Midwest Contemptuous Journal freaks out over new agey lovemaking ritual. Kendall Harmon gets a letter about Christian charity. Other punishing God blogs are joining in the witch hunt.
If this weren't for real, it would be hiliarious.
Conservatives should be careful. If they get hijacked by the intemperate, they will be revealed to be... sadly human in their mob mentality, more passionate about perversion, than enthusiastic in evangelising. I submit to you, if they had the fire of the gospel, they would seek to convert those wayward druids, rather than burn and ruin them.
And I say to you, with Jesus Christ, all things are possible.
John, I am a daily reader of Kendall's blog (and yours) and I comment occasionally. But as a priest in the church my initial reaction was falling down laughing. This whole thing is so funny my wife and I can't help but continue to follow it to see what will be discovered next about the Melnyks. (Hard not to feel sorry for them). And yet the more I ponder this whole thing I honestly do get sad. Pluralism and relativism has overtaken our denomination. I grieve for the souls who depend on folks like the Melnyks for Christian spiritual direction and leadership and who knows what they get. Combine that with the great feeling I get when I am able to be used by the Holy Spirit to help people come into a relationship with the Risen Christ--its my desire for all people. And here are Episcopalians whose leaders are drawing from this crap. Its sad.
Posted by: redeemed | Oct 29, 2004 at 03:23 PM
What a tempest in a teapot. Talk about the madness of crowds.
Posted by: Elliot | Oct 29, 2004 at 03:24 PM
It is not a tempest in a teapot to be concerned about false worship, potentially misleadingly posted on a official looking church website. The non-apology apology by the church official in question did not help in that it did not treat the central concern seriously
On the other hand, the tone of some posters has been over the top, and perspective means understanding that a departmental misjudgment needs to be seen for what it is.
Posted by: Kendall Harmon | Oct 29, 2004 at 03:57 PM
Oh come on, John. That's the last refuge of the liberal scoundrel. "It's really no big deal, what are they getting so bent out of shape about?" We already think you liberals will make the Scriptures say anything you want them to say; why give us this much ammunition? If ECUSA won't draw the line here, it won't draw the line anywhere.
I like your alternative name for my site, though.
Posted by: Christopher Johnson | Oct 29, 2004 at 03:59 PM
So now even mere disagreement with conservatives makes a person a "scoundrel."
Just like writing a "pagan ceremony" (and under a pseudonym, too!) makes a person guilty of....something. Not sure quite what.
Why don't they get it over with and just arrest us all?
Posted by: | Oct 29, 2004 at 05:13 PM
Because then there would be no one left to make them feel more Godly than the rest of us pagans and perverts.
Posted by: Karen | Oct 29, 2004 at 05:16 PM
Hey John,
Yes, it is hilarious, and practically a parody of itself.
But after the ludicrous nature of the whole thing wears off, think of what these two ordained Episcopal priests are doing. They are literally worshipping false gods, invoking them in fertility rites. Literally doing stuff that got the nation of Israel into trouble all throughout the OT.
You don't have to be a wild eyed "Fundie" to know that the first commandment is "No other gods, period." Most of us in the post modern 21st century would imagine making our careers our god, or love of material things, or something equally esoteric to be how we could violate this commandment.
But here are two people who have made holy ordinational vows to God, and they are whoring after other gods.
It may seem too silly to be concerned about - a couple of middle aged folks playing druid and cavorting under the moonlight to jazz up their sex life, or whatever. That's probably how a lot of folks would see it.
But in reality they have delved into the very worst kind of spiritual practices, which are warned against all through the Bible.
All this spiritual stuff is real, John. Jesus and his apostles knew all about the spiritual principalities of the enemy, and the bad guys haven't gone away just because a lot of people don't believe in them anymore. These folks have actively sought after them. Bad, bad stuff.
To call it bad stuff, to be appalled that ordained priests are writing and engaging in literally unholy rituals, does not mean that we are a mob hung up on sex or "sadly human" in our outlook. There's a time to call something what it is, and this is terrible.
