8/14/2004 1:06:43 PM
EPISCOPAL CLUELESSNESS WATCH Catherine Waynick, the Episcopal Bishop of Indianapolis, knows just what the ECUSA needs to do about the Current Unpleasantness. Surprisingly, it involves lots and lots of talking:
Waynick believes the Episcopal Church and all religious denominations have to improve their efforts to talk about sexuality with their congregations.
"The church as a whole has not done an adequate job of talking with members about sexuality in general, let alone homosexuality," she says. "We need to put some effort into discussing the place of sexuality in human life, its meaning and purpose -- and come to some clarity about what it means to us."
Sue Reid, rector of St. Alban's in Indianapolis, thinks that's a nifty idea:
The Rev. Sue Reid of St. Alban's Episcopal Church in Indianapolis says her church hasn't suffered any drop in turnout or offerings. The St. Alban's rector believes the church has survived the controversy because human sexuality has been discussed there through the years.
"We have several openly gay members in our congregation," Reid says. "Some congregations have discussed it openly for a good number of years. Those who have not are having the greater level of difficulty."
I was under the impression that the reason why I haven't been inside of an ECUSA church in over a year had something to do with that denomination's eagerness to trample on the Word of God for a cheap civil-rights liberal high. But as it turns out, that had nothing to do with it at all.
The reason I'm angry is that I have no idea whatsoever about "the place of sexuality in human life, its meaning and purpose" because my parish never ever discussed these issues. And I'd still be attending church there and tripling my pledge and everything would be fine if only they had. I guess I'm well rid of that place.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 2 comments
8/13/2004 9:06:51 PM
CHASM The five retired bishops scheduled to meet with Frank Griswold's Council of Advice over their "irregular" Ohio confirmations have cancelled the meeting. Seems Frank didn't want any outsiders to attend and the five bishops don't much care for star chambers:
Friday, August 13, 2004
Dear Bishop Griswold:
We, the undersigned bishops, regret that the meeting we had jointly arranged with the Council of Advice, to take place on 13 August, is not possible due to your refusal to have this be an open meeting with a small number of non-participating observers present. We feel strongly that a meeting of this importance should not be held in secret. There is a history of closed door meetings in the House of Bishops. Our distrust of closed meetings on vital issues, as well as our assessment of the gravity of the current crisis in this Church, compelled us to insist that our meeting with your Council of Advice include non-participating observers. We believe this planned meeting was a significant opportunity to establish clarity on core issues which are dividing our Church. We deeply regret that this meeting now will not take place.
We had hoped for an opportunity at this meeting to discuss the radical departures of the Episcopal Church from the Faith and Practice of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church. We have tried fervently for many years to have an open and honest discussion in the House of Bishops about these departures from our historic Faith and Practice, but to no avail.
We regard these departures from the Faith, and their ramifications in the life of this Church we love, to have culminated in the actions of the General Convention of 2003. The most serious departure from the Faith at this recent Convention occurred when the House of Bishops refused to affirm the historic Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral of 1886, 1888, in a motion that was put forward to encourage the faithful members of this Church. We felt that it was imperative that the people of this Church be reassured that we the leaders of the Episcopal Church still believe:
(a) The Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, as “containing all things necessary to salvation,” and as being the rule and ultimate standard of the faith.
(b) The Apostle’s Creed, as the Baptismal Symbol; and the Nicene Creed, as the sufficient statement of the Christian faith.
(c) The two Sacraments ordained by Christ Himself - Baptism and the Supper of the Lord - ministered with unfailing use of Christ’s words of institution, and of the elements ordained by Him.
(d) The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its administration to the varying needs of the nations and peoples called of God into the unity of His Church.
(Quoted from pages 877 & 878 of the Book of Common Prayer)
Sadly, this resolution (B001) to affirm this historic statement of our Faith and Practice lost on a vote in the House of Bishops: 84 - No, 65 - Yes, 8 Abstentions. It is difficult to understand how bishops could vote against the faith they swore to uphold at their consecration. It has been reported that bishops did this for political reasons. If this is true, then this is in pitiful contrast to our predecessors who stood for the Faith, even in the face of death.
As a consequence of this action, as well as others at the 2003 Convention, along with other departures from the Faith in recent years, there is confusion and dismay among many faithful Episcopalians. The Episcopal Church has been declared out of Communion or in impaired Communion with the majority of our Anglican family. Thousands of people feel they are “like sheep without a shepherd”. Large numbers of clergy, congregations, and individuals have felt compelled by their conscience to leave the Episcopal Church. Still others remain but find themselves unable in good conscience to accept the pastoral care and Episcopal ministry of their diocesan bishops.
And yet, many bishops seem more concerned about Canons than about the Faith of the Church. Many bishops are taking stringent actions to punish clergy and congregations for being loyal to the faith in which they were nurtured for many years. We do certainly believe that Faith and Order are integral parts of one reality. However, the role of Order is to preserve, protect and defend the Faith of the Church, not just the territory and increasingly arbitrary actions of bishops. May the Lord have mercy on us!
We earnestly believe that our Lord Jesus Christ is calling the Episcopal Church to repent for abandoning much of the Faith “once delivered to the saints”. We pray that you, as our Presiding Bishop, will lead us all by your own repentance, as called for by most of the Primates of the Anglican Communion, so that this Church will repent and return to the Lord.
