to me when I said (on another tread) to change the name of TEC to TCH [The Church in Heat], the problem is that these old agents of menopause and impotence lost their ‘animal magnetism’ long ago. This is what makes their obsession with ‘all things sex’ (and all its deviations) such a mystery.

[9] Posted by All-Is-True on 7-9-2012 at 01:07 PM · [top]


Christ gives us the perfect freedom: in the phrase of Milton Friedman, he makes us ‘free to choose.’

What baffles me is not that KJS and the rest have chosen to embrace the other choice: if they had chosen to embrace sin, taken off their robes and collars, and renounced their ecclesiastical titles so that sin could completely master their minds and desires, then they have a right to that choice because that is the choice God gave them In the Beginning. (Remember, the creation of Hell was because God loved us enough to give us a choice…God will not rape or ravage us, unlike many who now have booths at GC.)

But what baffles me is that the 815 crowd seem arrogantly oblivious to the fact that they are mocking God by pretending to embrace both sin and God.

As we see in Revelation, God is not amused at this. Not at all.

Woe to them.

[10] Posted by All-Is-True on 7-9-2012 at 01:16 PM · [top]

Now see, I go away for a month only to find that after running over the edge of the cliff, TEC is damn determined to lay track to the bottom as well.

#10 - right on

[11] Posted by Festivus on 7-9-2012 at 01:33 PM · [top]

“the Episcopal Church (USA) will soon be a haven for sex perverts and psychological basket cases”


“This occasion calls for the strongest kind of condemnation of those in authority whom we trusted to know better.”

“Hey, conservatives, don’t feel bad. You effed up. You trusted us.”

[12] Posted by SpongJohn SquarePantheist on 7-9-2012 at 03:39 PM · [top]

[comment deleted—off topic; commenter banned for blatant violation of off-topic commenting policy]

[13] Posted by Topper on 7-9-2012 at 06:22 PM · [top]

Yes, of course, I am appalled at this latest action.  But do not think that it will lead to any kind of mass exodus from TEC or vocal complaints from the people in the pews.  With the exception of a teeny tiny minority (probably less than one half of one percent) they no longer care what GenCon does or they would have exited long ago.  If they do not care that a gay rector may be foisted upon them at any moment, they will not care about a transexual or (coming next perhaps) a pedophile.  They may say that they would care, but, when the time comes, they won’t.  There is no “final nail in the coffin,” there is just the slow sad whimper of increasing irrelevance.

[14] Posted by Ann Castro on 7-9-2012 at 06:50 PM · [top]

Ann, agree with the widespread indifference and apathy, yet it was interesting to note in the Tweets from Jim Naughton (which Kendall linked) that some of the Bishops who voted no said things along the lines of “they wish they could vote “YES” but they knew their diocese was not ready for that…”  So some of the bishops do fear a further exodus, it seems.

Sorry, I’m too lazy to scroll through all the tweets to find the examples I’m remembering.  The thread is here.

[15] Posted by Karen B. on 7-9-2012 at 07:02 PM · [top]

RE: “But do not think that it will lead to any kind of mass exodus from TEC . . . “

Agreed—but then, as a person who’s happily staying in TEC, that’s what I’ve been pointing out for years now. There will be further departures—of that there’s no doubt, as after each and every General Convention a fresh wave of people leave.  But no “mass exodus.”

RE: “There is no “final nail in the coffin . . . “


I think what has happened in spades, though, is 1) detachment, and 2) distancing of conservatives within TEC—in dioceses, in parishes, and nationally.  And that’s all to the good.

Obviously I expect further detachment and distancing [as opposed to departure]—and . . . heh . . . much less money.

None of those things indicate “indifference” but rather lots of concern. It’s just not expressed in the way that some would approve of or wanted or expected.

[16] Posted by Sarah on 7-9-2012 at 07:35 PM · [top]

Sarah, I wasn’t suggesting that “indifference” = lack of concern or using it as a pejorative term in any sense.

I guess I’m just struck by the fact that the opposition / concern is more *muted* / individual now.  There is little to no hope I hear reasserters within TEC expressing that concerted action or concerted outcry will make a difference.

The concern is real, but the outcry is no longer public.  People seem to sense it is wasted breath.  Instead there is focus on individual protest (withheld giving), or a single parish or diocese trying to differentiate and take a stand.

These things are all good, and needed and commendable.  But there are no cries of “rally round the flag” with any hope of change.  There seems to be more of an attitude of passive resignation.

I’ve been glad to see from John Burwell’s reports that deputies from SC and CFL and Dallas have been fellowshiping and encouraging one another.  That is excellent.  I can’t imagine how lonely some of those little stone bridges must feel tonight….

My prayers for much grace for all who are called to remain within TEC and stand firm and speak for truth.  I’m grateful for you all.


[17] Posted by Karen B. on 7-9-2012 at 08:28 PM · [top]

TEC has jumped the shark.  Don’t know what that means? oh Happy Days

[18] Posted by DAAR on 7-9-2012 at 09:07 PM · [top]

[off-topic comment deleted; the question has been well and lengthily answered for many years; commenter banned]

[19] Posted by banned4Life on 7-9-2012 at 11:43 PM · [top]

I love the photo attached to this article.  It suits 815 so well.

[20] Posted by MichaelA on 7-10-2012 at 12:28 AM · [top]

Looks like the TEC activists are going to get another victory.  Kendall has posted a revised resolution about CWOB (Communion without Baptism) which I will be *SHOCKED* if it does not pass OVERWHELMINGLY.

They have followed the GLBT activitists’ model perfectly focusing on need for “pastoral sensitivity in local contexts.”  So CWOB will de facto no longer be a canonical offense even if still LITERALLY against the unamended canons.

Wow.  Go read the revised wording here and see if you agree with me that this will SAIL through the HOB.

[21] Posted by Karen B. on 7-10-2012 at 08:21 AM · [top]

I think we should all take a moment to inhale deeply and let our breath back out slowly.  We need to calm down.

And show some sympathy for these hard-working whatever-they-really-ares.

It’s tough assuming the powers of God, after all. 

So much to do.  So much to do.


[22] Posted by JuliaMarks on 7-10-2012 at 08:54 AM · [top]

Sorry to promote my own comments at T19, but re: the revised wording on the proposed CWOB resolution that Kendall has posted at SF, it is RIGHT OUT OF THE INTEGRITY PLAYBOOK. 

I’ve dug up resolutions from GC2000 and GC2003 which provided the perfect model for this newly revised CWOB resolution…

See the comment thread here:

[23] Posted by Karen B. on 7-10-2012 at 08:57 AM · [top]

I do not know what is more amazing, the insanity of the HOB or Mr. Haley out-ranting me!

[24] Posted by Newbie Anglican on 7-10-2012 at 10:26 AM · [top]

...the Episcopal Church (USA) will soon be a haven for sex perverts and psychological basket cases, among others, who cannot even decide whether God intended to make them in any model, and who absolutely refuse to accept society’s labels describing them as, “male or female.”

Sadly, it’s already well under way. This item is from a local
Episcopal Emporium Episcopal Emporium.

[25] Posted by The Little Myrmidon on 7-12-2012 at 06:04 PM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.