Wednesday, January 19, 2011

It's never to late to do the right thing

The Anglican Cycle of Prayer for 2011 has been updated (hat-tip to Christian Paolino) to include the current bishops suffragan of the Diocese of Los Angeles.

Saturday 22-Jan-2011
Psalm: 98: 1-4 Isa. 45: 9-13
Los Angeles - (Province VIII, USA) The Rt Revd Joseph Jon Bruno
1. Suffragan Bishop of Los Angeles - (Province VIII, USA) The Rt Revd Mary D Glasspool
2. Suffragan Bishop of Los Angeles - (Province VIII, USA) The Rt Revd Diane Jardine Bruce
O God, by your grace you have called us in this Diocese to a goodly fellowship of faith. Bless our Bishops Jon, Diane and Mary, our other clergy, and all our people. Grant that your Word may be truly preached and truly heard, your Sacraments faithfully administered and faithfully received. By your Spirit, fashion our lives according to the example of your Son, and grant that we may show the power of your love to all among whom we live; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

17 comments:

Martin T. said...

Congratulations, are you happy now? Don't be shocked if most of those in the Anglican Cycle of Prayer just happen to "skim" over Saturday. :-O

dr.primrose said...

Jesus said, "You have heard that it was said, 'You shall love your neighbor and hate your enemy.' But I say to you, Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, so that you may be children of your Father in heaven; for he makes his sun rise on the evil and on the good, and sends rain on the righteous and on the unrighteous. For if you love those who love you, what reward do you have? Do not even the tax collectors do the same? And if you greet only your brothers and sisters, what more are you doing than others? Do not even the Gentiles do the same?" (Mt. 5:42-47)

I think those who intentionally "skim" over this prayer on Saturday should be much more concerned with their own relationship with Jesus than the place of Jon, Mary, or Diane in the church.

Martin T. said...

They WOULD skim over said prayer that was posted, instead of that one would most likely pray that those who separated themselves from God and the Church would repent, because by their chosen lifestyles and state of affairs they are not able to lead Christ's Church. Perhaps a secular organization would welcome them.

SUSAN RUSSELL said...

Martin T ... remedial reading assignment: Luke 18:11

uffda51 said...

As Winston Churchill was quoted as saying, “A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.”

Martin T. said...

Sorry Susan, Luke 18:11 doesn't apply here. When has it became a bad thing to pray for the repentance of others, especially when their sin is hurting the whole Body of Christ?? It has nothing to do with one not looking at their own lives, because I most certainly do and I know others do to. It seems like (no...IS) whenever someone is against what is happening here, they are blackballed and labeled as a "hater".

Martin T. said...

No fanatics here, just people who wish to change the Church to their own rules and not adhere to the ones set forth for us all to follow.

SUSAN RUSSELL said...

See also Matthew 7:3

And just for the record, if you were being "blackballed" your comments wouldn't be posted.

You're being disagreed with. Not much fun but ontologically different than being discriminated against.

Martin T. said...

I believe you know very well that I'm not speaking about myself, but for others who were pushed out because they won't toe the line. But there are a few of us still here in the Church. We're not going anywhere. Things would be much easier for you if we all did wouldn't it? We'll continue to stand by scripture. In reference to your last scripture post, see my last post. I love Jon and Mary, they are my brother and sister, but we have standards (or at least we used to).

uffda51 said...

No one has the ability to choose their genetic makeup, nor does anyone have the ability to change their genetic makeup. Equating genetic makeup with “lifestyle” is irrational. But arguments designed to defend prejudices are never rational.

SUSAN RUSSELL said...

"... they are my brother and sister, but we have standards."

Yes. Yes we do. Still do. Standards like "fidelity, monogamy, mutual affection and respect, careful, honest communication, and the holy love which enables those in such relationships to see in each other the image of God" for relationships and standards like "guard the faith, unity, and discipline of the Church; to celebrate and to provide for the administration of the sacraments of the New Covenant; to ordain priests and deacons and to join in ordaining bishops; and to be in all
things a faithful pastor and wholesome example for the
entire flock of Christ."

