www.byzcath.org Forums General Discussions Town Hall What is your opinoin of this site?

Of course, a diocese would not consecrate a person as bishop who was living with a mistress (mister?). That bishop to be has the opportunity to marry -- Gene Robinson does not. Please understand that I am not in favor of "marriage of gay persons" but I do believe that blessings of their relationships are appropriate. Civil unions would provide them with all the benefits that heterosexuals have (at last count I think it's over 1000).

Interesting comment from a group of RC clergy that I was with this summer during my sabbatical. "The genie is out of the bottle and the church is not going to be able to stuff it back in". Serious scholars of scripture take different views of interpretation of homosexuality in both the Hebrew scriptures and the New Testament.

My guess is that this post will open up a can of worms. : - )

Please understand that I believe that we can disagree with each other and remain brothers (and sisters) in Christ. I claim Jesus Christ as my Lord and Savior --- I just happen to disagree with some of you on certain subjects.

Blessings to all of you this day!


Mike+
Feast of St. Bartholomew the Apostle

Daniel,

I'm going to ask you to refrain from making such emotionally charged accusations ("apostate denomination") regarding the ECUSA. Those determinations should be left to the competant authority and not us arm-chair theologians. I'm sure Fr Mike would enjoy posting on this issue if we can agree to engage him without the vitriol.

Father Deacon,

That seems a bit difficult don't you think. I suppose we could avoid a descriptive word such as "apostate" but where does that get us? The word has synonyms. How are those to be avoided? If we avoid discussing the reality then what kind of discussion is there left.

If we wish to avoid controversy altogether perhaps it would behoove Father to stay away from controversial subjects.

Dan L

Since Gene Robinson cannot marry his current partner, thus making their relationship "irregular", would not the more prudent course have been for him to live as celibate bachelor? What message does this send to the faithful?

No, Dan, I don't think it is difficult. We discuss the issues and point out the error, but we don't just throw out a highly emotional term like apostate or heretic because we can't formulate something better to say.

By electing him bishop it tells:

1. Children that the entire Church supports the break up of marriages and the destruction of children's well-being.

2. Wives, and husbands for that matter, that the Church honors unfaithfulness.

3. The entire Church that fornication and homosexual perversions are honored in the Church.

Lord, have mercy!

Dan L

Dan, that didn't seem too difficult for you to formulate a coherent response.

If that makes a difference I can do that.

Dan L

Father Mike,

As one of those who was very vocal in opposing the hostile attitude taken toward you back at the beginning of the year, I am delighted to see you posting again. Welcome back

Rose and Mary Jo and Deacon John,

I agree that it was Father Mike's post that opened the can of worms, rather than anything that Rose or Mary Jo said. However, in Father Mike's defense (and I wish he had chosen to be a bit more subtle in his post), I think his intent was to reinforce Mary Jo's points about would-be Catholic apologists who consider the label "Protestant" to be an all-inclusive term that doesn't permit of distinctions and that respectful dialogue and love are often better weapons for conversion than confrontational rebuttal.

Anhelyna,

You are absolutely correct. Father Mike isn't the only Episcopalian posting here. One other, a very respected gentleman, also from the American South, comes to mind immediately and I have never seen a disrespectful post directed at him. We also have other Protestant members, (e.g., most recently, Roger, the Baptist pastor from Ireland) who have been received with respect and who themselves post here with that same respect.

Dan, Daniel, and TN,

I'm firmly convinced that, whether you choose to verbalize it (or even realize it), you are reacting to Father Mike as you have in large measure because he was one of "us" and elected to "go elsewhere". We would not do so if "elsewhere" was to an Orthodox Church (my brother and good friend, Ghazar, being a case in point).

Father Mike,

As I urged when you left before, stay. Consider that the warm welcomes of my sisters, Anhelyna and Alice, are reflective of what this Forum is all about and what makes it a different and more enjoyable place to be than most of its genre, whether they be RC, EC, EO, or Protestant.

Many years,

Neil

Neil,

I have no idea who Father Mike was and had no idea he left the BCC. You dismiss the idea that he defends the corruption in the ECUSA. We all must bear whatever crosses we have. His is ECUSA. But to defend their corruption is a position I will disagree with.

That he is ECUSA is mostly irrelevent. To agree with their recent stands on Women priests and homosexualists is quite relevent. If you are serious in your comments I urge you to rethink them. If not I will laugh along with you though I won't completely understand the joke.

Dan L

Daniel:

Maybe we ought to take a poll to see if all the "apostates" should be forced to leave this site?
: - )

I joined this site because of my Ruthenian heritage and I love to keep connected with it. I'm just finishing a 3 month sabbatical and during that time I had an opportunity to visit the wooden church at the GCU Headquarters and the Cathedral at Munhall. Both are very "spirit-filled" places.

I have gained much as a Ruthenian. I have gained much as an Episcopalian (a great wife, a great community and a good retirement system).

Can ya'll just tolerate me as a lurker? : - )


Mike+

Lurk or post. It won't bother anyone. However,if you defend a non-Christian position likely as not you will be challenged.

After many years as a United Methodist minister my wife and I found our way home to the BC Church. We like the forthright stands that it usually takes. We like the traditions. We like its faithfulness to that which has been taught from the beginning. We do disagree with those who would defend non-Christians stands as though they were Christian.

I'm not the Administrator here, but I'd be very surprised if John believed anything else.

Dan Lauffer

Pani,

It is a good site but some of the articles are a bit long. On the other hand I've seen much longer. I would refer thoughtful people to it.

Dan L

Fr Mike ,

I see no problem with you as a poster - I'm sure that all here realise full well that what I object to [ I've said it on more than on occasion ] is discourtesy.

Pastore Berean from Ireland is here - Zadok is here - why should you be chased away by discourtesy ?

OK - some posters do make their point very very vocally - and I suppose that is understandable - we do live by a Code - and that must be upheld .

The fact that your Church is having problems at this moment in time is not down to you - the RC Church is still embroiled in it's problems , and I'm certain that others have their own ' little' hiccoughs too.

We are all God's Children and hopefully our separate paths will lead us at the end to Him Who made us .

Forget the lurking - stay and post when you feel like it - and remember that occasionally we all need our flameproof garments

Anhelyna - the incredibly lopsided RC

That is not a factor at all. I had no idea he used to be one of us until afterwards. That wouldn't have mattered. I agree to disagree with Fr. Mike on positions his church has taken. There is nothing personal in it. If the Orthodox Church ever condones homosexual behavior and women's ordination, I will disagree with it, as well. However, if Orthodoxy ever teaches such, listen carefully for a trumpet blast, since it will all be over, anyway.