Episcopalians Believe Effing Anything

By fitsnews • on March 3, 2009

We’re all for religious freedom and letting people hook it up with whoever they want behind closed doors, but we’re pretty sure Episcopalians have gone off the friggin’ deep end.

And not just because they think openly gay bishops can marry and get married, people.

Episcopalians are now actually electing bishops who walk “dual spiritual paths.”

From Christian Newswire:

An Episcopal priest who has received a Buddhist lay ordination has been elected bishop in the Diocese of Northern Michigan. The Rev. Kevin Thew Forrester, who has served in the diocese since 2001, was elected on the first ballot and received 88 percent of the delegate votes.

The results of the election are now sent for consent to all bishops with jurisdiction and standing committees across the Episcopal Church, in what is usually viewed as a rubber-stamp procedure.

Forrester, who has been identified by his former bishop Jim Kelsey as “walking the path of Christianity and Zen Buddhism together”, is not the first Episcopal clergyman to practice dual faiths. In 2004, Pennsylvania priest Bill Melnyk was revealed to be a druid; while in 2007 Seattle priest Ann Holmes Redding declared that she was simultaneously an Episcopalian and a Muslim. Both Melnyk and Redding were eventually inhibited from priestly duties.

We encourage people to walk whatever spiritual path – or combination of paths – they want. America is (or was) a Christian nation, but we’re also libertarian in that we don’t think government should ever discriminate against a particular faith (even though it has every right to acknowledge it was established on one).

Having said that, though, shouldn’t the people who perform the sacred rituals of a particular religion actually be required to believe in those rituals? At least with more than half their hearts?

Doesn’t that sort of seem like a prerequisite for joining – let alone leading – a flock?

Because if not, honestly, what’s the point of going to an Episcopalian church anymore? If they’re making Buddhists, Druids and Muslims into Episcopalian bishops, should we even call them a ‘Christian’ church?

Episcoceltics, Episcosiddharthas, Episcohammeds, Episcofriscos, maybe … but Christians?

Again, everybody should believe what they want to believe, but it seems like to be an Episcopalian bishop you should at least pretend to be an Episcopalian.

Personally, we got traded from the Presbyterians to the Lutherans last year (for a can of almonds and some Ben Gay) and we gotta say, other than a few changes to hymn lyrics and weekly communion, there’s not a whole helluva lot of difference.

As far as we know, God is still in charge and will make the final judgment on everything and everybody.

Of course, our bet is he’s sitting up in heaven right now thinking, “Jesus Christ, those crazy Episcopalians will believe effing anything!”

And when Jesus inquires as to why he was summoned, God gets even more frustrated because he has to clarify himself.

“No I didn’t call you, son, but those damn Episcopalians are at it again!”

Comments

By Charlie (Colorado) on March 3rd, 2009 at 2:58 am

Actually, since Buddha didn’t make any definite statements on how the world got here, if there’s a Creator, an afterlife, or any of that stuff, Buddhist practice isn’t incompatible with Christianity.

By Toyota Kawaski on March 3rd, 2009 at 8:17 am

My Church is so far in left field from Gene Robinson,to our current presiding bishop Katherine who is not sure about the Holy Trinity to Archbishop of Canterbury using the church for antiwar protest we are messed up for sure.That’s why i use the ole Greenpeace slogan and think locally act locally paying attention to my local church only.

By CL on March 3rd, 2009 at 9:37 am

Buddhism is inconsistent with Christianity, as Buddhists do not believe in a soul, and salvation is achieved internally, not through any faith in an external creator. These views are fundamentally incompatable with the Christian faith, even the tepid, watered down Episcopalian version.

By Bob Hope on March 3rd, 2009 at 9:57 am

Got to side with Charlie here. As weird as it sounds, I don’t know much of anything that Buddha taught that went counter to the teachings of Jesus.

By Gary on March 3rd, 2009 at 11:02 am

Pictured above are just two more lavender-robed Obama voters!

By Mab on March 3rd, 2009 at 11:02 am

So — the Buddhism is what’s getting to you Sic, not the homosexuality, which is specifically listed in the Bible as reprehensible to God?

It is truly a bizarro world we are inhabiting.

By Fashizzle on March 3rd, 2009 at 11:12 am

At least they’re not burning witches, torturing heretics and imprisoning scientists anymore.

By CL on March 3rd, 2009 at 2:29 pm

“I don’t know much of anything that Buddha taught that went counter to the teachings of Jesus.”