Yours in Christ Jesus,
The Rt. Rev. C. FitzSimons Allison
The Rt. Rev. Maurice M. Benitez
The Rt. Rev. William J. Cox
The Rt. Rev. Alex D. Dickson
The Rt. Rev. William C. Wantland
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 15 comments
8/12/2004 5:19:08 PM
GO EASY ON THE NEW GUY Doug Giles just got added to the links here. This is why:
Did you see how Kerry held his Wendy’s hamburger? He looked and handled that Single with cheese like a beaker of someone else’s urine. Hey, Mr. Kerry, we might earn less in a year than the one of the bathrooms in your four mansions cost, but that doesn’t make us blonde.
Evidently, not too many people fell under their overly orchestrated spell at the convention in Boston, at least not too many newcomers. The projected Kerry/Edwards post-convention spring in the polls had all the bounce of an 87 year old Sumo wrestler with a bad hip.
Take John Edwards, for instance: no real person smiles that much. Middle Americans don’t beam that bountifully. Neither Jesus nor kids stoned on expensive weed grin that much. Only avaricious ambulance chasing lawyers, running for vice president and trying to off set their Lurch-like presidential running mate, smile that much. This grinning Edwards reminds me of the overly gleeful guy who sold me a ’75 Firebird back in ’79, which turned out to be a complete piece of crap. And be sure of this: John Edwards is to Dick Cheney what Potsie was to the Fonz. The debates should prove interesting.
Then we have Kerry’s esposa, Maria Teresa Thierstein Simoes-Ferreira Heinz Kerry. Her name alone screams Middle America doesn’t it? The guy who convinced Kerry to prop up his wife at the DNC should be simultaneously slapped by the Democrats and celebrated by the Republicans. Watching and hearing Teresa ooze made me think I was at the Whiskey a Go-Go in the late ‘60’s listening to the front poet before Grace Slick took the stage. Is it possible Jim Morrison had a secret sister?
Read the whole thing.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 6 comments
8/12/2004 5:04:02 PM
SEE NO EVIL? There is a case to be made against George W. Bush on the issue of terrorism if John Kerry has the courage to make it:
Two senators chairing committees with direct oversight of intelligence and terrorist-related issues have asked the chief internal watchdog at the Department of Homeland Security to investigate the appointment of a top director at the agency and his brief suspension from it.
Faisal Gill was forced to take a few days off in March after sources close to the FBI raised flags about Gill's former position as spokesman for the now-defunct American Muslim Council. He was then reinstated, and Republican Sens. Charles Grassley of Iowa and Jon Kyl of Arizona want to know why. They also are questioning why Gill is at DHS in the first place.
Seems this Gill never told anyone about his association with the American Muslim Council:
Aside from questioning whether this connection raised concerns among officials before Gill was hired, the letter draws attention to reports that Gill had omitted his affiliation with the AMC when he filed his employment application and requisite security clearances at the agency.
"Questions have been raised about Mr. Gill’s previous associations with groups and individuals who are known or suspected to be involved with terrorism financing," the letter reads.
"Mr. Gill is reportedly director of intelligence policy in the Department’s Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IAIP) directorate," the senators wrote. "A person in such a position would likely have access to highly sensitive information about vulnerabilities in the nation’s critical infrastructure."
The senators then ask: "What is the department’s policy for employees who omit information, especially information considered important or material, from their security clearance background forms?
The American Muslim Council was no mere cultural organization:
"What are the Department’s general policies and procedures for considering employment of a person with previous links or associations to individuals or groups who are investigated or prosecuted for suspected crimes, especially terrorism matters or, who provides services to such individuals or groups?"
Meanwhile, AMC’s founder, Abdurahaman Alamoudi, pleaded guilty in a U.S. federal court in July to charges ranging from illegally receiving cash from Libyan sources to tax evasion and passport fraud. He also admitted to being part of a Libyan plot to kill Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia.
Court documents call Alamoudi an active supporter of Hamas, which the U.S. State Department has deemed a terrorist organization.
Was this a case of overly-excessive sensitivity trumping national security?
Reports about Gill have invigorated a smoldering debate among Republicans, some who say the administration has been too accepting of certain representatives of Muslim groups with dubious ties to terror funding and anti-American sympathies. Others say going after Muslims like Gill is akin to a political witch hunt.
It may well have been since one civil-liberties group has already begun tossing terms like "racist" and "anti-Muslim" around:
"I don’t think working for an organization like the AMC in of itself is a bad thing," said Kit Gage, president of the National Coalition to Protect Political Freedom, whose founder, Sami Al-Arian is awaiting trial on charges he was a prime fundraiser for the Palestinian Islamic Jihad, an accusation he vehemently denies. Gage said the group has distanced itself from Al-Arian.
"There are always going to be people who are racist, who are anti-Muslim and feel threatened by groups like ours who do coalition work, because we stand up for groups that have taken on unpopular positions," she added.
I don't see Kerry doing much with this story or this whole idea. For to do so, he would have to declare at the very least that it might not have been that smart of an idea to employ people like Gill in sensitive government positions, which would open him up to charges of "racism." And no Democrat can tolerate that.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 8 comments
8/12/2004 2:33:57 PM
SLAM DUNK The Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, Anglican bishop of the Diocese of Hulme in Great Britain, closes the case for the disestablishment of the Church of England and demonstrates once again that western liberal Anglicans are not morally or intellectually serious people:
A Church of England bishop has called on churches to ban the singing of I Vow to Thee, My Country, one of the best known hymns, because he says it is heretical and has racist overtones.
Racist? Golly.
The Bishop of Hulme, the Rt Rev Stephen Lowe, said the hymn's popularity was a symptom of a "dangerous" increase in English nationalism which had parallels with the rise of Nazism.