And I certainly don't want to burn them! I'd love to see them repent of all this crap and return to the Lord. I have admonished them to do so. I'd love to see the whole ECUSA leave the apostate garbage that it has been attracted to over the past 30 or 40 years. But I fear it won't It's only getting worse, and you're going to see weirder and weirder things as time goes on.
God bless you in your journey.
Posted by: Peter Watson | Oct 29, 2004 at 05:31 PM
Pot? Kettle? While I agree kindness is sometimes lacking in the all too human responses on titusonenine and MWCJ, your presentation of "Midwest Contemptuous Journal" and "punishing God" blogs places you in the same context. Certainly we should all be careful in making judgments (God's place not ours) about others, Christian or not, but testifying to the glory, omnipotence, and omniscience of God never got anyone (OT, NT, or later) in "trouble" with God and the 1st Commandment (cited in both the OT & NT) is clear (God is very definitely not espousing a new thing there). Opinions are a dime a dozen...learned or otherwise...the Word of God...priceless. As to conversion, going amongst those who have never heard the gospel to share that wonderful story and the redemption it carries for those who choose to believe than to attempt to persuade or beg those who are supposed to know, were schooled to know, and frankly, just should know better seems to me a much better use of the time God gives us to further His Kingdom. However, they do remain in my prayers along with all those who would profane God in the name of Christianity.
Posted by: Anglican-to-be | Oct 29, 2004 at 05:52 PM
Come on, everybody. This happened two days ago, and it involves only two individuals. Can everybody just take a breath here? And maybe give ECUSA 10 minutes to work out what it's going to do? And maybe not extrapolate this incident to the entire Church?
I have to say that on a day-to-day basis I just don't see the apostasy that everybody is worried about. The services I go to are quite standard, by-the-book eucharists, and the preaching is from the lectionary readings or on the observance of the day. I kind of like the fact that Episcopalians can be eccentric, so I really hope that we don't get straight-jacketed into some sort of conformity over what's going on now.
Posted by: bls | Oct 29, 2004 at 06:10 PM
And BTW, I can think of many things that could have happened that are much, much worse than this - can't you?
So why all the furor and the way, way overheated rhetoric? It looks like "piling on," to me.
Or maybe it's simply the result of disappointment with the Windsor Report?
Posted by: bls | Oct 29, 2004 at 06:21 PM
John, You gotta love these Melnyks. Look how many comments you're getting! :)
Posted by: redeemed | Oct 29, 2004 at 08:21 PM
Redeemer, unfortunately, the desire for more hits and attention brings out the worst in me.
Christopher, fortunately, your sense of humor and intelligence makes your page... readable.
Well, I take the blame for saying "contempt" and using "punishing Gods" but I think, #1 actually, MCJ is openly contemptuous of liberals. Thats what makes his blog so interesting. That's why I succumb myself to it.
#2, I think that the main difference between liberals aond conservatives is that liberals have a nurturing conception of God and conservatives have a punishing conception of God.
Posted by: John Wilkins | Oct 30, 2004 at 07:37 AM
"Come on, everybody. This happened two days ago, and it involves only two individuals."
An interesting take, when the indiviuals involved are leaders of a congregation of 1200 member (or so I've read) and when they are able to get one of their pagan rites posted by an official organ of the ECUSA where it is held up as an exemplar for others to imitate.
But, what I find most telling about the whole affair, is not what some have perceived as the over-the-top mob mentality of the rapidly shrinking conservative element in ECUSA, but the nonchalance and excuses provided by some of the liberal element in ECUSA. But, at least we have a point of agreement (I think): this pagan ritual should be condemned for what it is. But John, where should we go from here? Should the Bishop take action, or is it really no big deal? Should we just chalk it up to diversity and say well that's not going on in my parish so why worry?
What truly frightens me most, though, is not the attempts to minimize this whole affair but that some within ECUSA seem not even to be aware of the blasphemous nature of these pagan rituals.