If you mean morally, then you may be right. But the two are fundamentally incompatible at a doctrinal level. It is an absolute joke that someone with such a muddled view of his faith could be chosen to be a bishop. This speaks volumes of the sorry state of the Episcopal faith.

By john on March 3rd, 2009 at 3:08 pm

As a practicing Episcopalian here in Columbia, I do have to say that this is a bit strange. However, as most Epis. will admit, faith for us is more a practical, personal issue than the snakehandling fundamentalism of Southern Baptists – those guys remind me of the Roman Catholics circa 1480 – in Spain. Faith is, has, and will always be up to the individual in the end, which is why Epis. are so accepting of all people (even if I don’t agree with half of them). Christianity, as Christ intended it to be, isn’t a ‘member’s only’ club, and if you look carefully at all the major world religions you’ll find that their all based on the same creeds – love thy neighbor and thyself, the golden rule, etc. Now I’m saying Epis. should accept sinners and heretics and tell them to keep on keepin’ on. Anglo Catholics have always had a more sensible, practical approach to religion and faith in general – which is perhaps why more US Presidents in history have been Episcopalian. Think about it.

By john on March 3rd, 2009 at 3:10 pm

whoops, meant to say ‘Now I’m NOT saying keepin on”

By Ron on March 3rd, 2009 at 3:44 pm

“If they’re making Buddhists, Druids and Muslims into Episcopalian bishops, should we even call them a ‘Christian’ church?”

NOT NO, HELL NO!

By terry_freeman on March 3rd, 2009 at 5:04 pm

Why not? I understand that many Japanese have practiced both Shintoism and Buddhism for generations; it doesn’t seem to bother them in the slightest. Perhaps we should just learn to get along.

By CL on March 3rd, 2009 at 5:34 pm

John,

There is quite a bit of difference between ministering to everyone and allowing everyone to minister. If you do not accept that we possess an immortal soul, that salvation lies only through Jesus, then you have no business calling yourself a Christian, let alone pretending to be an authority on doctrine you don’t even accept for yourself.

At some point, it ceases to be Christianity. Why not just make Oprah the Archbishop of Canterbury? She seems nice and accepting of other people. Or maybe my golden retriever. He is very friendly and has never bitten anyone.

By Obvious on March 3rd, 2009 at 6:48 pm

John,

Believe whatever you want, just don’t call yourselves Christians. It’s Orwellian for your church to call itself a Christian church but not actually believe the Bible or the teachings of Christ. At least the Universalists are honest.

By Gary on March 3rd, 2009 at 7:51 pm

Are those pictured above Obama’s new picks for Secretary of the Navy and Army, respectively?

By roofus on March 3rd, 2009 at 8:21 pm

Gary,
I wonder if they paid their taxes?

I suspect not, they look like Dems…

By iknowwhatyoudid on March 3rd, 2009 at 8:48 pm

Debate the ethics all you want, but, from a practical perspective, who cares what the Episcopalians are doing? Like every other mainline Protestant church that has traded morals for manners, they are writhing on the scrap heap of history. These are just the final twitches before the heart stops beating.

By J-man on March 3rd, 2009 at 11:00 pm

I am an Episcopalian. I’m a confirmed, pledging member in good standing. I believe that Jesus was the son of God; that he died on the cross and was raised for the forgiveness of sins. Most Episcopalians believe as I do.

By iknowwhatyoudid on March 4th, 2009 at 4:30 am

J-man, I’m afraid the only sin that Episcopalians believe in is the “sin” of hurting someone else’s feelings, or perhaps the “sin” of wearing white shoes before Memorial Day.

The Episcopalians who believe as you do, are leaving the church in droves. It started in the late 70s with the ordination of women. And though the media won’t use the dreaded “schism” to describe what’s happened to the church, that’s exactly what’s happened. There are more Roman Catholics in church each Sunday in England than there are Anglicans.

Episcopalians made the same mistake that so many other mainline Protestant churches did: they thought that by lowering their standards, they’d attract more people. The opposite happened. I once attended an Episcopal service in San Francisco where people brought their dogs. During communion, the priestess handed out dog biscuits along with the bread. When the barking drowned out the singing, the priestess reminded everyone that the dogs were worshiping in their own way. The youngest person there was in his 50s. On the way home we walked past two Catholic Churches. Both were overflowing with people, nearly half of them children.