Liberal Anglican logic par excellence. You love your country and think very highly of it. Germans in the 1930's loved their country and thought very highly of it. QED, you're a Nazi.
The bishop said the words, written by Sir Cecil Spring-Rice in 1918, were "totally heretical" because they suggested that people should pledge their allegiance to their country before God.
"My country, right or wrong is not an appropriate sentiment for Christians to uphold," he said.
He had no objection to the second verse but would not allow the first to be sung at any of his services and urged clergy to think "long and hard" before permitting it.
"I quoted it as one example of my concerns about growing nationalism," he told the Telegraph. "While I am proud to be English, it is dangerous for a nation to suggest that our culture is somehow superior to others."
The lyrics to this hymn run as follows:
I vow to thee, my country—all earthly things above—
Entire and whole and perfect, the service of my love;
The love that asks no question, the love that stands the test,
That lays upon the altar the dearest and the best;
The love that never falters, the love that pays the price,
The love that makes undaunted the final sacrifice.
And there’s another country, I’ve heard of long ago—
Most dear to them that love her, most great to them that know;
We may not count her armies, we may not see her King;
Her fortress is a faithful heart, her pride is suffering;
And soul by soul and silently her shining bounds increase,
And her ways are ways of gentleness, and all her paths are peace.
I know of no passage in Scripture that precludes love of country; indeed, quite the contrary. Intensely patriotic places like the United States and Britain excel the world in love of their fellow men wherever they live. Who has sent more aid to more places or spent more lives for less of a return? Whose citizens criticize their government's errors more freely or more passionately? For Lowe to assert that loving one's country is somehow dangerous for the world is one of the most astonishingly idiotic statements ever written or uttered by anyone.
And I don't know how Steve understands the verses of this hymn but if one reads them together, which most intelligent people do, it is quite clear that the author believes that the second "country" is infinitely preferable to the first("most dear...most great...soul by soul and silently her shining bounds increase"). But for someone like Stephen Lowe, who is apparently counting on the United Nations to usher in the Kingdom of God, I guess that first verse would be heretical.
Lowe may think he's zealous for the cause of Christ. But that didn't stop this bishop of an allegedly-Christian church from writing this about the United States in a recent diocesan newsletter:
There can be little doubt that the Bush administration sees itself as the upholder of world order and that its value system and way of life should be imposed, if necessary, by economic or even military means upon the rest of the world.
I gather that on one section of the Great Wall of China there is now an enormous plastic statue of Colonel Sanders, the founder of Kentucky Fried Chicken, whose contribution to American obesity is only challenged by Macdonald’s. I find this uncritical sense of superiority coming from the United States about its values and way of life one of the most frightening aspects of global life.
A nation that has so much power over world order and yet threatens the future of the world by its gas-guzzling attack on the world environment seems to lack a moral conscience, yet proclaims its own rightness in all things with pride that borders on arrogance. And sadly elements of the conservative Christian right seem to support this world view by the misuse of biblical material and an apparent lack of any understanding of Jesus’ teaching about the Kingdom of God.
Whatever, pointy-hat. Apparently, the US is going to send the army in here and there and force-march everybody into a McDonald's. But let's see. The United States, according to Steve Lowe, believes that its "value system and way of life should be imposed, if necessary, by economic or even military means upon the rest of the world." We have an "uncritical sense of superiority" over here, we seem "to lack a moral conscience," and we proclaim our "own rightness in all things with pride that borders on arrogance."
Lowe can't be bothered to back any of this up. Every leftist and atheist liberal Anglican in Europe knows all this is true(Mike Moore said so and he's an American) so why worry about ascertaining facts when it's so much easier to mindlessly regurgitate Guardian editorials? I guess that the Diocese of Manchester, in which Lowe is a suffragan, believes that proper use of "biblical material" means that we don't need to trouble ourselves about Exodus 20:16 anymore.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 14 comments
8/11/2004 7:16:27 PM
THE ANGLITARIANS WEIGH IN Anglicanism's crypto-atheist wing sends a letter to the Lambeth Commission:
The Modern Churchpeople’s Union believes it would be a major error to apply any sanctions with respect to the appointment of a gay bishop or the approval of same-sex marriages.
We concur with the view, already expressed in other submissions, that the Anglican view of authority is best described as a balance between Scripture, reason and tradition. The MCU was founded in 1898 largely to defend this theological tradition, and has now had just over a century’s experience of promoting it in debates over a wide variety of issues.
The famous three-legged stool. Do go on
In our experience the value of this approach has been proved in the way contentious issues have, in fact, been resolved. Time after time, when new ideas have been promoted, their opponents have appealed to biblical proof texts or elements of the church’s tradition in order to defend the status quo. Far from being sufficient to conclude the debate, however, these appeals have contributed to it, alongside other considerations such as new knowledge and concern for human well-being.
Let's see now. We of the MCU claim to believe that "the Anglican view of authority" rests on "a balance between Scripture, reason and tradition." But the appeals by conservatives to Scripture or tradition did not conclude the "debate" because they didn't take into account "new knowledge and concern for human well-being." Seems like it would be awfully hard to sit on that stool.
Satisfactory resolutions have, in practice, resulted from periods of open debate in which different sources of authority are compared and weighed.
Resolutions? Of what?
