« daggers out | Main | cat fights! »

13 April 2008

the pussification of the anglican church

Well at least the Anglican church in the West.

And that's not just Western Australia.

In widely unexpected news, and thanks to a loophole in current Anglican canon law, the Anglican Diocese of West Australia has appointed its first woman bishop.

Expect some fawning op-ed from Muriel Porter, Australia's only Anglican laywomanTM some time soon.

What makes Archdeacon Goldsworthy's appointment a joke, as does the appointment of all women priests and bishops in the Anglican Communion - is that these Anglicans have failed to provide a theological basis for the appointment of women priests and bishops. This is not to say the theological case for opposing women priests and bishops is strong - it isn't really because the Anglicans can't make up their mind about whether the priesthood is sacerdotal or not, and whether that even implies it's only for men (Anglo-Catholics and evangelical Anglicans for example, would both oppose women priests and bishops for different reasons) but at least those who oppose it, try to do so on theological grounds. 

The agitators for women priests and bishops have simply used loopholes in current Anglican canon law to prosecute their case which is based on no more than secular notions of "equality" and even more inappropriately, some "right" to be a minister.  As I have pointed out before, it's theology by polity, and it's a tactic taken straight out of the American Episcopalian activist handbook.

Goldsworthy's appointment is meaningless and in fact, an insult.  Goldsworthy is just a political stooge. Women ministers in other denominations would have more credibility.

I will guarantee you one thing though. The more the Anglicans veer towards the loony left in their theology and politics, the more irrelevant and empty their churches. 

If you want evidence of that, see the ECUSA - the largest Anglican body in the U.S.A. which has dwindled to next to nothing in terms of membership, and where the current high-priestess whose theological education and formation amounts to, um, oh...hmm... is deposing any orthodox Anglican bishop in their midst, and suing every parish that dares oppose 815's loony left political agenda to ensure that its pews are completely emptied.  And it is purely a political agenda.  There is no Christian theology here.

To see how much of a joke the ECUSA has become, look no further than the Episcopal Divinity School - a seminary for Episcopal priests which offers such delightful subjects as:

T 3150 Queer Incarnation
Jordan
7:00-9:00 pm
The incarnation is sometimes presented as an arithmetic problem: What do you get when you add some divinity to a human body? But thinking about incarnation has to start much further back, in the realization that accounts of Jesus show us how little we understand about either divinity or bodies, much less about how bodies can show, act, and becomes divine. Just here and theology of the incarnation can learn from works of queer theory and the writings of queer thinkers. The body of Jesus- despised, de-sexed, and yet miraculously distributed- invites us to an exchange of bodies along the margins of human power and its certainties. We will think about the queerness of Jesus' body with the help of some traditional texts on incarnation and passion (Athanasius, Bonaventure, Aquinas, Julian) and much more recent work on gender performance, bodily transition or transformation, and the rituals of camp.

I'm ever so curious how they get queer out of Athanasius, Bonaventure, Aquinas and Julian (I guess that's because Jesus' body was "queer"), but then, even the preliminary reading list barely features an orthodox Christian author, much less any primary texts. So what's a bit of revisionism here and there.

A commenter at MCJ offers more:

T 3410 Theology of Liberating Queer MDGs
Gillian
Fr 11pm - 2am

Using phenomenological reconstruction of deconstructed postmodern interpretivist readings of selected Gnostic scholia to marginalized "pseudepigraphical" gospels, we shall attempt to liberate the reimagined stories of the historical Jesus from the patriarchal paradigms of repressive premodern historical literalism. Using the seminal works of modern queer theorists, we will examine how this reconstructed Jesus' divinity lies essentially in his embracing of the liminal and rejecting of the privileged center, and how this teaches us that our holiness derives from love of self, as actualized in the passion of the homosexual 'other', and love of world, as incarnated in the MDGs. Prerequisites: Queer Theory, Feminist Theory, Intro to Environmentalism. Some rudimentary familiarity with the New Testament suggested but not required.

Yeah, well, what place the New Testament in a Christian Church.  The seminary has replaced it with Gaia's Gift: Earth, Ourselves and God After Copernicus.

