see more Lolcats and funny pictures
I've had too much serious stuff lately.
There are only two possible lifestyles: Gospel and not. Full stop.
A Hispanic Episcopalian was pulled over recently and asked to show his papers. He was born and raised in the U.S. and had his valid Arizona driver’s license with him but that wasn’t good enough for the deputies since they’ve seen “too many fakes.” So now he, and others like him, are avoiding church because the congregations are afraid of detainment or harassment by over-zealous deputies.When I read that, I thought, “Huh?? Why the heck would they avoid church? The blogger explains:
The problem? He, and many others, worship within one of Arpaio’s Crime Suppression Operation [zones]. . . . Most are of Hispanic origin and they have been pulled over and asked to provide their papers. . . . According to the Rt. Rev. Kirk S. Smith, Arpaio's deputies interrupted a confirmation service on April 6 in a Roman Catholic Church in Guadalupe, a largely Hispanic neighborhood where Arpaio started another Crime Suppression Unit.WHAT?? Sheriff’s department interrupting a church service to look for illegal aliens? Surely not! It’s been a standard for centuries that churches are places of sanctuary. I cannot imagine sheriff’s deputies thundering into a church service. But I believe this blogger. I also thought surely that was a once-in-a-lifetime mistake by the Maricopa County Sheriff’s Department. But no. It happened at least once more in 2008.
And on Good Friday [Arizona] Bishop Smith received a call from the priest at a Spanish-speaking church in Phoenix. He drove to the scene and found an officer. "I tried to explain to him that not only were his men frightening law-abiding citizens, but they were in fact violating if not the letter, then at least the spirit of the Constitution by preventing people from going to church--it's called freedom of religion. Suffice it to say, the deputy, although polite, was not interested. He had his orders."That does it. I am officially gobsmacked. It appears that sheriff’s deputies were intentionally targeting churches where they thought they might find undocumented Hispanics. I can’t possibly explain this. And I am now doubly proud of Bishop Kirk Smith.
This despite the fact that Arapio’s own press release dated Jan. 18 stated, “The posse members and deputy sheriffs will not racially profile anyone in this operation.”This has been my point. There’s no way the police and sheriff’s departments can do this without racial profiling!
Are they pulling over French speakers to make sure they haven’t come here illegally from Canada? Are they pulling over blue-eyed blonds as suspected illegal European immigrants? How about people of middle-eastern descent?Let’s face it. In the U.S., we are a nation of mutts. With the exception of the Native Americans, we’re all immigrants or the descendants of immigrants. The only way that Arizona police and sheriffs can exercise this law fairly is to pull over every person who isn’t obviously Native American.
This law does not take effect for 90 days. During that time there will be many court challenges, including those coming from the federal government. The law might be tied up for months and years in litigation, and I believe there is a good possibility it will never go into effect.I hope he is correct. If he is not, this bodes ill for all of us.
The cost of first class flights and accommodation for the four of them amounts to the value of approximately a whole year’s pay for all the currently unpaid priests in Zimbabwe and Lake Malawi!They ask the same question I have been asking: Who is funding this luxurious meeting in Singapore? Who is paying for all these airfares, hotel rooms, and meeting rooms?
It is not clear where the monies have come from to support this venture but they are assumed to be from conservative and schismatic North American Anglicans? These are currently pursuing a fissiparous agenda in their battle against the American Episcopal Church and a disruptive and schismatic programme in the Anglican Communion.Note that! The Central Africans recognize that someone is paying for all this … and that “someone” is paying for the schismatic initiative in the Anglican Communion. They recognize that the assault on TEC is a well-funded one. I agree with them. I wonder whether the Global South delegates are asking who is paying for their Singapore junket. And if they aren’t, why aren’t they?
Neither is it clear where Albert Chama’s authority to attend on behalf of the Central African Province has come from? By agreeing to attend the Conference in Singapore Albert Chama has allowed the Province to be counted as supportive of the schismatic movement. This has happened with neither Provincial synodical approval nor support from the other bishops.Do you hear that? The Central African province did not authorize Chama to attend. They did not authorize him to speak on their behalf. And it seems that they do not want to go along with the schismatic effort. People like Akinola like to claim that all of Africa is behind him and against the Western Anglicans. They like to claim that all the millions of Africans are supporting them. These people from Central Africa are trying to say “NOT SO!”
Ironically, the new letter from the Diocesan Secretary of Lake Malawi once again asks donors for desperately needed money for the Diocese and gives banking details for transfers. Thanks to acting Dean Chama’s unwise junketing trip in South East Asia support and donations, which come largely from the U.K. and the U.S.A. and from the very churches which the Global South Conference has been called to condemn, are likely to be in short supply.Read the full letter at The Lead.
The hard-working clergy of Zimbabwe and Lake Malawi will need to go on scratching a living from their smallholdings in order to survive.
This is curious to me.
It sounds like the situation in Sudan is just like that in Central Africa.