Examples are numerous. When the MCU was founded the dominant issues were the theory of evolution and literary-historical studies of the bible. Since then many of our members have taken leading roles in a variety of debates including women in the ordained ministry, remarriage after divorce, capital punishment and contraception. In each of these issues the majority Anglican view has changed. In each case the process of change took time. The time was made available because church members, including bishops, had the freedom to express views at variancewith the inherited position. Nor is this true only of the twentieth century; further back in time one might instance the debate about the slave trade, where again supporters of the status quo had biblical texts on their side but nevertheless a Christian consensus against it emerged.
A couple of things. I've said many times before and I will no doubt say many, many more times that I will listen to the slavery analogy in this particular situation when someone shows me a Biblical verse commanding the children of Israel to own slaves. Not before. And I was not aware when the "majority Anglican view" on these other issues was officially established and how it was calculated. I would think it would be tough to do considering that Anglican numbers have been dropping like a brick for at least the last thirty years.
We believe that this granting of time and freedom, within which a consensus can slowly arise or change, is justified by the Anglican understanding of authority. Central to the traditional balance of Scripture, reason and tradition is the recognition that no single authority is infallible and we therefore need them all to balance each other.
As the MCU officially explodes the notion that it is a Christian organization. If Scripture is not infallible and tradition is, as the MCU indicated above, also insufficient, then reason is the only leg left on that stool. And there's a word for people who desperately need to get Scripture and tradition out of reason's way.
This makes Anglican theology open, in the sense that every age has the potential to discover new insights. The methodology is inductive rather than deductive; absolute certainty is not given to us, so theological reflection should be done with humility and creativity. Within the church divergent voices need to be heard, or our ears will be blocked; churches at their best are inclusive.
Told you. Translation: we really hate it when people expect us to have consistent morals and to seriously believe stuff. We'd much rather let the secular culture determine what we think is wrong. It's a lot less work and people don't get mad at us.
We recognize that many are attracted by a contrasting approach which appeals to a single source of authority and employs deductive processes to establish doctrines.
They're called people who take the Gospel seriously.
Such an approach offers a greater sense of certainty and is closed in the sense that it provides no place for new insights.
Once you get past the whole dying-on-the-cross-for-the-sins-of-the-world thing, I'm not really sure what "new insights" are required.
However, churches in this tradition characteristically become closed in the sense that it provides no place for new insights. exclusive by, for example, excluding from teaching or leadership roles those who deviate from their inherited teaching.
Did I just read that? Did I just read that a group of "modern churchpeople" actually thinks that it's a bad thing for churches to exclude "from teaching or leadership roles" those people who don't believe what the church believes? No, it's not possible. I couldn't possibly have read anything so mind-bendingly boneheaded.
When such exclusions fail to resolve differences of opinion, the history of modern western Christianity illustrates all too amply how easily splits occur and sectarianism develops. We would not wish this to be the fate of Anglicanism.
Too late, sunshine. That train's left the station.
The view that the Communion should refuse to acknowledge Bishop Robinson’s status as a bishop, because his stance disagrees with inherited Anglican teaching, implies that currently inherited doctrine is the only legitimate position and that diversity of opinion among the Communion’s leadership is not acceptable
Well...um...that's because it isn't acceptable. That's kind of what this whole dispute has been about since last August. Does anyone at the MCU read newspapers?
We understand this to be an example of an exclusive ecclesiology based on a closed theology, and therefore inappropriate to Anglicanism. To impose sanctions on ECUSA, or Bishop Robinson, or priests who wish to be open about their gay or lesbian sexualities, would suppress the debate and constitute a major change in Anglicanism’s decision-making processes.
Which it desperately needs. As the engineers say, that's not a bug, that's a feature. Anyway, it seems to me that leaving Robinson in place would do far more to "suppress the debate" than any sanctions ever could. After all, what's the point of having a "debate" about homosexuality if a real live homosexual bishop is allowed to keep his pointy hat?
We see no reason why Anglicanism should not remain united while disagreeing about the ethics of homosexuality.
We, on the other hand, don't much like lying to ourselves so we "see no reason" why we should stick around a "church" that is so fundamentally dishonest.
More on the Modern Churchpeople's Union here.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 16 comments
8/11/2004 1:59:17 PM
UNSOLICITED TESTIMONIAL - If you don't read Jeff Goldstein on a fairly regular basis, begin doing so at once. You'll be awfully glad you did.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 2 comments
8/10/2004 7:25:34 PM
HELL IN A HANDBASKET HBO has a new series coming out:
Think Tony Soprano, but without all the violence or swearing — and with a wife who doesn’t care if he sleeps with other women.
That’s the star of HBO’s new original drama series, the Tom Hanks-produced “Big Love,” about a polygamous, fictional Utah family living in the present day.
The "family" isn't going to be Mormon though:
HBO spokeswoman Mara Mikialian said she hadn’t seen the pilot, so she couldn’t provide many specifics about the show. She said the family would not be Mormon, and the show would be shot in California — not Utah. It’s scheduled to premiere in 2005.
Mind if I take a stab at it? This "family" will be portrayed as perfectly normal and this series will have a kind of "Heather Has Two Mommies and One Daddy" tone. There will, of course, be minor arguments, mostly revolving around who sleeps with who when and who sits where in the restaurant. The appropriateness of three-ways will be a recurring comedic topic. But these people will "love" each other and be portrayed as "good" people doing the best they can.
The only serious conflict in this series will come from the family's "bigoted" conservative Protestant neighbors who will carry Bibles everywhere they go and quote Genesis 2:24 to the good guys a lot. But one of the bad guys, probably someone's daughter, will eventually see how noble and decent the polygamists are, become "enlightened," run away from her repressive religious home, move to the big city and become some man's concubine. Critics will love this show, saluting its "courage," while suggestions made here and there across the country that HBO should be dropped from local cable packages for showing this program will be called "censorship" and will be greeted with feigned horror and revulsion by the left.