We don't not have standards, my friend. What we don't have is the ridiculous idea that those standards only apply to heterosexuals.

Using "biblical standards" to condemn those who apply those standards equally to hetero & homsexualt persons -- who assert that sexual orientation is morally neutral -- makes as much sense as using "biblical standards" to condemn astronomers for daring to suggest the earth revolves around the sun instead of the other way around.

The Bible may have said it but that doesn't always settle it.

Martin T. said...

I'm sorry Susan but I cannot and will not place my marriage between me and my wife on the same equal footing as someone living in SS relationship. Please don't expect people to do that, even if you all do end up getting what you want. I will never look to "them" to be an example in my life for anything (well, maybe for what not to do), much less receive the Eucharist from them. So much for unity. But hey, as long as your diocese is happy, nothing else matters.

uffda51 said...

Martin T., you have repeatedly expressed here both your feelings of personal superiority, as well as your animus towards “them” quite clearly. Just wondering, though, if you can clarify the exact time, date and place when “the rules” were “set forth for us all to follow.”

BTW, I’ve received the Eucharist from “them” many times and lived to tell about it. My life would be infinitely less rich without the influence and friendship of LGBT teachers, colleagues, friends, priests, and so on. If “unity” means pretending we all still live in the Bronze age, I’ll pass.

Martin T. said...

uffda, I'm just wondering when the General Convention is going to vote to have it's own version of the Bible like the Jehovah Witnesses, that's all. I guess the majority of practicing Christians in the world just "feel superior" too, right?

dr.primrose said...

Jesus said, "Do not judge, so that you may not be judged. For with the judgment you make you will be judged, and the measure you give will be the measure you get. Why do you see the speck in your neighbor's eye, but do not notice the log in your own eye? Or how can you say to your neighbor, 'Let me take the speck out of your eye,' while the log is in your own eye? You hypocrite, first take the log out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to take the speck out of your neighbor's eye." Mt. 7:1-5.

Fitting words in this conversation, don't you think?

uffda51 said...

OK, I'm already violating my New Year's pledge of "shorter, on topic posts only" . . .

Martin T., it’s not about the myriad translations and versions of the Bible. It’s about the historical and cultural context in which it was written and the recognition of the influence of the Holy Sprit over time.

This was the language used by my Rhode Island Puritan ancestors in the 17th century to justify slavery.

"Unless the heathen were acquainted with the Gospel, eternal misery would be their lot in the after life. Therefore, any suffering that the slaves might experience on the slave ship or in slavery was more than compensated for by their fortunate delivery from a life of idolatry and savagery. A slave trader could piously rejoice that an overruling Providence had been pleased to bring to this land of freedom another cargo of benighted heathen to enjoy the blessings of a Gospel dispensation." (Of course the “land of freedom” (New England) first had to cleared of Native Americans, who were either killed or enslaved, in King Phillip’s War, arguably the bloodiest war in American history.)

The “majority of practicing Christians in the world” at the time used the Bible to "feel superior" to Africans and Native Americans just as many Christians still use the Bible to feel superior to LGBT persons. Pious and patriarchal “delivery from a life of idolatry and savagery” is simply an earlier version of “love the sinner, hate the sin.”

Martin T. said...

Doc, it doesn't apply here. That line is used when someone says something you don't like. Yes, I am a sinner, and unlike some, I actually repent. I don't try to change the rules so I can wallow in my own dirt. uffda, again (and to who else is confused) You can't compare race and gender to going to bed with someone with the same parts. You're actually born with the first two, and you can't change it. No, not even an operation can change it. If people didn't love you, they'd just let you carry on without a word from them. Love isn't letting someone go astray without a warning, that's being irresponsible.