Remember Jeremiah 1:5 Before I formed you in the womb I knew you, before you were born I set you apart

Sorry kid, your mom and Nina thinks she’s Me, maybe another time.

Another TEC priestess who ministers to the culture of death and destruction. What a blessing WO has been to TEC!

OK, so Churchman’s position is, “This is a matter for the individual woman’s conscience, unless her conscience tells her there’s a need to repent” ???

Our Lady of Akita, pray for us!

Where are the modern day saints to fight these modern day demons?

I am sick and speechless. I am so thankful for this site because the stories I read here confirm that my decision to leave TEO was the right one, despite how much I loved my parish.

Let’s just put this in some perspective.

Here’s a quote about the “Dr Mengele of America”:

He [Tiller] talked about his own family’s experience of providing shelter, delivery and support for women who were “too far along” for him to perform the abortion as one of the “the most powerful things” he had done and urged other doctors to do the same.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2009/06/21/choice/

In other words: Tiller puts Ragsdale and “Churchman” to shame!

Ugh… How on earth could God rejoice about a woman choosing to kill her own child? What of the wisdom of Solomon which required the mother to let her child go to another woman rather than him being killed?

When mothers murdering their own babies is regarded as a good thing by people you know that Satan rules the roost.

“…and was sickened to discover that the rite for abortion is couched wholly in terms of sin and transgression.”

“Sickened? Really? It is always amazing at how much a single word can say.

Failing to make biblical distinctions between life and death… these feast of the kid boiled in its mother’s milk (forbidden at least 3 times in Scripture.)

Lord have mercy.

Yes indeed, Allen, what a blessing WO is to the whole world. Sheesh. Twisted. She’s sickened, all right.

“The Episcopal Church, by resolution, has long held that women have the freedom to choose an abortion. It is not considered a sin.”

If this is is not doublespeak with shades of Orwell’s “1984″ I don’t know what is.

The name “Churchman” for a churchwoman coming our with this declaration adds that little bit of “icing on the cake”

I

I

“The Episcopal Church, by resolution, has long held that _______ have the freedom to _______. It is not considered a sin.”

Fill in the blanks with absolutely anything, and it will be stating a truth.

(Note – the aforementioned “truth” is only so in the eyes of TEC……)

PS – I would dearly like to know if Ms. Churchman considers anything whatsover to be a sin; and if so, would she be willing to rebuke someone for sinning.

Bill (not IB) why what a silly question. We both know what she would consider sin. Homophobia, misogyny, failing to recycle, shopping at Walmarts, driving an SUV, voting Republican, and frequenting hate mongering bigoted sexist anti liberation blogs such as this one.

Well-then-we have people like anglicat who I bet doesn’t think abortion is a blessing, and from her blog appears to be a hearfelt disciple of Jesus Christ and a faithful minister of the Gospel. Once again, I am not trying to debate women’s ordination. :^) Just pointing out that not all Episcopal clergywomen are like Russell, Ragsdale and Churchman. In fact, I know some others who aren’t.

Unfortunately, the are probably clergymen who also think abortion is a blessing. I wouldn’t put such a statement past Jack Spong.

I think we need to expand abortion rights in this country. I don’t think it’s right for a bunch of old men in Washington to tell people that abortion is only legal up to the time of birth. SUPPORT RETROACTIVE ABORTION RIGHTS NOW!!!!

Chris-

Had you ever thought of not reading “Episcopal Life”? ;^) Granted, you wouldn’t have so much interesting-and alarming stuff-to post on your blog, but it might bring your blood down pressue a few degrees, and I’m sure everyone here (except for the occasional troll) is concerned about your well being. :^)

…and spoil all his fun?

Thanks for keeping this issues in the forefront by posting these kind of stories on your blog. While this kind of evil is difficult to read about, believers need to understand how deep the rot goes in many religious institutions.