Thanks to Ecumenical Insanity.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 12 comments
8/10/2004 5:06:43 PM
MARK YOUR CALENDARS Hmmm. I may have to lop off some vacation days in November and do a little live or at least on-site blogging because it says here that the National Council of Churches Nobody Goes To Anymore will be in town:
The 2004 National Council of Churches/Church World Service General Assembly will meet November 9-11, 2004, at the Sheraton St. Louis City Center in St. Louis, Missouri. St. Louis is an exciting and attractive city on the banks of the Mississippi River making it the center of the westward growth of our country, religion, commerce, sports, music and art over the last 150 years.
St. Louis is "the center of the westward growth of our country, religion, commerce, sports, music and art over the last 150 years?!" I love this area as much as anyone and I would never make such an idiotically extravagant statement. But we do have a very nice and very large non-sectarian chapel near the convention site where visitors will be able to worship after a hard day's work of passing resolutions declaring the intense, unspeakable, darn-near Nazi-like evil of the United States and Israel:
Public worship Tuesday evening at Christ Church Episcopal Cathedral, about six blocks from the hotel.
And I'm sure that there will be someone there who will be more than happy to provide free math tutoring:
Getting to General Assembly is as easy as 1-2-3:
1. Click here to register on-line
3. Follow the instructions below to make your hotel reservations
Although as soon as someone tells the NCCNGTA that Missouri's state constitutional amendment barring homosexual marriage passed with over 70% of the vote, they'll declare us homophobic bigots, announce a boycott of the state and go someplace else. So I guess I won't bother.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 1 comments
8/10/2004 12:16:58 PM
KILL ME NOW The MCJ's London bureau chief sends this along. If you're me, this might be the single most depressing picture in the history of photography:
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 23 comments
8/9/2004 8:25:29 PM
LIFE STINKS THEN YOU DIE - As the headline of this Australian story indicates, sometimes it just doesn't pay to get out of bed in the morning.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 5 comments
8/9/2004 7:40:36 PM
THE YIPS Is the pressure getting to the John Kerry campaign?
Human Events magazine reported today that the BarnesandNoble.com web site was "hacked" - accessed by unathorized persons - and that an image of a bookcover, a book critical of John Kerry, was replaced with a different image. The title of the book "Unfit to Serve" was changed to "Fit to Serve" and the photo on the cover was changed from a recent photo of Kerry gesturing during a speech with a photo of Kerry with his Swift Boat crewmates taken during the Vietnam War.
The National Debate has learned from high-level sources at Akamai, the internet hosting provider for BarnesandNoble.com, that investigators do not believe the bookseller site was "hacked", as originally reported by Human Events magazine, but rather that an unauthorized person gained access to the "customer account portal" using a compromised password.
This may have been the reason:
Since the early 1970s, Kerry has spoken and written of how he was illegally ordered to enter Cambodia. Kerry mentioned it in the floor of the Senate in 1986 when he charged that President Reagan’s actions in Central America were leading the U.S. in another Vietnam. Here’s what he said as excerpted from the new book, Unfit for Command:
I remember Christmas of 1968 sitting on a gunboat in Cambodia. I remember what it was like to be shot at by the Vietnamese and Khmer Rouge and Cambodians, and have the president of the United States telling the American people that I was not there; the troops were not in Cambodia. I have that memory which is seared--seared--in me.
Drudge has learned from the accounts of Swift Boat officers and Kerry’s crewmembers that Kerry was never in Cambodia. Unfit for Command authors charge that Kerry made it all up.
“Despite the dramatic memories of his Christmas in Cambodia, Kerry’s statements are complete lies,” according to John O’Neil, co-author and the Swift Boat commander who took over Kerry’s boat. “Kerry was never in Cambodia during Christmas 1968, or at all during the Vietnam War. . . . he was more than fifty miles away from Cambodia.”
Kerry was stationed at Coastal Division 13 in Cat Lo. Coastal Division 13’s patrol areas extended to Sa Dec, about 55 miles from the Cambodian border. . . . Tom Anderson, Commander of River Division 531, who was in charge of PBRs (small river patrol crafts] confirmed that there were no Swifts anywhere in the area and they would have been stopped had they appeared.
All the living commanders in Kerry’s chain of command . . . deny that Kerry was ever ordered to Cambodia. They indicate that Kerry would have been seriously disciplined or court-martialed had he gone there. At least three of the five crewmen on Kerry’s boat, Bill Zaldonis, Steven Hatch, and Steve Gardner, deny that they or their boat were ever in Cambodia.
O’Neill observed that the Cambodia incursion story is not included in Tour of Duty (Kerry’s recent biography). Instead, Kerry replaced the story with a report about a mortar attack that occurred on Christmas Eve 1968 “near the Cambodian border” in a town called Sa Dec and Christmas day was spent at the base writing entries in his journal.
After conducting interviews and research, authors of Unfit for Command conclude, “The truth is that Kerry made up his secret mission into Cambodia.... the lie about the illegal Cambodian incursion painted his superiors up the chain of command. . . . as villains faced down by John Kerry, a solitary hero in grave and exotic danger and forced illegally against his will into harm’s way.”