Since his consecration, Archbishop Daniel has been whining all over the U.S. that his province is so poor that he cannot even afford to pay his clergy. He has told us that many clergy are due significant amounts of backpay. He has asked the Episcopal Church and the dioceses in relationship with Sudanese dioceses to raise tens of thousands of dollars to pay back-pay for the bishops in Sudan. He has spoken powerfully, asking us to give money that will support the bishops, agricultural needs, and much more.
One of TEC's bishops and at least one of our priests [neither of them from my diocese] have been working very hard to raise tens of thousands of dollars for the Episcopal Church in Sudan. I believed those funds would go to back-pay. I'm not so sure now. If Archbishop Daniel can afford to go to Singapore with three of his bishops, purportedly in first-class seats, why in the world does he need any financial support?? Right now, I'm not sure I'd believe Sudan's Archbishop Daniel if he told me the sun rises in the east.
Of course, because I'm involved in Sudan's Diocese of Lui ... and have been for about four years ... I'm also aware of the situation of their priests. My friends, none of the priests get salaries. Most of them work hard as subsistence farmers, trying to grow sufficient crops to feed their families. They break their backs to make a living. And, on top of that, they serve as priests to their parishes.
So the Episcopal Church of Sudan can't afford to pay its bishops, and none of its priests gets paid.
But now Sudan's Primate, Archbishop Daniel, can afford to get himself and three of his bishops to Singapore for this schismatic, hatemongering meeting. DO YOU HEAR THAT?
I want to know: Who is paying for the travel for him and three other bishops to spend this long time in Singapore? If he’s paying from the ECS budget, then why should any of us support his work within Sudan? If he's not paying, then I want to know who is paying for him to attend this schismatic meeting.
I well remember that Deng had his "Barbie moment" at the Lambeth Conference when he issued a written statement at the beginning of the 2008 Lambeth Conference here, then went prancing into a press conference. ENS posted the full interview in 2 parts here. Or see Part 1 here and Part 2 here.
Is +Daniel bought and paid for??
I say this as one who has designated part of every paycheck, over several years, to go toward support for the Episcopal Church of Sudan.
I will not pay for my own oppression, Archbishop Daniel. I well remember your hatemongering circus at Lambeth, sir, but I had forgiven it for the sake of my sisters and brothers in Lui. That may be at an end, given your choice to attend this meeting in Singapore.
Give a transparent accounting for these expenses now, Archbishop Daniel! NOW!
We demand transparent accounting from organizations like ERD, Heifer, etc. We know we can trust them. I now realize it would be stupid for anyone to send money to the Episcopal Church of Sudan, which never provides such accounting.
I am frustrated by Archbishop Daniel's behavior, and I need to hear a clear statement from him. Out of one side of his mouth, he declares his gratitude for relationship with dioceses in the Episcopal Church (U.S.). But now he goes to Singapore with three of his bishops, where the order of the day is hatred of Americans. I want to hear what he really believes. I want to know which side he is on.
I'll base my future actions on what -- if anything -- Archbishop Daniel has the courage to say. I wait.
In all your minds there will be questions around the election and consecration of Mary Glasspool in Los Angeles. All of us share the concern that in this decision and action the Episcopal Church has deepened the divide between itself and the rest of the Anglican family. And as I speak to you now, I am in discussion with a number of people around the world about what consequences might follow from that decision, and how we express the sense that most Anglicans will want to express, that this decision cannot speak for our common mind.Of course, most of my friends in the Episcopal Church have taken umbrage. As do I. I took it as a slam against The Episcopal Church (U.S.).
The Americans will claim to be have been insulted (although, to be honest, it will have no real effect on them), but it is the rest of us, the "Not In My Name" brigade, who have been insulted the most as we seem to have disappeared completely according to our beloved leader.I think MadPriest is speaking sense. By saying that "everyone" is against the U.S. position, Williams is trying to disenfranchise our friends abroad even more than he is dismissing us. I have heard from other Anglican friends outside TEC that they support us. Perhaps they are even more entitled than we to be angry when Rowan Williams says that “All of us [Anglicans]” are against TEC and when he pretends to speak “our common mind” as if no one outside of the U.S. believes as we do – as if everyone else is against the stance we have taken. Williams is wrong. Dead wrong.
In all your minds there will be questions around the election and consecration of Mary Glasspool in Los Angeles. All of us share the concern that in this decision and action the Episcopal Church has deepened the divide between itself and the rest of the Anglican family. And as I speak to you now, I am in discussion with a number of people around the world about what consequences might follow from that decision, and how we express the sense that most Anglicans will want to express, that this decision cannot speak for our common mind.
You've all seen that paragraph, and several of you have offered good comments on it. I hope to offer my own comment about it later.
But, for now, let's just look at what Williams said and didn't say ... and how he said it ... when speaking to the "Global South Encounter."In Williams’ many lugubrious paragraphs, this was the only clear, specific statement he made about the issues that are now tearing the Anglican Communion apart. The rest of his statement was his typical mumblemumblemumble.