I always have thought that those clergy who support abortion rights are contradicting not only scripture but also the creeds of the faith. In the Nicene Creed, Christians confess a belief in the Holy Spirit as “the Lord the giver of life.” All life is a gift of the Holy Spirit — and to take that life is to deny this gift, it is to deny that He truly is the “Lord the giver of life.” Pure heresy.

FenelonSpoke: “Once again, I am not trying to debate women’s ordination. :^)”

Thanks. After all, since you’re a priestess or pastorette, you have a rather vested interest in defending WO.

You might want to consider reading Alice Linsley’s blog and communicating with her since she renounced her ordination and converted to Eastern Orthodoxy. I have also heard of Lutheran pastorettes who renounced their ordination and swam the Tiber.

For liberal political action organizations, which is what the former Episcopal Church has become, choice applies only to the license to destroy one’s baby in the womb. It most definitely is a sin to these poeple if you want to own a gun, drive an SUV, or choose not to recycle.

We passed a resolution! It’s not a sin! I have here, from Herr Hitler, a piece of paper…

This is the sort of outcome you get from people who think that getting their hands on the levers of power is all they need to do, and that reality will just obediently trot along at their heels, changing into whatever they order it to. It reminds me of ‘I, Claudius’, where the Roman Senate had only to pass a resolution, and a mortal could be turned into a god.

It reminds me of ‘I, Claudius’, where the Roman Senate had only to pass a resolution, and a mortal could be turned into a god.

Isn’t that what happened in our last presidential election?

TUAD-

Pastorettes sounds like a singing group. ;^) I have no interesting in talking to or about pastorettes.

I wish women who have turned in their orders much grace and peace in the Lord Jesus Christ. They have made a prayeful decision which is perfectly in keeping with their view of Christianity, apostolic succesion and God’s call upon their life. With all due respect, I don’t need to be converted to their point of view as that is not God’s call upon MY life :^)

FenelonSpoke: “With all due respect, I don’t need to be converted to their point of view as that is not God’s call upon MY life :^)”

Fenelonspoke, how did you validate God’s call upon YOUR life to become an “ordained” woman?

FenelonSpoke: “Just pointing out that not all Episcopal clergywomen are like Russell, Ragsdale and Churchman.”

But there is one aspect in which they are all probably alike. They would *all* probably maintain that becoming a priestess or “ordained” woman was God’s call upon their THEIR lives.

JUST. LIKE. YOU.

Several years ago I had an email battle with a local priestess over various (the usual) issues.

I told her that TEO would some day make abortion a sacrament, and would be adding stirrups to altars.

If my “faith community” was “non-judgmental,” I would begin to suspect that they don’t actually care about my spiritual state, but only my donations.

The woman in the article says, “Women should be able to mourn the loss of an aborted fetus without having to confess anything.”

This is the most convoluted piece of logic I have seen in a long time. Some woman decides to murder her child so that she may live as she wishes, but she wants to be able to mourn that murder without having to confess responsibility for that murder? And the church is simply supposed to accommodate her?

Selfishness. Foolishness. Sin. We should ALL be daily reminded of our sin, not told that we’re really all okay.

God will never rejoice in abortion. However, he may mock this human ignorance and hubris.

“He who sits in the heavens laughs;
the Lord holds them in derision.”
– Ps. 2:4

I have to say after reading the highlighted part of her statement I am given a whole new perspective on the story of Hansel and Gretel. Knowing that a decision to kill a preborn child is a valid option in God’s eyes provided it is the best option for the family one can conclude the same holds true for children who have made the journey down the magical birth canal.

Of course the Grimm Bros did not see this option as being a valid one blessed by God so they make a big point of the kids outwitting their parents then actually finding shelter in the wood. Worse they are positively gleeful about the willfull murder of a gentle practioner of nature religion with environmentally friendly population control and body disposal methods. And to show just how anti progress they are the Grimm’s make it all “right” by appealing to the greed of dad. By using this to have the children accepted back into the fold they undercut stepmom’s autonomy, her well thought out choice and her growth as a womyn not tied down to the patriarchal restrictions on her selfhood.

