Saturday, January 19, 2008

Bravo Bishop Frade!

Episcopal Cafe is reporting that +Leo Frade, Bishop of Southeast Florida, voted to consent to the inhibition of Pittsburgh Bishop Bob Duncan.
.
BRAVO
.
BISHOP FRADE!!!

While the whole statement is posted below, here's my "take away" for the WHOLE of Christ's Church & the World:


"... after reviewing all the supporting documents that give evidence of their actions, I was astonished that we neglected to take action any sooner on their obvious violation and breach of their oath to engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline and worship of The Episcopal Church."

AMEN. AMEN. AMEN.

And the more the light of day is focused on the actions of the schismatic bishops, the more the rest of the church will awake to that truth and wonder, along with Bishop Frade, why we've put up with their divisive, destructive energy as long as we have.
.
In the end the "truth will out" -- and the truth is this schism-du-jour is a power grab by narrow minded malcontents who, tired of representing a minority opinion in the Episcopal Church, carefully charted the course they are sailing now.
.
It was never about a bishop in New Hampshire or a blessing in Pasadena -- or any of the other dozens of straws that have been blamed for breaking the camel's back over this last decade or so. It was always about power and patriarchy. And it is time for us to call "time" on this testosterone temper tantrum. It is time to end the collateral damage being done to the LGBT faithful whose lives and vocations have been the scapegoats in this struggle. And it is WAY past time to get on with the mission and minstry of the church without the distraction of Duncan and his ilk.

Thanks be to God for strong leadership from our Presiding Bishop and House of Deputies President -- and for Bishop Frade for his strong, clear words of clarity.

=========

Dearly Beloved in Christ:

Greetings from the Holy Land! While leading my yearly pilgrimage of the faithful to the land of our Lord Jesus, I have been asked to comment on the decision of the Three Senior Bishops to unanimously move to inhibit the Bishop of San Joaquin, but not to inhibit the Bishop of Pittsburgh.

I must state that after carefully examining the decision of the Review Committee headed by the Rt. Rev. Dorsey Henderson of the Diocese of Upper South Carolina, which recommended the move to inhibit both bishops--of the Dioceses of Pittsburgh and of San Joaquin--and after reviewing all the supporting documents that give evidence of their actions, I was astonished that we neglected to take action any sooner on their obvious violation and breach of their oath to engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline and worship of The Episcopal Church.

I firmly believe that any bishops whose words and actions are in violation of this oath, as stated by church canon, should be equally subject to the appropriate canonical discipline.

I also believe that it is my episcopal duty to assiduously safeguard both the membership and patrimony of our Church as a whole. The faithful of those dioceses that have been betrayed by their bishops need to know that they are not abandoned by their Church.

The Episcopate must not tolerate such actions as these bishops have taken; they have betrayed the trust that was given them when we, their brother and sister bishops, consented to their election. The seriousness of this betrayal is not mitigated by the fact that in one of the cases the goal of turning away from The Episcopal Church has not been fully achieved. As I have learned to say in America, "You can not just be a little pregnant."

It was with great sadness that I concluded I had no other choice but to vote to move to inhibit two of my brothers who have betrayed their trust to be faithful shepherds of their dioceses, which are integral parts of our Episcopal Church.
.
The beauty and flexibility of Anglican polity has allowed since its foundation disparate and disagreeing parties to remain in full communion. It is my sincere hope and prayer that these two bishops, who once pledged of their own free will to engage to remain faithful to the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal Church, will in a spirit of reconciliation choose to fulfill their previous promises.

If they are unable to do so, we in the HOB must do our sad duty to discipline them and move in a timely manner to protect and provide for the many remaining faithful of these dioceses.

Blessings,
The Rt Rev Leopold Frade
Bishop of Southeast Florida and Senior Bishop with Jurisdiction of TEC.

9 comments:

Anna B. said...

Susan, this does not relate to the article and it is not particularly timely, however I wanted to share with you this Christmas Message from the Bishop Nathan Baxter, Diocese of Central PA. I didnt know how else to send the message to you. It touched my heart so deeply to know that my Bishop considers LGBT people to have a full and equal seat at the table. He is another courageous man - in my humble opinion. It can be read at the address below.
http://www.diocesecpa.org/bishopmsg.cfm

edav38 said...

According to your little advertisement of "Days left of Bush in Office", Tell "ME" that you are no more for "Bringing People Together" than those who are trying to cause Schism within the polity.

You CANNOT be for something when you are Advocating AGAINST the Very Same Thing!!

It is NOT possible to do so. and you Know that is truth, or maybe you don't since you are practicing it.

SUSAN RUSSELL said...

edav38 ... off-topic but interesting.

And, of course, I disagree. Working WITHIN the American political process to lobby for policy change ... and CELEBRATE the upcoming regime change ... is part of the historic, democratic process.

Working OUTSIDE the Episcopal Church polity to pull off a schism because they haven't been able to persuade the majority of Episcopalians to buy their narrow, exclusivist agenda is a whole different ball game.

Apples.

Oranges.

"Bringing people together" means coming together in spite of differences ... not insisting on being agreed with as your criterion for included.

An parallel that would actually work to make your argument would be if the majority of us who voted AGAINST Bush in 2000 had tried to go around the Supreme Court in the Florida vote count decision and decided we were going to align ourselves with ... oh, let's just pick CANADA ... instead of the USA.

