The Apostasy Plot Thickens
Episcopalians refuse affirmation of Christ
--Hans Zeiger, VirtueOnline Correspondent
www.virtueonline.org
COLUMBUS, OHIO (6/20/06)-The House of Deputies of the 75th General Convention of the Episcopal Church today overwhelmingly refused to even consider a resolution that affirmed Jesus Christ as the "only name by which any person may be saved."
[...]
Judy Mayo from the Diocese of Fort Worth also opposed discharge. "My friends, this is a church convention, and this is the very essence of our faith. This may be the most important thing we deal with at this entire convention...Surely we can say together that Jesus Christ is Lord. And if we can't, we have no reason to be here."
[...]
McDowell explained that how one lives his life is the more important issue than whether one affirms Jesus as Lord. To place a statement of belief over actions is the essence of "self-righteousness," he said. "Actions speak louder than proclamations...What Jesus calls us to do is to live our lives."
McDowell outlined his basic theology of grace: "Salvation by grace is remembering that we are the children of a living God. Grace is already there. And salvation is realizing we now live into that salvation. And sanctification is the transforming of my life from one that's me-centered to one that's God-centered."
[...]
"If we cannot affirm the unique salvific power of Jesus Christ as our Lord and Savior, we are no longer a Christian church." Switching to a sarcastic tone, Howell declared, "We have no need for a Creed. Why do again what we did in the past?"
"This clearly shows that we are of a mind that does not affirm Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior. And we should not be surprised that our church is dying spiritually,"
The final tally on the electronic vote was 70.5 percent for discharge (675 votes) and just 29.5 (242 votes) to consider the resolution affirming Jesus Christ as Lord.
I have nothing really to add. It pretty much speaks for itself.
from the mind of... Eric | 11:26 PM
9 Comments:
Do you really think that what one professes is more important than how one lives? That saying some owrds is more important than actually following The Way of Jesus?
I mean, it *is* shocking, especially the way you've oversimplified it. But without seeing the whole debate, I'm going to assume that it centered on the ancient debate over faith vs. works.
Unlike some here, I will *always* asume God is at work among fellow believers, and will rarely assume the worst. I look for grace. Y'all look for rigid adherence to words that are just so much wood, hay and stubble.
I se ya saw fit to leave this important bit out:
"The Rev. Robert Certain of the Diocese of San Diego told the House of Deputies that he refused to consider the resolution because the General Convention of 1982 had endorsed salvation through Christ alone, and a resolution was unnecessary."
Just more signs that a split looms. ... Shoot, man, that's how lots of Baptist churches grow! Someondy gets all bent out of shape with someone else, lins get drawn, deacons take sides, and there's a split. Pretty soon, you've got TWO Baptist churches, and more likely than not in a few years both have grown. I've never understood how that is a bad thing.
I pray for the Episcopaleans, that the individuals find God's will for themselves, if they can no longer find it collectively.
Uh-oh. Bro. DooDad will accuse me of "piety" again! (Does anybody know what he means by that?)
Look at the definition of "sanctimonious". You use it. It means having a pious attitude.
Pious--hypocritically virtuous (Oxford Dictionary, again) Surely you trust a dictionary, ER (most likely more than you do God's Holy Word!).
"Do you really think that what one professes is more important than how one lives?"--ER
To say otherwise id pure heresy!
The more you engage in spiritual conversation, the more your complete lack of understanding shows.
That's predictable in light of the fact that you reject God's Word.
It's not what we do that swaves us, pal. It's what Jesus did in our place.
Virtue is a product of salvation--not a requirement.
That's Bible.
"I will *always* asume God is at work among fellow believers, and will rarely assume the worst."
Until fellow believers demonstrate otherwise I will also assume God is at work in their midst.
But I'm also reminded that Walking the walk and talking the talk can often be deceptive... and deceitful.
But Jesus Said, "He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him." John 14:21
1 Timothy 4:1 further states, "Now the Spirit speaketh expressly, that in the latter times some shall depart from the faith, giving heed to seducing spirits, and doctrines of devils"
Some may have seen the vote as unnecessary. But it is also safe to say that many have "departed from the faith."
