Rat & Swan wrote:

[shite]

Whether you admit it or not, your moral and theological
relativism is causing schism in your church.

Jonathan Ball wrote:

> Whether you admit it or not, your moral and theological relativism is
> causing schism in your church.

One cannot have a schism of one side -- if the conservatives weren't
promoting schism on their part, there would be no problem. The
inflexible on both sides make the situation worse. It's the
conservatives who are suggesting leaving, not the liberals in the
ECUSA.

Rat

Rat & Swan wrote:

>
>
> Jonathan Ball wrote:
>
>> Whether you admit it or not, your moral and theological relativism is
>> causing schism in your church.
>
>
> One cannot have a schism of one side

Your "side" is causing a schism. It is because you are
self-indulgent moral relativists who will pitch your
holy works into the fire in order to indulge yourselves
in earthly pleasures.

degene-Rat wrote:
>> Whether you admit it or not, your moral and theological relativism is
>> causing schism in your church.
>
> One cannot have a schism of one side -- if the conservatives weren't
> promoting schism on their part, there would be no problem.

Wait a second, the "conservatives" are not promoting schism. The schism
came with changes supported by you and your fellow travelers. This is
clear when one takes a look at the wider view in Anglicanism: you have
offended the church in other nations, and they have broken fellowship
with you. YOU have sown the seeds of division. You are not called by God
to uproot order and change the doctrines of the church, but to live by
and uphold them.

> The
> inflexible on both sides make the situation worse. It's the
> conservatives who are suggesting leaving, not the liberals in the
> ECUSA.

You have already left. They will let you keep whatever names for
yourselves, but they will keep the treasure of the Gospel. That's more
important anyway.

usual suspect wrote:

> Rat wrote:

<snip>

>> The
>> inflexible on both sides make the situation worse. It's the
>> conservatives who are suggesting leaving, not the liberals in the
>> ECUSA.

> You have already left. They will let you keep whatever names for
> yourselves, but they will keep the treasure of the Gospel.

And the ECUSA will keep the church property, it looks like.

If they're going to sulk, they can do it in someone's living room
or the local storefront. We get BOTH the gospel and the property.

Rat
<snip>

degene-Rat wrote:
> <snip>
>
>>> The
>>> inflexible on both sides make the situation worse. It's the
>>> conservatives who are suggesting leaving, not the liberals in the
>>> ECUSA.
>
>> You have already left. They will let you keep whatever names for
>> yourselves, but they will keep the treasure of the Gospel.
>
> And the ECUSA will keep the church property, it looks like.

This is more important to you and your fellow belly-servers. The
God-servers will take his message -- the one you seek to corrupt and
change with your profligate impentitence.

> If they're going to sulk, they can do it in someone's living room
> or the local storefront. We get BOTH the gospel and the property.

The former is foreign to you, which is why you seek to change it; it is
also eternal. The latter is temporal: this is why the faithful will not
fight as hard for it as they will for the treasure of the Gospel. The
hedonistic pleasure you derive your sham alternative lifestyle is also
temporal, but its consequences are eternal.

Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put
darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for
sweet, and sweet for bitter!
-- Isaiah 5:20

usual suspect wrote:
> Rat wrote:

>> <snip>

>> And the ECUSA will keep the church property, it looks like.

> This is more important to you

<snip>

I can tell you, I'm looking forward to worshipping at Holy Faith
if the local bishop splits -- it's a prettier and more historic
church than the one I attend now, but it has a REALLY annoying
priest. Their building, our priest: perfect.

Besides, we keep getting refugees from their parish, and we're
running out of room....

No sense of humor, have you?

Rat

degene-Rat wrote:
>>> And the ECUSA will keep the church property, it looks like.
>
>> This is more important to you
>
> <snip>
>
> I can tell you, I'm looking forward to worshipping at Holy Faith
> if the local bishop splits -- it's a prettier and more historic
> church than the one I attend now, but it has a REALLY annoying
> priest. Their building, our priest: perfect.

Style over substance. Typical. What a waste of a sanctuary: filling it
with transvestites, NAMBLA freaks, and women with bad haircuts in
flannel shirts. Not to mention an apostate priest.

<snip>