By Pat Hendrix on March 4th, 2009 at 8:50 am

Well, first and foremost, the Budda never said he was a deity. Buddhism is about as much about religion as Jungian psychology. Can we Episcopalians be Jungians, too? Just want to check with the folks above. You know, the ones that think a guy lived in a whale for 300 years, that stoning your children to death is okay if they’re disrespectful and that buying slaves is fine if you buy them from a neighboring village.

Yep, that’s the ticket.

By J-Man on March 4th, 2009 at 9:32 am

Yes, iknowwhatyoudid, I am well aware of what is happening in the church. It is a nightmare. I was just making a point that most of the MEMBERS actually still believe. The clergy does not. I actually heard a priest pray not to long ago to thank ‘the mother Jesus for sending the prophet Al Gore..” I’m not joking. Our church is empty almost empty now. Once on Easter, when the priest was explaining that Jesus more than likely was human and could not have risen from the dead..the entire congregation started laughing. It was really dark, and really sad. It is now a Universalist church with Christian traditions in the service.

By CL on March 4th, 2009 at 10:51 am

Where does karma fit into Jungian theory again, Pat? Or rebirth? These are metaphysical concepts that are well outside the realm of psychology. But keep up the sneering, self-righteous tone. It only makes you look like more of an idiot.

By Pat Hendrix on March 4th, 2009 at 11:53 am

CL,

I’m guessing your not well read on the teachings of ZEN Buddhism, which focused away from spirtual texts. You know, like rebirth. It’s focused on awakening through meditation, which has nothing to do with rebirth and Karma – but with controlling the mind. You know, genius, like psychology. If you want to try reading for a change, I’d could suggest a series of simple books by authors like Joseph Campbell that help explain the link between the two. It might help.

By Pat Hendrix on March 4th, 2009 at 12:26 pm

At the risk of highjacking this thread to everyone’s boredom, let me give that another try without the insults. For everyone’s sake, I’ll simply leave at this:

To be an Episcopalian like Rev. Kevin Thew Forresterand and a believer in the teachings of Zen Buddhism does not mean that you believe in rebirth or Karma. It only means that that you believe there is a practical application for some buddhist teachings in maintaining self-control and discipline of mind. It this case, buddhism is not a religious doctrine. In fact, Jung and Jungian thought present significant commentary in the interpretation of Buddhism, particularly Zen and Vajrayana, because he saw it that way.

By spotone on March 4th, 2009 at 2:03 pm

ooooh!It’s all starting to make sense to me now…

By Crooner on March 4th, 2009 at 2:10 pm

sic:

I was traded the other way, and still struggle with the whole “trespasses/debts” thing. I mean, really, I ain’t forgiving debts and Wachovia sure as hell ain’t forgiving mine.

I feel like such a hypocrite.

By CL on March 4th, 2009 at 2:20 pm

Well, explain it to me, since I am such an idiot, but if there is nothing religious about his affiliation to his Buddhism, then why the use of religious language? What the heck is “lay ordination” in the context of a secular meditation group?

Even setting that aside, Zen Buddhism (this fact is mentioned nowhere in the original article, but I’ll take your word for it) would still be incompatible with Christianity. Jesus Christ would be just the sort of external distraction that Zen Buddhists would reject in their path to enlightment. You cannot in an intellectually honest way follow two systems that tell you that salvation (or enlightenment or whatever pseudo-religious term you want to apply) is found in opposite directions.

I am sure it is tiring for you to have to tolerate the rabble who fail to measure up to your heroic and brilliant standards. It must be hard to be so awesome. Atlas, I salute you. Okay, sarcasm off. I find it a better response than feeling the need to justify my self to a comment-warrior. You are part of that special breed of bomb throwers who so courageously post anonymous insults and ridiculous judgments about people they don’t even know.

By Pat Hendrix on March 4th, 2009 at 4:11 pm

I think I’ll leave the discussion of religion versus belief systems aside.

I will comment on one thing. “Courageously post anonymous insults”? My handle is Pat Hendrix. I’ve posted that I live on Rutledge Avenue. Would you like my social security number, CL? I’m hardly hiding my identity.

In any event, I’m not commenting on people, just their comments. If they happen to betray a level of, ugh, not being grounded in sanity or facts, well, I may comment.

Best,

Pat

By Mab on April 1st, 2009 at 2:12 pm

Some of them really DO BELIEVE ANYTHING!

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,512066,00.html

wow…………..