And this one's a treat:

P 1810 Modern Pastoral Counseling, part 2
Himmler
T/Th 5:00-7:00pm

The contemporary Episcopal world offers new challenges in parochial and diocesean communities. In this semester we discuss the uses of terror, propaganda, and psycological warfare against active opponents, as well as continuing our study of manipulation, desensitization, and "victim rhetoric" in cultivating communities of ignorance and apathy. Guest lecturers will include members of the local legal community, ex-Soviet KGB agents, Hollywood musical agents, and an anonymous Italian businessman from the Chicago area.

"Anonymous Italian businessman from the Chicago area?" Well I guess the Lavender Mafia learnt its standover tactics from somewhere. 

Why don't they form a partnership with Randolph College and do field trips, no, work experience at the local brothel? 

No wait, that might imply there's men left in the Episcopal Church.

Indeed, their catalog, which begins with the favourite Hollywood quote from every lefty's favourite syncretist dead Hindu, is the epitome of pussification and queer. 

And blasphemy.

There are many factors that have dragged the Episcopalians down to this gutter level, but one is that conservative Episcopalians didn't have much taste for church politics, leaving room for the loonies to move in and turn the church into a front for their favourite political cause.

Australian Anglicanism can look forward to descending to the same self-parodying sop in the next decade - some dioceses are not far behind now - if Anglican men don't get back to their churches and boot out the girlie-men and their jack-booted sisters.

HT MCJ

Update: Right on queue, The Age - via SMH's Linda Morris - sings praises to the shattered "stained glass ceiling" and wheels out Muriel.

I also don't think Linda realises just how stupid Herft's protocol is - not just in terms of what it says about Goldsworthy's appointment - but also in terms of how stupid she is revealed to be, in the way she reports it:

The protocol included making provision for a retired male bishop or a bishop of a neighbouring diocese to step in to perform largely ceremonial duties in place of a woman if a congregation could not accept female ministry.

Ceremonial duties? *rolls eyes*

Posted by saint at 11:07 PM in fools, frauds, nympholepts | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/t/trackback/11402/28050224

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference the pussification of the anglican church:

Comments

The problem now, I suspect, is that those men don't WANT to come back for fear of having to be with the girlie men. I'm convinced a similar phenomenon kept the best of the 70s and 80s Catholic men out of seminaries.

Posted by: C.L. at 14/04/2008 2:02:53 AM

You would prefer its sodomisation?

Posted by: Caroline at 14/04/2008 6:59:02 AM

Hey, that'll eventually be a selection criterion for some Anglican "bishops".

Posted by: C.L. at 14/04/2008 10:13:25 AM

there is no biblical basis for bishops at all.

All denominations ignore God's clear instructions on the requirements on being a fair dinkum bishop, overseer or even deacon which we find in 1 Tim 3 or Titus 1.

Posted by: Homer Paxton at 14/04/2008 10:56:15 AM

I don't think it was fear CL. If fear kept men away, that is no better than being faithless. Unless, of course, the curricula in seminaries were like that of the EDS. Then one would fear being asphyxiated by banality and dying of boredom.

P.S. Homer. I think you know we worship Christ not the Bible. There is nothing "unbibical" about the office of a bishop. Also it does well to think of the church sometimes as the Eastern Orthodox do - as a hospital for those who are sick in all manner of ways and in need of the Great Physician. And to remember that orthodoxy is a future goal which drives the present.

Posted by: saint at 14/04/2008 6:25:50 PM

What a curious webpage. The bitter, self-important 'fruit' diplayed here raises plenty of questions about the quality of discipleship displayed by the author. Furthermore, the intemperate comments made about Kay Goldsworthy testify to a common problem amongst evangelicalism's self-appointed apologists namely that they can see everything except the forest lodged in their own eyes.

Posted by: Wayne at 14/04/2008 10:11:48 PM

What codswallop, Wayne. You seem to have a view of Christian intellectual discourse that owes more to an effete academic lounge or a Hollywood Bible film than to such real-world examples of speaking the truth as are to be found in the Fathers of the Church.