Ridiculous?

That's what Duncan and Schofield are up to.

Thanks for the chance to clarify.

frharry said...

RE: "It was never about a bishop in New Hampshire or a blessing in Pasadena -- or any of the other dozens of straws that have been blamed for breaking the camel's back over this last decade or so. It was always about power and patriarchy."

And yet, is it not those very motivations which now inform the actions against the schismatics? Is it not the point when membership and properties are in question, when the lines of obedience to the hierarchy are violated, that action occurs?

Had it truly been about issues of justice, about gay bishops and same sex blessings, the General Convention would NEVER have voted through the resolution its last day. The reality is that the convention sacrificed its own LBGT members and clergy to insure that our bishops - well most of them, anyway- got their invitations to the Lambeth tea party.

I'd like to believe that there is some principle beyond power and property at work here. I'd like to believe that the church has found its way to do the right thing which would begin with public repentance for its history of institutionalized homophobia. But, at a very basic level, I think it's pretty hard to make that case given the way things have unfolded.

I'm sad to see the conservatives go. But I'm even sadder that so many LBGT folks and others of good conscience had already left while the conservatives were allowed to blackmail the church and set its agenda. The price of a contrived unity based in concerns for property, power and social respectability has simply been too high. It has included no small amount of the church's integrity.

edav38 said...

The problem on Both sides of these issues is that everyone on each side is acting as if the "Roman Catholic Church" dictates to we Anglicans/Episcopalians, how we worship, who can be among us, who has the right frame of mind, who is Sinful and who is not.

One thing, that Both sides have Forgotten is that ALL of Humanity is Sinful, Does Not live as CHRIST has told us to, that Everything we do is putrid in the sight of the Lord, because there is NO Sin that is less than another sin, except for denile of CHRIST, which no one on either side has done yet. They have not denied CHRIST, just each-other.

How are the Faithful ever supposed to Follow, if the leaders do nothing but Bicker amongst themselves on who can and cannot worship?

Have we come to the point where people and groups like "Focus on the Family" are in control of our places of worship?

It is looking more and more like it.

This whole argument, not just this article, but the whole FAR Right-wing of the church against LGBT's, it is all point-less in the sight of the Lord, it Does Not lead us anywhere closer to CHRIST, no matter what either side would like us to believe.

What do these bickerings get us?..........Only Division, and takes us Away from the Body of Christ....

LilBearSings said...

Edav - it makes a huge difference if you're a gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgendered Christian.

There are not two "sides" here. There are those who want to chase the GLBT children of God out of their Father's House, the GLBT people refusing to be chased away, and the heterosexual people defending their GLBT brothers and sisters in Christ.

In my city there is a GLBT youth group with over 300 teenagers in it. All these kids face terrible persecution and often their worst persecution is at the hands of their own families. For many of them the first thing that happens is that their mom's and dad's stop loving them, and the second is they loose their access to church and God. My Bishop marched in the Pride Parade this year. Teenagers showed up at the Episcopal booth at the festival after the parade and learned they could come to church and not be told God hates them. If you had seen their reactions it would melt your heart. To gay kids and adults today the first thing that comes to mind when you say "Christian" is "hate". I'm not sure there is a more important thing for the church to "get on with" than changing that reputation.

RonF said...

edav38 said:

How are the Faithful ever supposed to Follow, if the leaders do nothing but Bicker amongst themselves on who can and cannot worship?

and lilbearsings said:

There are those who want to chase the GLBT children of God out of their Father's House,

Hm. Outside of a very, very few nutbags, I don't recall seeing or hearing anyone say that homosexuals were not welcome in God's house and were not welcome to worship there.

I certainly do hear people say that Jesus has told all us sinners that we should repent of our sins and embrace the grace of God. Asking someone to put away a sin that they have tightly embraced is not the same as chasing them away. We are called to hate the sin, but love the sinner. Those words of Jesus have not been implemented very well, any more than many of his other words have been; but that does not invalidate them.

SUSAN RUSSELL said...

Ummmm ... Ron ... and the source for "those words of Jesus ..." would be?

It's actually from St. Augustine. His letter 211 (c. 424) contains the phrase Cum dilectione hominum et odio vitiorum, which translates roughly as "With love for mankind and hatred of sins."

The phrase has become more famous expressed as "Love the sinner but hate the sin" or "Hate the sin and not the sinner" (the latter form appearing in Gandhi's 1929 autobiography).

edav38 said...

Ron said: "Hm. Outside of a very, very few nutbags, I don't recall seeing or hearing anyone say that homosexuals were not welcome in God's house and were not welcome to worship there."

Then Ron, you need to get your hearing aid fixed, because that is a Large portion of Christians around the world who would love to see an end to us, that would like to ban us from their churches (the So. Baptists do so almost daily, as do a good many Anglican/Episcopal congregations where it is dangerous to be who you are).
If you are not hearing it or seeing it, then you are not looking or listening very well.

Indiana is about to go through another round of trying to pass Hate-Crimes legislation. Every time that GLBT's are included in it, the "Christians" come out if FORCE to oppose it. Apparently they feel it is their "Right" to Discriminate against GLBT's, even though ALL forms of Discriminations against God's children is repugnant.

Ron, again, if you do not hear it or see it, then maybe you best stand up and look around and listen a bit more. Cause it is right in front of your face day in and day out.