ABRAKADABRA - It's Bishop Lawrence

Now you see him - now you don't.  That is correct, when Bishop Lawrence looks in the mirror the person looking back is none other than - tada! Bishop John David Schofield. How can I come to that conclusion?  Well read this:

The central purpose of his presentation to the Bishops was to convey his understanding that with the passage of Resolutions D002 and D019 (making all possible variations of “gender identity and gender expression” protected categories in the canons of the church), and the adoption of authorized provisional rites to bless same gender relationships, the doctrine, discipline and worship of this church have been profoundly changed.

He told the Bishops that the magnitude of these changes was such that he could no longer in good conscience continue in the business of the Convention. In fact, he was left with the grave question of whether he could continue as a bishop of an institution that had adopted such changes. It was with that question on the table that he took his leave from the House of Bishops.

Since that time, and in the gathering of the Diocesan Clergy, the Bishop stated that he believes the Episcopal Church has crossed a line he cannot personally cross. He also expressed to the clergy that though he might act one way if he were a priest in a diocese, as a Bishop he feels deeply his vow before God to faithfully lead and shepherd the Diocese of South Carolina. Both dimensions of this dilemma weigh upon him at this time.
 

This is a few paragraphs from the  letter to the diocese of South Carolina after Bishop Lawrence returned from convention. I have highlighted the parts of the letter that are almost identical to the words used by John David as he  was moving into his end-game.  "I didn't move PECUSA moved- The doctrine, discipline. etc. has changed.  The church crossed a line that I cannot cross."

 

He also has reworked the constitution and canons of the Diocese of San Joaquin South Carolina just as was done in San Joaquin. Bishop Lawrence is indeed not only the protege of John David but he continues to play the diocese of South Carolina in an almost identical fashion to that which was done by John David.

 

Am I without recommendations?  You all know me, I gots lots!  First, I am assuming that the National is looking at this and seeing the same things.  If they have not already sent an emissary to Lawrence they should.  Simply put, they should say, "Stay or go but do not pis* in my ear and tell me it's raining".   Then move on bringing him up on charges.

 

Next, they should send an emissary to the other protege who is currently messing with the Communion Partners and ask him the same question.  He can demonstrate that he intents to stay by renouncing the Communion Partners and that which they stand for -- an Episcopal/ACNA inside the Episcopal Church of the US. 

 

Really, how dumb do they think we are? Oops, please don't answer that!

He does not need facts -- he has a great story

I now have positive proof that the Republicans could care less about the facts -- the reality of the situation or the science behind making decisions.  We have heard this over and over again.  Most recently Tony Adkins decided that science was all wrong and women were just "asking for it".

I have no idea who the representative to the Republican Convention was, but here is his comment on National Public Radio.  The conversation turned to Governor Christie and the keynote address.  The Republican political pundit said this about the sum and substance of Christie's keynote address:  "who needs facts when he has story  to tell".  Who needs facts?  Well, there we go! How does one combat that?  I recently had a facebook person tell me that he has opinions and his opinions are as good as facts.  Just what in the world is going on?  How have the citizens of the most advanced country on earth suddenly decided to discard the very essence of what got us where we are.  Don't need facts?  How did we defeat Hitler?  Don't need facts?  How did we create the most powerful military in the world?  Don't need facts?  How did we put a man on the moon?  Don't need facts?  Cured AIDs.  Don't need facts?  How did our Declaration of Independence and the Constitution come into existence?

Now we don't need facts.  We need white guys telling us we don't need facts.  We don't need facts since we have all our women barefoot and pregnant all the time? We need white guys who want to control everything in our bedroom and while we are distracted -steal us blind and leave  us in the poorhouse-- and laughing! Don't need facts?  Surely everyone understands that once a child is born into poverty there is no help for the mom or the child for food, shelter, education or any other of the necessities.  No we don't need facts, we just need hedge fund managers that can waste billions of dollars and then the Federal Government comes to their aid.

Why confuse me with the facts -- George Bush inherits a huge surplus and puts us into a deficit and then it must be President Obama's fault.  Let's spin a story without any truth.  Let's just not use facts. Let's just spin a good story.

Flax, Fax or Facts

I have come to notice something that is a strong strand between the Grand Old Party members and the members of the Anglican Church in North America.  This revelation is actually based on those members of both that write, talk, or broadcast.  Big time Bishops or regular folks in the pews and voting booths.  My guess is that most cross lines between each because of the unique approach to "facts" but none the less both observable groups suffer from the same affliction.  The rallying cry for both parties is "Do not confuse me with the facts. I am entitled to my own opinion." 