Saint, I didn't mean fear of their vocation - as they may have discerned it - but fear of that vocation (and the faith sustaining it) being undermined or ruined. Many Catholic families in the 70s and 80s made this attitudinal switch - a big one in Catholicism. They actively wanted their sons to avoid particular parochial seminaries. They were seen, rightly, as poisonous.

Posted by: C.L. at 15/04/2008 12:37:31 AM

First thanks C.L. I doubt that Wayne would have even read the Fathers (or even St Paul!) and would probably hyperventilate if he did. They are exactly the sort of men I had in mind!

OK, you may be right in the sense of fear of vocation being undermined and the attitudinal change C.L. (and I am still not sure "fear" is the right word but you are in a better position than me to know). On the other hand, that may have also been a good thing in that it starved particularly toxic seminaries of "fodder" - although that also carries a cost. It also doesn't mean those men (and women who may have entered an order) have not been able to fulfil their vocation in other way - if I can go all Protestant on you in "vocation" as not necessarily being limited to the ordained or those in religious orders.

Nor does it mean that the present generation will be subject to the same "fear". Do you think that still holds? I've been impressed with a few young men I have met in the past year (Lutheran and Anglican) who are discerning vocations and who have their eyes wide open when it comes to sorting wheat from chaff and picking the undercurrents and whirlpools. I'd like to think they are representative even if I would say the numbers entering the ministry in Australia these days - Catholic, Anglican, Lutheran, Orthodox or otherwise - would be quite small.

Posted by: saint at 15/04/2008 2:17:17 AM

There's nothing protestant about that view of vocation. Every Christian has a vocation, as Catholics have always been taught. And yes, the voting with their feet did kill off some orders and ways of doing things that were of no further orthodox use in the Church. Contemplative orders for women religious and orthodox seminaries, however, have begun to flourish.

Posted by: C.L. at 15/04/2008 11:10:28 AM

Saint, my old err young mate.

no-one is worshipping the bible however God gave us clear requirements for bishops/overseers/pastors and deacons.

note today's bishops are toally different to biblical bishops. They actually overseer a church!

It isn't a vocation as the person is chosen by God.

does anyone really think a man can have a reverent wife and disciplined children without being chosen and blessed by God?

no church needs anymore oversight than their own bishop. He shepherds his flock.
By defintion itcannot be a woman nor can it be a single man nor a married man without children or with very young children.

Of course denominations believe they can choose pastors by other methods just like choosing an accountant or solicitor.

Posted by: Homer Paxton at 15/04/2008 1:27:57 PM

Yes Homer, if the New Testament tells us anything it's that God won't bestow blessings of ministry on a single, unmarried, childless man.

Posted by: C.L. at 15/04/2008 1:39:58 PM

tell us how a single man manages a household CL?

you are conflating the position of apostles with bishops

Posted by: Homer Paxton at 15/04/2008 2:07:17 PM

That is good news C.L. if that is happening in Australia C.L. (contemplative orders, orthodox seminaries flourishing)

I suspect that Australia will fall some way between Europe and America in the near future, with perhaps a slightly larger creative Christian minority than say, B16 can forsee for Europe, and with perhaps not as much robustness in the public square as one sees say in America. And of course, one can't forget our new Australians - particularly from Africa and Asia who I think are going to be increasingly influential. Heh. I'd like to see the few whiny teenagers who are presently complaining about an Anglican school banning gay escorts from a school formal whinge to them.

Homer, I think we are going to have to agree to disagree about your view of "biblical bishops". I also think you, C.L. and I have a slightly different understanding of vocation, although I suspect my understanding is closer to C.L.'s than yours.(Funnily enough, one of the most throught provoking books I have read on vocation and the "history of vocation" in recent times has been by a Baptist who wasn't exactly unfamiliar with the Church Fathers either :-O)

Posted by: saint at 15/04/2008 4:49:36 PM

Saint,

my basic point is God has given us requirements for Christian leadership which are quite high indeed he has shown us what to look for in a family.

Therefore it cannot be a vocation.

Neither you not CL nor I could be a bishop or deacon at this time not matter how hard we vocate

Posted by: Homer Paxton at 16/04/2008 7:26:27 AM

Post a comment