Will any of this matter? Probably not. John Kerry's not George W. Bush and that's all Democrats and "journalists" care about; the Democrats would run and the media would sugarcoat Axl Rose if they thought they could pull it off. So expect these stories and the others like them which are sure to emerge to be buried, buried quickly and buried deep. But remember all this the next time Mike Moore lifts his face out of the cherry pies long enough to create another goofball Bush conspiracy theory.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 14 comments
8/9/2004 5:12:48 PM
LES GRENOUILLES MAUVAISES I have tried hard to avoid gratuitous French-bashing around here. But it would be so much easier to do if the French would cooperate:
While on a tour of the museum at the Auschwitz death camp in Poland on Sunday, a group of around 50 Jewish university students from Israel, the U.S. and Poland were verbally attacked by a three-member gang of French male tourists.
Evidently incited by the presence of an Israeli flag wrapped around the shoulders of Tamar Schuri, an Israeli student from Ben Gurion University, the first assailant ran at the group while its members were being guided through a model gas chamber and crematoria and began swearing and hurling anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli insults.
"He told us to go back to Israel and said that we were stupid and should be ashamed to walk around with an Israeli flag," testifies Maya Ober, a 21-year-old Polish student at the Academy of Fine Arts in Poznan and member of the Polish Union of Jewish Students (PUSZ), which organized the 16-day summer learning program along with the World Union of Jewish Students (WUJS).
After the initial altercation, a second assailant grabbed Ober by the arm. "One of the guys held me by the arm and wouldn't let go," says Ober, who lost several members of her family at Auschwitz. "I was afraid. I couldn't move and I didn't know what he was going to do.
"I was shocked. Although I have met anti-Semitism many times, I never expected to meet it at Auschwitz, where so many of my relatives were killed," she says she spoke to the assailants in French and that in addition to being "brutish and vulgar," their sentiments "made absolutely no sense."
Anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli insults. At Auschwitz. The sentiments expressed by ces lâches français, if you'll pardon the redundancy, probably did make "absolutely no sense." But that's not news; Emile Zola, perhaps the most courageous Frenchman who has ever lived, figured that out over a century ago.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 16 comments
8/9/2004 4:50:12 PM
STORYTELLING Found another anecdote for you, Jan:
In an effort to reaffirm the orthodox beliefs of their faith, three [Tennessee] Episcopal churches have voted to realign with the Anglican Communion.
The move, made after the controversial naming of an openly homosexual man as bishop by the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (ECUSA) last year, came after much "soul-searching" and prayer by local congregations.
Such ordination is seen by some as a step toward same-sex marriages that could lead to the validation of other, generally unacceptable lifestyles or actions.
St. Bedes in Manchester, Trinity Episcopal in Winchester and St. Barnabas in Tullahoma are just three of the area churches to take a stand for orthodox beliefs in recent weeks.
Rev. Laird Bryson at St. Barnabas explained that his parish vestry, or governing panel, voted to join the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes last week as a way to let both the congregation, the church community and the general public know that during this division within ECUSA, St. Barnabas will uphold the historic faith and tradition of the church.
You may commence spinning now.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 12 comments
8/9/2004 12:28:45 PM
PISKIE-LETICS I don't ever again want to hear how bad Roman Catholic sermons supposedly are:
When the president worships on the road, it is customary for the pastor to pretend he's not there -- or to, at most, greet him and maybe remember him in a prayer.
No one told that to the Very Rev. Martin Luther Agnew Jr., who was up from Shreveport, La., for eight weeks as the summer minister at St. Ann's Episcopal Church, less than a mile from the Bush family estate at Walker Point.
Marty's quite the liberal Episcopalian:
Agnew got personal during his message about tithing and stewardship. He began by acknowledging he had ruffled some feathers the previous week, when he warned that gated communities ''tend to keep out God's people."
And if you've recently eaten, you might want to bail out now:
Plunging ahead, he singled out the George H.W. Bush's golf prowess during a parable designed to make the point that an ''intimate, meaningful relationship" with Christ requires shunning earthly possessions.
''Our material gifts do not have to be a wall -- they can very well be a door," Agnew said. Then, referring to Luke 12:33, the minister said, ''Jesus says, 'Sell your possessions and give alms.'"
''I'm convinced that what we keep owns us, and what we give away sets us free," he said.
Seriously. I'd click over to Kendall's place if I were you because it's right about here that Marty runs as fast as he can right into the septic tank:
Agnew held up a golf iron and asked his flock to imagine the first President Bush taking repeated swings to try to hit a ball out of the rough. The former president made what Agnew called ''a mighty swing" at the ball, resting atop an anthill, and missed, killing about 346 ants.
With Agnew brandishing the club for effect, he said the former president whiffed again and killed 641 ants.
The former president continued to swing wildly, in Agnew's telling, and finally one ant said to another, ''If we're going to live, we better get on the ball."
''What God is reminding us to do," Agnew said, ''is to get on the ball."
Whatever, Marty. Amazingly enough, Mr. Bush didn't laugh his head off:
Barbara Bush looked at her husband with a small smile. Her son the president nodded a few times, but the former president sat stone-faced through the story, according to an Associated Press reporter who had a good view of them.
Even though Marty did the best he could to turn himself into a joke:
After the parable, Agnew stepped down into the pews and jovially high-fived the former president. Old number 41 sportingly returned the gesture, but did not smile during the rest of the sermon.
Here's a little background on Marty in case you need to know what churches to avoid on Sunday mornings.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 12 comments
8/8/2004 4:05:25 PM
ANECDOTES Piskie-flack Jan Nunley, a few days ago:
Still, the mass movement -- both into and out of the [Episcopal] church -- predicted a year ago has not occurred.