Once upon a time, in the world of facebook I joined a group and took on a few "friends" from that group.  Shortly thereafter I began receiving some of the most "bizarre" writings from one individual.  I generally ignored the diatribes until one day I could do so no longer.  The posting was so confused and so out of touch with research that I had to post back, and in a nice way, merely asked on what research did he base is post?  I was immediately attacked by about 5 of that persons friends (comments section) criticizing me for being a liberal communist.  Being as obstinate as I am I tried once again and merely asked for the author to clarify his writings by citing the necessary research to support his arguments.  At this point he wrote back and in slightly longer posting said that these were his opinions and he was entitled to his own opinions.  (It was not as mean as this may sound).  At that point I found a way in which to end our facebook friendship.

Drinking from the same bucket we hear the leaders of the ACNA movement (and indeed the leaders of GAFCON) espousing the same sort of thing.  ACNA says "We are the Anglican representative in the United States." ignoring the facts.  "Don't confuse me with the facts, I am entitled to my own opinion."

Why is this problem not self-evident?  Sure, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.  My concern is that these silly people are spewing their opinions as if they were facts and then they and their followers are acting on their own opinions.  Facts be damned.

I will end with this story.  Years ago I was working in a school district that had negotitated a deal with a cellular company to place a cell tower on a campus.  This was creating much needed revenue for a district that was in huge trouble financially.  The parents went crazy over the "rays" that were affecting their children.  We scheduled a meeting and flew in the world's foremost expert (Harvard in this case) on cellular towers and the effects on the human body.  We met, and I introduced the expert.  The expert began his explanation for the effects (i.e., none to speak of) of cell towers on children.  A parent stood up and asked, "Who paid you to come out here?"   Of course he responded with the district paid his way. The parent then went on to explain to the parents that whatever this person said was bogus because he was paid by the district. this was, at that time, the foremost expert and one of the few in the world at that time.  The long and the short of it was this:  After the parents sat back down and negotiated a portion of the revenue to come to the PTA funds of that elementary school suddenly all the magnetic rays and evil things emanating from the tower was no longer pertinent.  They exchanged money for their children's safety.
 

Is It In The Water?

By now we are all aware of the Romney/Ryan/Akin/IRD/Koch Brothers/etc. and the movement towards an oligarchy in this country.  The idea that the best thing for second class citizens is to be mothers, housewives and barefoot and pregnant.  The "hard decisions" that cut support for the poor, the underprivileged, babies, children and folks who need a hand up, students, and unions.   While I will continue to write against all this crap, vote against the fools that work against democracy and try to not revert to 1962 there is still a burning question that I have not heard a very satisfactory answer. 

Why does middle and working class America feel/believe that the world can only be saved by people like Romney and Bush and Reagan and Wall Street and Hedge fund presidents?  Why is the appeal to achieve tons of money so popular to them when everything the right-wing nuts do contradicts everything that they say?  Why do common folks, those who have achieved what they have by way of union activism now rip at the very seams of the fabric they are wearing?  And how is it that so many of the middle and working class believe that capitalizing social security, doing away with medicare, eliminating universal health care   are all good things?  Why is it that we believe that the  "hard decisions" are cutting food stamps and not depletion allowances? And why is it that the grand old party leaders can say whatever they want (ala Akin) regardless of what the science says and have everyone believe it is true? 

I can honestly say that while I worked in management almost all of my career and I openly negotiated at times against CTA and CSEA for contract rights I have always respected who and what they are if for no other reason that I recognize my parents successes as well as my successes s well as my children's successes are all built on what unions past and present have delivered.  I recognize that affordable housing -- actually an opportunity to own a home comes not willingly from the rich but from those in Congress who believed that to own a home was worthy of legislation.  To provide equality across the country was a God given right. That mistakes are made and forgiveness and mercy are more important than justice and punishment. But, alas, I appear to be in the minority.

I am open to anyone explaining this phenomenon to me.  Right now -- I cannot see it and I do not understand it.

IDs? IDs!

IDs?  IDs! We don't need  no stinkin' IDs!

We have talked about this over the blogs and most recently at Friends of Jake.  Well, I just got one more reason to really dislike the climate we are currently living in. 

My son, is a Petty Officer and a nine year veteran of the Navy.  He was recently selected to go to Naval  Officer Candidate School in Newport, Rhode Island.  While the rest of his family are registered Democrats and have been most of their lives, my son is a registered Republican (what would you expect from a Navy type?), not really the crazy type, but a staunch Republican.  He has been to the California Republican caucus and has "rubbed elbows" with the Firestone family, an aggressively conservative group.  My son is overall, an old style republican, fiscal conservative and a liberal when it cvomes to most social programs.  He believes in many principles currently ascribed to the democrats, but alas, I just cannot seem to get him to our side.