The Grimms could have given us a worthy tale if only they had remembered that infanticide is a blessing even when all is wonderful, secure, happy and loving within a marriage. But nope shortsighted as they were all we get is a happy reunion while the one person to see the full wisdom of leaving Hansel and Gretel to starve or be eaten by wild beasts is forever branded as evil. I bet in the sequel she goes to an Episcopal Seminary.

EpiscopalLife Online selects which responses to post, and an open thread like this one is not available. Would that we were allowed to go keypad to keypad against this person. Inclusive church my foot!

Disgusting. This person has no business being allowed inside a church, let alone leading one.

Fenelonspoke -

I know several ordained women in TEC who are not like Ragsdale or Churchman. There are, I am sure, quite a few faithful ordained women in the Episcopal Church. But that is really beside the point.

Once I started asking myself whether ordination of women to the priesthood was truly permissible and started reading the debates about it with an open mind, I came to the conclusion that if one wants to be a member of the Church Catholic, then one has to realize that God did have something to say about the differing roles of men and women in his creation. The fact is that the Anglican Communion was in grave error when it decided that it could unilaterally change 1900+ years of tradition.

This is the same sort of arrogance that Rome displayed when it added the filioque to the Nicene Creed – an act which helped to precipitate the great schism between the Eastern and Western branches of the Church. This was not a good thing.

Of course, Protestants may do what they wish within their own folds. I am not arguing that point. However, the fact remains that in order to be a part of the Church Catholic means no women priests. That is just a simple fact of life.

What we have seen repeatedly in the Episcopal Church is that so many women priests feel that they have an inborn right to declare what God would or would not find “good”, even if it flies in the face of 2000+ years of traditional biblical interpretation. These women are their own authorities when it comes to the Bible. And what they say it says, trumps everything else.

I don’t care if it’s Nino or Nina Churchman – I still feel like scrubbing myself with a Brillo pad after reading that…

I’m surprised she hasn’t changed her name to Nina Churchwomyn.

Jim – actually, church is EXACTLY where this person needs to be. Not in church leadership, but on her knees repenting and asking for God’s forgiveness.

“This is the same sort of arrogance that Rome displayed when it added the filioque to the Nicene Creed – an act which helped to precipitate the great schism between the Eastern and Western branches of the Church. This was not a good thing.”

Actually WO is much worse. Modifying a Conciliar Creed in order to combat a perceived heretical understanding of procession isn’t even in the same BALLPARK as meddling with a sacrament to the point of disposing of the Church’s understanding of the valid matter for that sacrament.

Der Mr. Lewis,

I am neither Episcopal nor Catholic, so your points are better addressed to someone who is. :>)

Grace and peace in the Lord Jesus Christ.

Allen Lewis: “Another TEC priestess who ministers to the culture of death and destruction. What a blessing WO has been to TEC!”

Evidently the liberal revisionist apostates think so. Not only that, but the constantly agitating and agitated GLBT zombies think so too, since they used WO as a trojan horse wedge to ram in their heresies into the pulpit and the pews.

Because +VGR could say the very same thing as FenelonSpoke:

“With all due respect, I don’t need to be converted to their point of view as that is not God’s call upon MY life :^)”

And he could just as easily dodge, evade, ignore, and/or dismiss the question in the same manner that was posed to FenelonSpoke:

“Fenelonspoke, how did you validate God’s call upon YOUR life to become an “ordained” woman?”

I.e., are you sure you actually heard or received a “call”?

Are you this so-called “call” was from God, and not something or someone else?

Don’t you think Scripture and tradition/Tradition and the overall bad fruit that Allen Lewis alludes to contradicts what you think was a “call”?

And maybe any “affirmation” that you may have received about your so-called call was not from God and His Written Word either.

I’m not interested in pursuing this, Mr. Lewis.

Peace in Jesus Christ.