That, my friend, is Apostasy... a falling away. It forces one to wonder in the Spirit of God ever dwelt in their hearts. If they were ever the recipients of His grace, and His gift of salvation.
All this means is I should pray that much harder. And I hope you will join me. After all, "the prayers of the righteous availeth much."
I have no righteousness of my own, but Jesus has imputed His to me. The same is true of all believers. And that means, when my prayers line up with His will... they accomplish a great deal.
Re, "Virtue is a product of salvation--not a requirement.
That's Bible."
I agree. Where in the world does Bro. DooDad get the idea that I don't agree with that??
Hey, EL, DooDad accused me over at my joint of "dogging" him. Now, I haven't left a word at his place in weeks. Have I been dogging him, or is it the other way round?
This is your place, EL. This is about the only place I ever encounter DooDad other than my own. It's your call. And I insist that you make the call.
Does Bro. DooDad have part "ownership" in this blog? He seems to be claiming such.
Does DooDad call people's mothers vicious, disgusting names? No!
Someone should call the Reverend Self-Worshipper on that one, huh?
Of course, 5-year olds go tattling to mommy, too!
Grow up and defend your own self, Reverend! Don't expect others to fight for you.
Get a freaking back-bone, dude!
(EL, I'll not respond to any more of this yahoo's posts. Ipromise to ignore them from now on.
I've put him in his rightful place enough!
ER--
I think your comments have been in the spirit of honest debate... nothing malicious, or mean-spirited. We disagree on some issues, and since we are all quite opinionated, our discussions are... spirited... to say the very least. I do think D. gets a bit carried away sometimes, but if I censor him for what *I* think is beyond civil, I must also censor you for things *I* think are uncivil. I can't silence one, and allow another free reign.
So, in the spirit of that last statement. I must insist that everyone be respectful.
But here's my dilemma in all this-- How do I determine what is civil and what is UNcivil? Church of the Erudite Redneck is humorous. Is it a dig? Certainly. But is it mean? I guess that depends on whether or not you're offended by it. D's personality is not mine. Your personality is not D's. But because of the seemingly wide divergences in our ideologies, there's bound to be friction. I encounter it at your place. But more importantly, I encounter it just about everywhere I go. But that's fine. I've decided I want to learn, and the best way to do that is go to places that challenge me and my well-entrenched ideals.
I don't know what's in your mind when you post comments... I can't see your face or hear inflections or stesses of speech, so I only have the "tabula rasa" of the printed word to judge what is, and what is not nice. The same is true of D. He see's something you've posted and perhaps assumes it's a personal dig. I don't know. I can't speak for D.
Now... I've dealt with the "Circle-Jerkers" issue. That is not the kind of debate I want to foster here... I've been to some of those MoonBat dens of "Un-Niceness". So it's done away with. Furthermore, we're all adults, and I shouldn't have to spell out exactly what is and what is not allowable speech. Let's all use a little common sense... To say nothing of a little Decorum.
What I am most concerned about, is the casual passerby, who after reading the tone contained within the comments section, quickly departs with the wrong impression of ME, and the God I worship. I have to represent Christ in everything I do. Even this blog.
Let's all try to disagree without being disagreeable. I don't want to have to turn off comments altogether. It is becoming quite a headache, and more trouble than it's worth, but I can't tell you and D. how much I've learned by debating everyone who stops by.
I hope this sufficiently addresses your request, ER.
Be at peace, one and all.
I am blessed to have been able to debate on the web over the past couple of years. God has taught me so much during that time--about myself and about others.
I have been humbled on many occasions (not lately, not here, not there) and have had to eat my bitter pie. But I've admitted it.
God has changed some of my views--the one that really stands out id my position on the death penalty--through the thoughtful debate with others way more articulate than I am.
Erudite Redneck has been a belssing, as well! Really, he has. He has helped me to see that the Christian values I hold dear are sound. He has helped me to depend on God's word even more than I did before.
Through my debate with him, I have recognized faults that I have taken for granted. God has used him, though not in the way he, the Reverend, would think he has.
His fallacies have further grounded me in my faith. For that, I am grateful to God!
Thanks for trying, EL. I appreciate it.
Post a Comment
<< Home