At any rate, he is headed to the OCS school in Rhode Island and is driving.  For some reasons unbeknown to his mother and father he left late and is covering about 1,000 or so miles a day.  Hard but doable.

So, in Illinois, he is stopped by a law enforcement officer (do not know if sheriff, police, highway patrol or what have you) and my first thought was well, 1,000 miles a day, must have been stopped for speeding.  Guess what?  That was the furthest thing from the truth.  He was pulled over under suspicion of drug running!  First, if they ran wants and warrants they should find him as a member of the armed forces.  His car, a Chevy Blazer, has all the required military stickers.  My son is 6'9" tall, certainly someone who can "hideout" in a crowd.  The officer said he was stopped for at least two reasons.  First, his license plate, the state of registration, is Washington.  Apparently the officer believes that a huge drug ring  is operating out of Washington state and they suspected my son was among the bad guys because he had a Washington plate.  But hold on, that is not all, the officer said "you were not driving on I-80 and so you were suspected of drug smuggling for not being on a major interstate.  What?  My son had decided to take a scenic route just for fun and that made him a suspect in a drug operation?

This is a George Bush nightmare!  One cannot drive on a scenic byway with the state of Washington license plates without being suspected of drug smuggling?  Where in the world did this all come from?  Back in 09/11/01 the then President (GWB) decided that fear was the operative word so that he and his cohorts could bomb the heck out of Iraq trying to find Osama Bin Laden.  He then sent troops to Afghanistan to find Osama Bin Laden.  Now apparently, Osama Bin Laden may be riding in a Chevy blazer having Washington license plates.

My son has been deployed in the Gulf during the current disagreement.  He loves his country more than most everything and thinks freedom is a good reason to fight. His dad agrees with him -- maybe he learned it from me -- I hope so.  But what he cannot do, I can. 

I am outraged by what happened to my son.  I am so angry I am beside myself.  How can we, a free country and a free people, allow the police to just stop any old person they want to, search their car, and then make up some cock and bull story about drug runners in Washington taking back roads to mule their stuff?  That officer ought to be ashamed of himself -- in fact that officer should have, at the end of his shift, turned in his gun and badge and any other property of the state and resigned.  He would be free, of course to choose to join the skinhead group of his choice -- courtesy of my son.

Hard Decisions

I was listening to Capitol Public Radio (NPR) this morning when the NPR reporter interviewed a politician from, well it makes no never mind because it is all the same.  They (the politicians) had to make some hard decisions in order to balance the budget -- so they closed a hospice for the elderly.  Now, just how is that a hard decision? The vast majority of people living in a hospice cannot vote.  Those childre3n who will be affected by reductions in free and reduced lunch, aid to families with dependent children, MIC, mental health programs, recreation centers and more -- they are all children and cannot vote.  How about the "hard decision" to cut education?  Realize that by the numbers there are only about 24% of parents who might vote -- no big deal, a politician can still weather those numbers and be re-elected.  That is, especially if they do not want to make "the easy" cuts -- like tax incentives for corporations, tax breaks for the very, very wealthy.  Those folks thank you/ask you by way of millions of dollars to campaign funds.  So, why would the politicians want to make those cuts?  What makes matters all that much worse is so many middle class and working poor actually believe it.  After all, why would they lose a tax break or some services simply because the rich are not to be touched?  Certainly these are hard decisions -- no one would intentionally want to hurt me, right:?

ACNA and Marx: The Relationship

Is it possible that the Anglican Communion in America is somehow connected to Karl Marx? Well, let me show you some things that might give you pause.  ACNA  was formed out of several diocese and a conglomeration of bishops and laity that, down deep, does not appreciate the democratic nature of the Episcopal Church.  They reject logic and reason and require a significant adherence to their beliefs, however arcane or bizarre.  The laity has little or no say in how the ACNA is run nor do they seem to want to.  So, how does that relate to Marxism? 

Here is the quote directly from Karl himself: "Religion is the opiate of the people".  If you do not believe this quote then please analyze the events fomented by John David and his cronies.  They allow for no real news from any source, no real congregations of the faithful that would serve as a communication device; and no real discussion of any issues unless the puppets in the audience are part of the drama.

For my money, "All that is necessary for evil to triumph is for enough good men (and women) to do nothing". - Edmund Burke