At least the Catholic bishops stood up – sort of – for the right side of this issue. This is about the Executive Committee meeting, and I’ll be a lot happier if they make a statement as a body at this week’s meeting.

http://tinyurl.com/mcwrm7

Of course, something is better than nothing, I guess.

http://www.usccb.org/comm/archives/2009/09-144.shtml

My mistake. The bishop’s statement came from an executive session of the whole body. While I would have liked to see them directly address the scandalous nature of what happened at Notre Dame, particularly the perfidious acts of it’s president, Fr. Jenkins…

again… something is better than nothing.

It always makes me sad to see this kind of statement being made by a woman. I know women who have lost babies by miscarriage. They mourn because they knew what they lost. I have read the testimonies of women who aborted and now regret it. They know what they lost. How has this woman’s soul been so deeply scarred that she cannot feel the wound of the loss of a child? A murderer’s mourning without repentance is empty, and healing can only begin with the recognition of the sin.

It’s as if the feminist revolution has changed these women into men, without any physical connection to the child in the womb. Those of us women who have borne children, or who have wanted to, know what this means. Churchman doesn’t.

May I ask that we leave FenelonSpoke alone on this? I for one am willing to accept her as a sister in Christ who tries to live the Gospel as best she can by the grace of God, just like any of us. And just for for the record, I am a Roman Catholic who fully supports my church’s stance on women’s ordination. Otherwise, I hope I’d be honest enough to join the Episcopal Church…

It is times like this that I wish the Apocolyps of Peter had made it into canon.

I’m surprised she hasn’t changed her name to Nina Churchwomyn.

Nina Covenwitch!

Thank you, Mr. Pawlak. I appreciate your gracious response.

Peace in the Lord Jesus Christ.

FenelonSpoke, I won’t attempt to engage you personally in discussing your calling. However, it’s true that the innovation of ordained women in ECUSA was tied up with and was an integral part of radical feminism and also the “gay” agenda from the very beginning. It took me, along with many others, quite a long time to see what was in front of our eyes. It is still true in ECUSA that while there are faithful believing Christian women among the ordained, they are the exception rather than the rule, I think from observation a rather small minority. Within the groups which are forming the ACNA, either the traditional Christianity of the new milieu will produce fewer and fewer ordained women, or it also will spin out of control. I expect the ELCA, for instance, to be swamped by the same tide which is destroying ECUSA; it seems to me to be well on the way.

Yes, I believe that you’ve commented on this before, Katherine. :^)

I don’t feel a need to defend women’s ordination either for myself personally, or to take on the role of defending women’s ordination overall simply because I am apparently the only ordained woman who posts here, or that mentions being ordained. I see that the other clergywomen are smarter than I am in that way, :^) athough Susan Russell occasionally does a fly by on SFIF. And no, I would not compare myself to Rev, Russell as from what I have read of her comments we would disagree on a number of major issues.

There are just as many liberal clergymen and their are liberal clergywomen. They (ordained men) are simply not talking about the “blessing” of abortion, for instance. because it would be wholly and offensively presumptous of a man to say such a thing, as abhorrent as it is when anyone says it. That doesn’t mean they don’t basically see it that way. As far as gay marriage, there are men who do and would support gay marriage even if there was not a woman ordained in their denomination.

As the cuture is increasingly polarized I see that ordained women may continue to become one scapegoat, ie. “If women had never been ordained the church wouldn’t have moved towards liberalism” when the move towards liberalism in society and the church has been coming for many, many decades and is, IMO, due to a complex set of sociological factors. I suppose that if women had never gotten the vote, or hadn’t filled in jobs normally assigned to men during WWII the society and church would not have moved towards liberalism. The society would not have moved towards liberalism and anti-Christinaity if there had never neen people like Neitzsche (sp?)or Marx who were speaking long before women were ordained.