The objective was not to make money but to promote opposition to the Anglican covenant, particularly within The Episcopal Church. Because the 2012 General Convention will likely be making a decision regarding the covenant, we can expect increasing discussion of its merits in parishes and dioceses in the next two years or so. .... [The site] offers many items that are especially good at communicating one’s opposition to the covenant.
Our diocesan convention passed a resolution last fall, instructing parishes to engage in dialogue about the covenant. [The Resolutions Committee offered a fine resolution with mechanisms and a leadership, which got stripped out on the convention floor. So now parishes are told to hold discussions, but with no materials or mechanisms for doing so. That's a floor battle I lost. Grrrr.... ]
I'll probably buy one of the shirts. I'm not sure whether I'll wear it to a parish/diocesan "dialogue" on the covenent. But maybe so, since I happily sported my "My manner of life ..." t-shirt back in 2006 at the diocesan debriefing after the passage of B033.
Integrity USA will sponsor a visit by Bishop Christopher Ssenyonjo (ret.) from West Buganda, Uganda for a six week U.S. and European speaking tour. His visit will be an historic opportunity to hear the personal witness of a courageous man of faith who has proclaimed God's inclusive love and spoken truth to power in homophobic Uganda. Bishop Christopher has been a valiant straight ally of the LGBT community and has experienced firsthand the cost of discipleship for his work and witness. He brings words of both hope and challenge of all those working for equality and inclusion in the church.The name of Bishop Christopher Ssenyonjo rang a bell, but I had to do some searching.
Bishop Ssenyonjo has been an outspoken advocate for human rights in Uganda. He has taken great risks in defense of LGBT people in his country, a nation where lawmakers recently considered imposing a death penalty on homosexuals. He will address the homophobic and draconian anti-gay movement and legislation pending in Uganda.
His ministry with Integrity Uganda could soon [be]outlawed by the government, and Bishop Christopher could be put in prison for his support of LGBT Ugandans. He has strongly condemned the bill as a violation of the UN’s Declaration of Human Rights and a violation of the sacred bonds of the Ugandan extended family system. He calls the bill inhumane and was recently a part of a delegation to the Speaker of the House to reject the bill.
Please be a part of this historic tour, donate to support his work and share these venues with your friends.
CITIES ON THE TOUR :
The bishop will be visiting the following communities:
Los Angeles May 10- 16th
Sacramento May 17-18th
San Diego May 19-21st
Orange County May 15-16th and 21st
San Francisco May 22-26th
Minneapolis May 27- 31st
New York June 6th-8th, 13th-17th
Belfast and Dublin Ireland June 18-21st
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
Contact Tour Coordinator: Rev. Canon Albert J. Ogle
Vice President for National and International Affairs
949 338 8830
In 2002, Archbishop Mpalanyi Nkoyoyo (now retired) defrocked Ssenyonjo because of his support for homosexuality.
Ssenyonjo, formerly the bishop of West Buganda Diocese, in 2004 formed a new denomination called the Charismatic Church of Uganda and was consecrated bishop.
In 2004, Archbishop Luke Orombi wrote to Ssenyonjo informing him that he was “no longer entitled to wear the robes of a deacon, priest, or bishop in the Church of Uganda.”
He was later excommunicated.
Better yet, read the GayUganda blog:
In Uganda, where most queers are too afraid to come out of the closet, straight allies are essential to the gay rights movement but none are as cute, charming or controversial as 78-year-old Anglican Bishop Christopher Ssenyonjo.
. . .
The Desmond Tutu lookalike works on the outskirts of Kampala, in a tiny storefront across from a row of shanties. By necessity, Christopher never toils past dark. His office, with a dusty desk and used couch, has no light.
By day, though, this is where the retired bishop persists in doing what first got him into trouble almost 10 years ago counselling queers.
"The attitude of my church is that I should condemn them," he says. "But I refuse."
Thanks to Ann Fontaine for pointing me to these videos with Bishop Christopher Ssenyonjo.
The first one includes excerpts from a June, 2008, interview with The Rt. Rev. Christopher Ssenyonjo about his ministry with lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Ugandans, for the film Voices of Witness Africa.
The first Migrant Stations of the Cross, the stations were painted on the fence in observance of Good Friday, Frontera de Cristo (Presbyterian) and Episcopal Border Ministries members and supporters prayed at 15 Stations of the Cross positioned along a 2.5-mile stretch of the US/Mexico border east of Douglas. At 5:30am, they started their two and a half hour, 7,200 step prayer walk in the hopes of comprehensive immigration reform and for a desert without bloodshed and violence, including the recent death of rancher Robert Krentz. The Stations of the Cross reenact the important steps in the life of Christ, from his condemnation to his death on the cross and his entombment.All the photos are by Mark Henle of The Arizona Republic, available here.
Obama is not a brown-skinned, anti-war socialist who gives away free healthcare. You're thinking of Jesus.Indeed. Let us compare the Republicans' and the Democrats' agendae and see which one more nearly aligns with Jesus' agenda. I think it's pretty clear.