Posted by: Dave C. | Oct 30, 2004 at 08:05 AM
Oh, I don't know John. . . as I've said to many people before, I have a hard time not being universalist and one reason I became Anglican was because I believe the historic creeds and respect for tradtion to be a check on personal bias and speculation. I'd pretty much agree with what I understand to be Barth's and Von Balthasar's take on it, i.e. hoping for the salvation of all. So, does the fact that I percieve much of the behavior and belief promoted by my more liberal counterparts to be harmful to people's souls and lives, as well as to the Church, make my concept of God punishing? I just think people need to be saved from themselves. . .at least I do.
Posted by: Jody | Oct 30, 2004 at 08:46 AM
Jody, I think there are distinctions between unitarianism, pantheism, paganism, and universalism. It is not, I think, possible to be an Anglican Unitarian. It might be possible to be an Anglican universalist. It is not possible to be an Anglican Pagan.
Do I think it is serious? It might be. I still would have handled it a lot differently. I would have first honored Fr. Melnyk and asked him what was going on. I would want to know if his parishioners knew. I think, as a matter of Christian conscience, we should challenge each other and be kind in such dealings.
That said, I know the Melnyks, and they did some good work cleaning up some severely dysfunctional parishes [that have since called some good, more visibly orthodox, priests]. I did have some severe disagreements with him about his eucharistic theology. As did all the other liberal priests. He hadn't read Rene Girard.
Posted by: John Wilkins | Oct 30, 2004 at 08:59 AM
John,
Since you appear to dislike (or, to be more exact, have deep contempt for) MCJ and T19, why do you spend so much time posting on them?
And how can anyone say that such open disregard of the First Commandment by clergy is a minor matter? The words "you cannot serve two masters" come immediately to mind, and being a pagan/druid (?) and Episcopal priest flaunts that notion. I don't think the Inquisition should be reinstituted, but surely it is improper to have those openly contradicting the beliefs that go with their office be in a position of teaching and authority.
Don't bother with a reply - I won't be back to read it.........
Posted by: Joey W | Oct 30, 2004 at 09:26 AM
Hey, JW, glad it's all a matter of us reasserters being too angry. Maeks me feel SOOOO much better.
Jesus, of course, was so tolerant of false teachings and everything.
BTW, since we're into reanming blogs, may we rename this one "The Salty Viper?"
Apparnely you have conveniently skipped all the requests for prayer for these two individuals. Why, JW?
But then, as Chris Johnson points out, when a liberal doesn't have an argument he resorts to the playground whine of "He's bing mean!" It's so much easier than facing the facts.
I continue to pray for Bill & Glyn, JW, as I continue to pray for you. Pax Dei.
Posted by: MJD_NV | Oct 30, 2004 at 09:37 AM
MJD, uh, thanks for your prayers.
I still think that dealing with the problem of the Melnyk's religious confusion is better handled away from the mob. Since I don't know exactly what is involved, I'm going to see what happens.
Why am I on those blogs? Good question. The main reason is that I think that if liberals and conservatives don't read each other, people become even more extreme.
Posted by: John wilkins | Oct 30, 2004 at 09:58 AM
What truly frightens me most, though, is not the attempts to minimize this whole affair but that some within ECUSA seem not even to be aware of the blasphemous nature of these pagan rituals.
What truly frightens me is the serious lack of perspective on this issue.
Real atrocities committed in the name of religious fervor get less attention than a couple of nutty priests doing crazy things in their private lives.
God save us all from the "orthodox."
Posted by: | Oct 30, 2004 at 10:38 AM
An interesting take, when the indiviuals involved are leaders of a congregation of 1200 member (or so I've read) and when they are able to get one of their pagan rites posted by an official organ of the ECUSA where it is held up as an exemplar for others to imitate.
Hmmm. Aren't you infantilizing those 1200 members of the congregation, as if these two priests had them all under a spell or something? Or are you actually holding them equally responsible for what happened? I'm not quite sure how they came to be involved in this. Please explain.