I just want to post on stories that interest me and not be attacked on women’s ordination by a select few (and, no you’re not one of them) when I post. I don’t see any point in mouting a defense about women’s ordination when I will change nobody’s mind here, nor they mine. I’ve been hearing the arguments for almost three decades. That is why I appreciated Mr, Pawlak’s post and willingness to regard me as a sister in Christ. I am just trying to pursue the calling I believe God gave me and, with God’s grace be an apprentice to the Master Jesus Christ the Lord. People telling me I’m not called (and again, you didn’t do that) is not going to convince me. People telling me that I’m not sufficiently Christian because I believe in women’s ordination is not going to convince me. My move towards ordination was a long process. I didn’t even grow up in a religious family so I attribute my journey to God’s work in my life. I realize of course other people don’t see it that way. Also, I have never thought of my calling as a right. Never. It is a wonderful gift. I honestly don’t know any clergywomen personally who ever described their ordination as a right. They may exist. I just don’t know them, and I know a lot of clergywomen.

As you also remarked, I am free not to post and I am free not to ever bring up ordained women. I also have the freedom to not read threads after a certain point-a freedom I sometimes claim. :^)

Grace and peace be with you in the matchless name of Jesus Christ.

FenelonSpoke, in the instances I have seen in which one of these WO firestorms has erupted, it has been you who has first commented on it. You know these guys are anti-WO and you know they’ll jump on it and that it won’t be a constructive engagement. If you could refrain from starting the conversation down that path it would be less annoying for you.

Yes, you’ve comented on that before, Katherine. :^) Sometimes, believe it or not, I don’t even bother saying anything in response to comments made about women’s ordination, and I don’t raise the issue. Most of my comments here have nothing to do with WO. I am not surprised by the responses. That doesn’t mean I have to always have to choose to be silent, or like what I read. Everyone is free to post what they like until Chris tells them otherwise.

Grace and peace.

P.S. The nature of blogs/forums on religion (unless one finds one where everyone agrees, and I haven’t found one yet) is for the reader to occasionally be annoyed. It comes with the territory. And I’m not really that annoyed. as I don’t know any of these people personally. I may gripe to a very few others but that is usually when I am tired. I wish them God’s grace and peace and blessings and we agree on issues other than WO’s, but since they are not in a church I serve and probably wouldn’t be, I am fine.

Thanks for your concern. :^)

Obviously I don’t believe in the validity of women’s ordination. But I restrict that belief to the Catholic and Orthodox churches. I consider ordination within Protestant churches an issue of their own governance and not a Sacramental one.

But it does seem to me that too many female clergy withing TEC do not see their ordination as a vocation in living alter Christi(sp) or as a “sacramental” order as understood in that church or even as presiding over those sacraments or being a shepherd to a flock. Instead they see at as a position from which to advance their agenda. A bully pulpit for their cause of the week. A place to enlighten the ignorant and foolish and resistant. A mantle of authority and rightness. It is for them a position political and is good only as long as it is useful to their cause.

I cannot speak for ordained women in TEC. The ones I know see it as a calling to call people to discipleship in Jesus Christ and to serve as a servant/leader in the church. Granted there are people ( both men and women) who wish to assert an agenda. That would cross denominational lines, IMO. However, given the state of the mainline churches in the U.S. nowadays nobody goes into ministry because, for instance, it pays well-nor should they. In addtion, anyone expecting to be respected and have power simply because they are ministers will be disillusioned. People like Susan Russell and Ragsdale have blogs and a certain amount of power, I suppose, in the denomination. And then there are millions of people who don’t blog, don’t have personal websites and go quietly about their work, preaching, officiating at worship, celebrating the Sacraments, spreading news of the the saving, healing and transformative power of Jesus Christ, visting the sick, bringing communion, teaching children and adults, attending meetings, going to the soup kitchen, etc. I actually don’t know any clergywomen personally-except me-who visit religion websites and, unlike them, I only serve in the ministry part time. When I tell then about the comments (I am thinking specifically of websites with militant Atheists) they say, “What, are you crazy?!! Why go there?!! ;^)

For the record, I’ve pulled a couple of comments that I thought were over the line. And since this is my joint, I and I alone determine where that line is. Just remember that wherever you come down on That Issue, you’re dealing with fellow Christians so watch what you say and how you say it.