"The anecdotal evidence is showing us that for most congregations, the effect has been pretty neutral," said the Rev. Jan Nunley, a national spokeswoman for the church.
Jan? Stop me if you've heard this one:
It's been a tumultuous year for some [Eastern Michigan] Episcopalians and their churches.
Since the ordination of an openly gay Episcopal bishop in New Hampshire a year ago, three local pastors have resigned their posts and tumbling local church attendance has yet to stabilize.
Gone are the Rev. Scott Danforth, 51, rector of St. Dunstan's Episcopal Church, Davison Township; the Rev. David Kulchar, rector of Trinity Episcopal Church, Flushing; and the Rev. Gregory Tournoux, 45, rector of Christ Episcopal Church, Owosso.
The Rev. Laura Truby, interim rector at Christ Episcopal, said she won't know until after summer vacation how attendance will shake out.
"In the past, groups have broken off into little splinter groups, but they come back over the years," said Bishop Edwin Leidel of Saginaw, head of the Diocese of Eastern Michigan, where the resignations have taken place. Leidel and the entire eight-member delegation from the eastern side of Michigan affirmed Robinson's ordination.
Here's another story that you might find amusing, Jan. I may have finally received the divine two-by-four upside the head, the sacred "Do I gotta spell it out fer ya?" that I've been so fervently praying to God for.
Not even a block north of the MCJ Building on Elm Avenue is a lovely little Wesleyan church that I had been meaning to visit. It's been there for years and years. The building is a plain brick thing in the Protestant meeting house style; its only adornment is a cross in white brick on the front of the building.
I haven't worshipped there because I believe that the congregation has either closed down or moved; I hadn't noticed any cars in their little parking lot for some time. But for the last month or so, I have seen men working on the place on and off, painting this, fixing that and planting things. So I assumed that the church was starting up again.
Turns out that it's not. I've been house-sitting and will be until the week after next so I haven't been by the neighborhood all that much. But as I drove by there today, I noticed a temporary sign telling me that a new church has purchased the building. Seems that a conservative and evangelical body called the Holy Trinity Anglican Church will be moving in there. Or already has.
There have been conservative Anglican churches here in eastern Missouri, an ECUSA stronghold, for some time. A few have been successful while others have been as temporary as the morning dew(if your St. Louis area congregation is looking for a building, there's a formally Anglican one on Chestnut Avenue in Webster Groves which may interest you). But I honestly cannot remember a time when I have noticed more of them.
There are a few names which have not defiled their garments. Even in St. Louis.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 26 comments
8/8/2004 12:49:35 AM
BOOKMAKING Why look. There's another new "Bible" out:
Sex is "fulfilling," masturbation is "difficult to resist" and Mary Magdalene "had something of a dodgy past". A new "youth Bible" which talks frankly about pornography and lust has been condemned by traditionalists for "dumbing down the message of salvation".
The Contemporary English Version Youth Bible, jointly published by The Bible Society and Collins - which also publishes more traditional versions of The Bible - is written in modern idiom and includes a number of extra passages penned by contemporary authors on "youth issues".
This thing contains just about every sell-out to the secular culture that it could cram into its pages:
The passage on pornography advises teenagers "to avoid the top shelf of the newsagents, [and] pray as you surf [the internet]". A section on masturbation cites St Paul's exhortation in Thessalonians not to be "a slave of your desires", but admits that "it can provide a release".
Exam anxiety can be dealt with by "praying for a bit of calm and a good memory!" while adolescents confused by their sexuality are reminded that "today's world is a sexual free market".
Young people are also told to look at the parable of Jesus turning water into wine in the context of first-century Palestine. "Riding a donkey after a drink was less dangerous than drinking and driving today," it says. "Jesus made up to 160 gallons of wine at Cana, but would he have made anything that would intoxicate or bring harm to anyone?"
Conservatives are rightly horrified:
The updated version has caused consternation among traditionalists, who argue that the Bible should not be tampered with. The Rev John Roberts, the general secretary of the Lord's Day Observance Society, said that the Bible should fight the increasing secularism of society, rather than embrace it.
"Our society has never been so open so you don't need to use the Bible to teach people about these things," Mr Roberts said. "The Bible is a book that one shouldn't denigrate with this kind of sleazy language. This is gimmicky, and it is a real worry.
"We need to be very careful we don't lose all concept of what the Bible is about by trying to make God 'pally'. He is not pally, He is too great to be brought down to our level."
And Catholics will have nothing to do with this abomination:
John Medlin, the development manager of the Latin Mass Society, a Catholic society that strives for authentic worship, claimed that the traditionalist wing of the Roman Catholic Church was growing worldwide precisely because it did not offer this sort of "watered-down faith".
"Traditionalist Catholics have very little interest in such material and do not see the point of it," he said. "The fullness of the message of salvation is contained in the Bible for believing Christians, and I see no point in attempting either to add to it or to dumb it down for a contemporary audience that is desperately seeking transcendence.It is patronising. It speaks of a certain lack of morals in the persons producing these sort of dumbed-down Bibles. What we need to do is to offer it whole and untouched to youngsters in their contemporary world. They are desperately searching for someone to offer them a goal towards which to strive."
One of the book's publishers thinks critics ought to get with the times:
A spokesman for Collins said that the Bible "had changed with the times". "Sex, addiction, eating disorders, masturbation, bullying - most kids have to deal with this and if a modern Youth Bible is to remain a truthful guide to how to live a Christian life, it just can't duck them," she said.
"Shame, confusion, embarrassment can't have a part in what we set out if we are to be credible at helping young people get more out of the Bible - and their lives."