And yes, everybody agrees that a "liturgy" that has nothing to do with Christianity shouldn't have been posted on a Christian website, this one in particular. So we agree that somebody screwed up at the Episcopal Women's Whatever and should be fired. (It looks, actually, they need to scrap the whole thing and start again from scratch.)
But again: does this really imply that all of ECUSA is pagan? This one incident? Isn't that going a bit overboard? How come I don't see any evidence of this widespread paganism in the services I attend?
I will say, though, that I hope this re-focuses the Episcopal Church on day-to-day sacramental life; I'd love it if this incident touched off a revival so that more parishes would hold daily services. (Conservative parishes don't do this, either, BTW.)
Posted by: bls | Oct 30, 2004 at 04:08 PM
bls:
Hmmm. Aren't you infantilizing those 1200 members of the congregation, as if these two priests had them all under a spell or something?
Bls, I don't know about you, but when I was growing up, I knew next to nothing about doctrine, correct beliefs, etc. I had to trust that some responsible adult (my parents, Sunday School teachers, priest) would help guide me along the way.
The same is true for adult converts. They don't know enough to be able to discern whether what is being preached is orthodox or not. So yes, I would be concerned about what the Melnyks are teaching their congregations, wouldn't you?
Or do you just automatically assume that any Episcopal priest teaches the correct doctrines? I have to say given Bishop Spong's denial of the Virgin Birth and the divinity of Jesus (and he is not the only Episcopal bishop to have done so), I would not be so sanguine myself. But to each his own, I guess.
Peace
Posted by: Allen Lewis | Oct 30, 2004 at 06:28 PM
I repeat my comment from your other site. The Episcopal Church should, for the benefit of its past reputation, disband before it becomes not only a laughing stock but a source of danger in its self-worshiping blasphemies.
Posted by: mary raitt | Oct 30, 2004 at 06:51 PM
The same is true for adult converts. They don't know enough to be able to discern whether what is being preached is orthodox or not. So yes, I would be concerned about what the Melnyks are teaching their congregations, wouldn't you?
No, sorry. I'm an adult convert myself and have had little trouble finding the theology I prefer.
It's not as if there's a dearth of information around, after all; you can find anything you want on the internet, from Chrysostom to Augustine to Barth to Spong. And it's not as if anything will be "lost," for the same reason. The libraries of the world are piled to the ceilings with information on religion, theology, and philosophy. And everybody is literate. I mean, take the Windsor Report, for instance; we all know where to get it, what it says (if we've gone to the trouble of reading it), and where to find more information about it.
Everybody (mostly) can drive to a different church, if the one they attend doesn't do it for them. I just don't see the issue here.
Posted by: bls | Oct 31, 2004 at 02:36 PM
I repeat my comment from your other site. The Episcopal Church should, for the benefit of its past reputation, disband before it becomes not only a laughing stock but a source of danger in its self-worshiping blasphemies.
Have you ever actually been to a service? Try it sometime; most parishes are quite standard in worship and liturgy.
All of this hysteria is an attempt to smear the church for the stand it's taken on the homosexuality issue, plain and simple. That's what you get when you buck the powers-that-be, and I'm proud of the Episcopal Church for doing it.
Posted by: bls | Oct 31, 2004 at 02:41 PM
"Have you ever actually been to a service? Try it sometime; most parishes are quite standard in worship and liturgy."
Well, standard what? The worship and liturgy are OK. The teaching is more like standard agnosticism. There's a reason ECUSA has never promoted (or valued) biblical literacy. And yes, I've been to a service or two - I was baptised Episcopalian over fifty years ago, before you adult "converts" came, confirmed long before anyone ever heard of Gene Robinson; I had to go outside ECUSA to find Christ. And I'm telling you that you don't have a clue Who it is you're playing with.
Posted by: Jebra | Oct 31, 2004 at 06:34 PM