Obviously the majority of the ones you know are outside of TEC. You speak of what the norm is for any clergy within a Christian Church or hey even a Christian organization. TEC is neither so the rules for their up and coming and influential clergy are quite different. The ones within TEC who still live out their Christian calling despite TEC are easy to spot. They are the ones at the frame shop picking out a frame for their deposition orders.

Actually, this is a legitimate place to talk about the much maligned “baptismal covenant”, which is, in fact, a covenant God makes with humankind to use the baptized person, as they allow Him, to bring His salvation into the world. ALL the baptized are called to ministry, which means service. All are called to be Christ’s arms and legs, his hands and mouth, in this world.

Protestants and Catholics/Orthodox have very different theologies of ordained ministry. Just as I expect a non-Catholic to evaluate Catholic matters with fair consideration of the Catholic point of view on that matter, it is incumbent on me to consider women’s ordination from the protestant viewpoint, which leaves me, more or less, in the same place as Paula Loughlin. Sorry for that run-on sentence, but perhaps it’s not incoherent.

Finally, there is evidence to connect women’s ordination to same-sex issues and various heresies current among religious liberals. It does not follow that every ordained woman shares the revisionist agenda or partakes of the heresies. What does follow is that I should speak against women’s ordination, but not, necessarily, against ordained women. Heck, I can go after Bishop Kate for theological revisionism and her machiavellian politics; I don’t need to argue about her ordination. I can complain about the spite and hateful acts of a Susan Russell or Elizabeth Kaeton for hours before I even think about their ordinations.

All people, by virtue of their baptism, are called into the ministry. Not all people are called into the ordained ministry.

And you are correct, Paula. Not being Episcopal, the majority of clergywomen I know are not Episcopalian priests. :^) I do know three Episcopal clergywomen-one quite well, two pretty well and so we have discussed their call.

“Here we offer and present unto you the souls(?) and bodies of our mistakes that your happiness may be increased by our decisions to murder,” eh?

What is the liturgical procession in which one would bring the products of conception to lay upon the altar?

The musical interlude? Perhaps a nice bachanalian orgiastic introitus-extroitus-introitus-extroitus rythym? Or would something with a bit of the crackling and burning sound?

And would one leave the POC in the biobag or would one dump it onto the linen? (The latter will certainly be a problem for the Altar Guild. Wine is bad but hemoglobin worst as far as stain removal goes!)

Also, won’t all this burning on the altar upset the CO2 bit since the incinerators normally used would probably be more efficient than bumbling officiants who have problems lighting the candles in the absence of the acolytes? I mean how many of these fals and guys could really start a fire to cook with, much less actually offer an incinerative blaze that would reach Molech’s nostrils?

Inquiring/Enquiring liturgicists need to know. Could The INTERVALLY-OMNISCIENT General Convention decide these matters without a resolution?

While I am constantly shocked by the evil in this world, the Bible makes it clear that evil will increase in the end times. So we shouldn’t be surprised. I am saddened to see it increasing so quickly though. Many in the church are being deceived – just like the Bible has predicted.

2 Timothy 3
Godlessness in the Last Days
1But mark this: There will be terrible times in the last days. 2People will be lovers of themselves, lovers of money, boastful, proud, abusive, disobedient to their parents, ungrateful, unholy, 3without love, unforgiving, slanderous, without self-control, brutal, not lovers of the good, 4treacherous, rash, conceited, lovers of pleasure rather than lovers of God— 5having a form of godliness but denying its power. Have nothing to do with them.

6They are the kind who worm their way into homes and gain control over weak-willed women, who are loaded down with sins and are swayed by all kinds of evil desires, 7always learning but never able to acknowledge the truth. 8Just as Jannes and Jambres opposed Moses, so also these men oppose the truth—men of depraved minds, who, as far as the faith is concerned, are rejected. 9But they will not get very far because, as in the case of those men, their folly will be clear to everyone.