What we do, Julian, is the best we can do given the lights we are given. We’re not trying to impress anyone: If we were, we’d adopt your theology, not ours, because yours is far more popular today, particularly among the formerly unchurched and the ill-educated. If you think forward thinking is sinful, that tells me about all I need to know about your ideas about theology.

The real question, Julian, is that if you disagree with the mainstream ideas of the Episcopal Church, why do you want to be a part of us? There are a thousand more evangelical churches out there than we are, and let’s face it, we’re not going back, even if going forward means leaving the Anglican Communion.

Caleb, you are wrong in your assessment of your opponent with the eyes of Holy God. Christ had no money when He was born and had no respect when He died at cross. But yet at the end He was glorified by God. Also please watch out Adam and Eve who disobeyed God because of “forward thinking”, later punished. Kingdom of Heave, if you or your Episcopal Church believes is for people of child like simplicity, where seeds of Kingdom can grow. If you have spiritual eyes, you can see for yourself from the Bible and justify, no scholarly book can give you that nourishment. Let’s watch out lest we should not be eternally condemned.

Episcopal version of gospel is really no gospel at all. Evidently some people are throwing us into confusion and are trying to pervert the gospel of Christ. They are trying to get approval from men or please rich and famous men like you to increase number for respect and survival, not from God. If the Church pleases men but not God they are not servant of Christ. If you like you can check Galatians 1:3-10 and justify whether I am right or wrong.

And, please quote me properly: I am a lifelong Episcopalian, not an Anglican. Episcopalians are Anglicans, perhaps, or at least used to be, but please understand that the Episcopal Church is a separate entity, and may well, at some point, decide to withdraw from the Anglican Communion, or if the grass eaters have their way, be thrown out. I suspect the former is more likely, because the grass eaters may be strong on dead-brain conservative theology, but they’re weak on two important things: Money, which the poorer provinces of Anglicanism desperately need, and which the US Episcopal Church has historically provided, and forward thinking, of which they have none, and without which they will have no respect.

These breakaway Anglican groups understand that, because they want to have it both ways, being recognized as members of the Anglican Communion, but without having to follow its rules. When the last group of grass eaters left, over the issue of ordination of women in the ’70s, at least they had the moral and intellectual honesty to form their own church, rather than strut around and try to bully everyone else into recognizing them as part of the Anglican communion. And they immediately dropped off the face of the earth; Julian, can you even name one congregation of this group? As Episcopal in tradition as Central Kentucky is, I don’t know of this group having a single congregation here. And the new group of grass eaters knows and understands this; they know that their association with we evil Episcopalians is the source of what little respect they now have, and what little they’ll ever have. They know, that like the last bunch of schismatics, once they’re gone, they’ll be gone forever, and no one will care.

Julian, St. Paul himself noted that people see the gospel in different ways depending on their ability to understand it. He likened it to a baby being able to digest only milk or pablum, while an adult can eat meat and potatoes. Your literal reading of the Bible reminds me of the time that my great uncle read the great novel Huckleberry Finn to me as a child. I loved it. I loved the stories and the humor and the adventure. It was only when I took the book up again in college that I realized its deeper implications and its influence on American literature. Your view of the Bible is like this: You take a literal view because, perhaps, that’s all you’ve been exposed to. Open your mind, Julian, and eat some meat and potatoes! Leave this evangelical pablum that you’ve been eating and spouting behind, and come eat at the adult table! I promise, it’s a lot more interesting, and more importantly, in my view at least, a lot more consistent with the message of the gospel. Hate, Julian, is not a Christian value, and that’s what the grass eaters are preaching.

Caleb, I know from your earlier posting that you are lifelong Anglican, so am I. Anglican throughout the history never denied the Bible as word of God, as we always said after reading from the Bible that “this is the word of God” and Church teaching never skewed away from the central message of the Bible for individual salvation. Our method of worshiping Trinity and ultimately attaining salvation from Holy God thru practice may be different in some cases from Roman Catholic or Baptist but not from the principles of Holy Bible. No doctrine or practices contradicted with virtue of biblical teaching, until recently by choosing extreme liberal attitude on sexual behavior, which caused the present crisis in Anglican world. Please note that Anglican never encourage divorce for married couple but allow remarriage after certain trial of spirituality, instead of excommunication from the Church e.g. prince Charles. Also the Bible does not teach woman priesthood as sin oppose to homosexuality. The beauty of Anglicanism is its adopting “middle path” as you stated above in Christian theology for salvation, not violating biblical teaching.

As I stated above ““Sola Scriptura” is not a denial of other authorities governing Christian life and devotion as long it does not contradict biblical teaching. Anglican adopted per “Sola Scriptura” Scriptural authority to pastoral care, as we find in the “Westminster Confession of Faith” which stated: VII. “All things in Scripture are not alike plain in themselves, nor alike clear unto all; yet those things which are necessary to be known, believed, and observed, for salvation, are so clearly propounded and opened in some place of Scripture or other, that not only the learned, but the unlearned, in a due use of the ordinary means, may attain unto a sufficient understanding of them.”

Here the phrase “due use of the ordinary means” includes appeals to pastors and teachers (Ephesians 4:11-14). As such, Sola Scriptura reflects a careful tension between the perspicuity (clarity) of Scripture necessary for its role as final authority, and the occasional need for its meaning to be revealed by exposition (Hebrews 5:12).