Yeah. Can't have the kiddies thinking that some things are wrong and shouldn't be done. They might feel "shame, confusion, embarrassment" and we can't have that. Who's this thing's other publisher anyway?
The Bible Society is dedicated to making the Bible accessible to people across the world. It is supported by donations from churches of different denominations including the Church of England.
Figures. But at least Dr. Williams doesn't seem to have written its introduction.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 12 comments
8/7/2004 4:58:37 PM
RECON East Tennessee Episcopal Bishop Charles vonRosenberg has a new letter up to his diocese. Guess what it's about?
We have the call from God, through Christ, to reconcile ourselves with one another and with God. That work is fundamental and primary for Christians, and it will require the efforts of a lifetime. The work likewise is costly. It led our Lord to the cross. However, in God’s providence and care, what appeared to be failure became, rather, a means to the goal of reconciliation.
“All this is from God, who reconciled us to himself through Christ and has given us the ministry of reconciliation; that is, in Christ God was reconciling the world to himself, not counting their trespasses against them, and entrusting the message of reconciliation to us. So we are ambassadors for Christ, since God is making his appeal through us; we entreat you on behalf of Christ, be reconciled to God” (II Corinthians 5:18-20).
The call to the work of reconciliation echoed from our gathering at diocesan convention. Convention’s resolution commends this work to us: recognizing our different conclusions about biblical teaching on human sexuality; valuing one another as faithful Christians nevertheless; and enlisting our participation on the path of respectful conversation. Our diocesan Commission on Reconciliation is hard at work, developing suggested means for conversation – an initial step in reconciliation – for our churches and the areas of the diocese.
On a more personal level, I have had many conversations with Episcopalians and others, within our diocese and beyond, on the subject of reconciliation as it relates to strongly held differences of opinion about human sexuality. In one such extended conversation, a gay Episcopalian freely used the term “gay marriage.” However, the church has been very clear in defining marriage, in part, as the union of a man and a woman. Thus, for me, the term “gay marriage” conveys a message loaded with political agenda.
In our conversations, we must come to terms with the terms we use. Obvious-ly, much work lies ahead. And as civil governments engage in the discussion, our task as the church is complicated further. But the call to reconciliation rings clear. The work is fundamental and primary for Christians, and it will require a lifetime. It will be a costly process. However, it is a work we cannot avoid, if indeed we choose to follow Jesus Christ.
Whatever, Chuckie. And the front-runner for Presiding Bishop breaks out of the pack; I don't think Frank's ever managed this many "reconcilations" in one piece. As for me, I'm going to go reconcile with some Jim Beam in a bit. Hopefully, I'll be able to forget all of Chuckie's mindless incantations of the word "reconciliation."
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 29 comments
8/6/2004 8:05:58 PM
PISKIE PORN Only the Anglicans. Only the freaking Anglicans:
A Gloucestershire vicar is to launch a nude calendar in his church after a group of 13 women posed naked to raise money for rape victims in Rwanda.
The Rev Stephen Earley of St Martin's Church in Horsley said: "As Christians we are taught to help widows and orphans, so I didn't hesitate."
The calendar will help Surf, an organisation working for survivors of the genocide and those with HIV.
It will be launched at an evening service at the church on 26 September.
"Many of the atrocities in Rwanda took place in churches where people had sought sanctuary, so it seems fitting to try and redress the balance," said the Rev Earley.
By being photographed naked?!!
Jo Hofman, 50, who posed for the calendar said: "We wanted to celebrate womanhood to heal a little of the pain suffered by our sisters in Rwanda."
A sentiment echoed by Sarah Clifford who also posed for the calendar when she explained her reasons for taking part.
"It seemed unbelievable that 10 years after one of the worst genocides in history, the survivors were now having to deal with even more suffering - Aids as a result of rape and children being orphaned for the second time - and we felt we had to act," she said.
By being photographed naked?!!
The vicar also said he was expecting a few complaints about his decision.
"Undoubtedly some people will complain but it is important to see it before making any criticisms.
"A lot of thought has gone into this and it is about empowering Rwandan women who have been so debased. It is about reasserting women's essential female selves," he said.
By being photograph...aw, skip it. Thanks to the crack staff at Ecumenical Insanity.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 20 comments
8/5/2004 2:14:56 PM
NOTES FROM A PEACEFUL RELIGION Ain't nobody here but us peace-loving chickens:
Two leaders of a mosque in Albany, New York, were arrested on charges stemming from an alleged plot to help a man they thought was a terrorist who wanted to purchase a shoulder-fired missile, federal authorities said Thursday.
The men have ties to a group called Ansar al-Islam, which has been linked to the al Qaeda terror network, according to two federal law enforcement authorities speaking on condition of anonymity.
The two arrests came as FBI, Immigration and Customs Enforcement and other agents executed search warrants at the Masjid As-Salam mosque and two Albany-area homes, officials said. The men were identified as Yassin Aref, 34, the imam of the mosque, and 49-year-old Mohammed Hoosain, one of the mosque's founders.
According to law enforcement officials, the two are being charged with providing material support to terrorism by participating in a conspiracy to help an individual they believed was a terrorist purchase a shoulder-fired missile.
The individual was an undercover government agent and no missile ever changed hands. Aref and Hoosain were allegedly involved in money-laundering aspects of the plot, the officials said.
The investigation has been going on for a year and is not related to the Bush administration's decision earlier this week to raise the terror alert level for certain financial sector buildings in New York and Washington, the officials said.
Posted by Christopher S. Johnson - 11 comments