For the present crisis we need constant prayer for peaceful solution and to be under one body of Christ as we and our Church Fathers prayed for thousands of years.

Yes, the Anglican church does use the Bible and does place Biblical texts at the center of its worship. However, unlike the more seriously protestant denominations, it has not adopted the doctrine of Sola Scriptura, which was my point, amply supported by your evidence. I’m not sure you understand the difference; perhaps an example will help. In Baptist and other evangelical churches, when issues of doctrine are raised, they only look at the Bible as providing the rule to be used. Anglicans have never done that. They have always looked to the famous three-legged stool of Anglican theology, the Bible, church teaching, and reason.

If we’re quoting Wikipedia, let’s quote a little more: “Wishing to pursue Elizabeth I’s agenda of establishing a national church that would maintain the indigenous apostolic faith and incorporate some of the insights of Protestantism, the Articles were intended to incorporate a balance of theology and doctrine. This allowed them to appeal to the broadest domestic opinion, Catholic and otherwise.[15] In this sense, the Articles are a revealing window into the ethos and character of Anglicanism, in particular in the way the document works to navigate a via media, or “middle path,” between the beliefs and practices of the Roman Catholic Church and of the English Puritans, thus lending the Church of England a mainstream Reformed air. The “via media” was expressed so adroitly in the Articles that some Anglican scholars have labeled their content as an early example of the idea that the doctrine of Anglicanism is one of “Reformed Catholicism”"

Julian, this is hardly sola scriptura. The Anglican version of spirituality and Biblical study is, as with everything Anglican, a mix of Catholic and Protestant doctrines. Trying to push us into the firmly protestant “sola scriptura” category is not within the spirit of Anglicanism. In fact, that’s one of the things the Church of England was created to avoid.

Caleb, as you are a Christian let us discuss “biblical Anglican” and “Sola scriptura” with spiritual perspective, and not trying to find Almighty God of Sprit and Truth with your science and history knowledge, as you tried before and refuted many biblical truth. This would be west of your time and life long effort to be a disciple of Christ, if you want to be. Wisdom of science and history are still in rudimentary form to get all truth about God.

Matter of facts in the statement above, you misunderstood meaning of “biblical Anglican”. It does not mean that Anglican religion can be found in the Bible but it means that Anglicanism follows the teaching of the Bible. You are really blind about the Bible and those who follow, and completely relied on your strength of intelligence, rather than love of God.

Unlike science and historical truth, the Bible is the foundation for godly knowledge and “Sola Scriptura” is the fruit. Please be noted that “Sola Scriptura” is not a denial of other authorities governing Christian life and devotion. Rather, it simply demands that all other authorities are subordinate to, and are to be corrected by, the written word of God. Thus “Sola scriptura” is a foundational doctrinal principle of Protestantism.

As per Canon 5, the doctrine of the Church of England is grounded in the Holy Scriptures, and in such teachings of the ancient Fathers and Councils of the Church as are agreeable to the said Scriptures. In particular such doctrine is to be found in the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, The Book of Common Prayer, and the Ordinal. The Church of England bases its teaching on the Holy Scriptures the ancient Catholic teachings of the Church Fathers and some of the doctrinal principles of the Protestant Reformation (as expressed in the 39 Articles, and other documents such as the Book of Homilies). Source: Wikipedia.

I hope now you know the truth about Anglicanism, whose believes are rooted in the Bible as well as ancient Catholic teachings of the Church Fathers. Any teachings that contradict with the teaching of the Holy Scriptures must be corrected by the word of God. Episcopal Church can not introduce new doctrines at their will that contradict teaching of the Holy Scriptures, unless they want to walk out of Anglicanism and form a new religion. Choice is yours to walk out, because main stream Anglican still follows traditional doctrine. Episcopal Church also violated its own doctrine by ordaining gay priests before officially amending doctrine to include gay marriage.

Julian, you’re entitled to whatever beliefs you want. If you want to believe in the doctrine of sola scriptura, fine, but don’t be intellectually dishonest by making that doctrine to be traditionally Anglican: It’s not.

In other words, hurrah for South Carolina! Hurrah for Mark Lawrence! Hurrah for his councillors, attorneys, and Theologian in Residence!

My position may seem weird, being both gay and conservative. In truth, I don’t know that I “chose” either one, though I *regret* neither. I do know that I would rather take my chances with a mistaken Christian than a dishonest Marxist-Feminist.

I would take “Anglican Curmudgeon” over Queen Louie Crew any day of the week. Better a brilliant lawyer who’s on the wrong side of one issue than a raving gut-bucket of a narcissist who taught poetry at a no-name state school.

May Katie Schori be humiliated down to the dust.

May the Episcopal Church lose another diocese and many, many contributing laity and selfless clergy.

May Newark be buried and forgotten, and its name blotted out forever.

The Anglican crisis is not crisis of legal issues; it is crisis of spirituality and must be resolved spiritually not by attorney. When spiritual core values of Episcopal Church have been shattered, Schism is inevitable, and it should be resolved keeping God in first place by continuous prayer with open heart until solution evolved so that God be glorified. Primary goal of both parties is to glorify God and Church property is one of the resources, so lets God be the judge, not the court to glorify His name and maintain “PEACE”.