I was born an Episcopalian in Massachusetts back when that marked one as a conservative. Went every Sunday, served as an Acolyte, confirmed, etc. Mom sang in the choir, Dad served on the Vestry. Then we moved to the Chicago area and it all kind of fell away.

Fast forward 30 years. My Boy Scout Troop lost it’s sponsor over the “no atheists” thing and we got picked up by the local Episcopal parish. I showed up once in a while and got drawn in. Now I sing tenor in the choir every Sunday, read the intercessions once in a while, and (proof God has a sense of humor) got elected Senior Warden. It’s a small struggling parish that’s had a few clerical changes in the last few years. The last time, I served on the Selection Committee that recommended the new pastor.

I’m in the Diocese of Chicago. The new pastor is pretty liberal, as there’s no way that the Bishop would approve any other kind of candidate. However, while he’ll be glad to inform you of his political opinions in private conversations (as in our monthly breakfast together) he keeps them out of his sermons. For the most part. The parish itself is divided over these issues, but has decided not to let them define our relationships to each other.

But now comes the Diocesean Convention, and I’m a voting delegate. Our bishop is leaving (health) and of the 8 candidates one is a “partnered” lesbian. As it happens, after going to a meeting where we got to ask them all questions I’ve decided that regardless of her gender or sexual activities I don’t think she’s right for our Diocese’s needs. But I’m waiting to see if people want to vote her in because of what she symbolizes instead of what she can do for the Diocese. It’s kind of how I think Pres. Bp. Sciori (sp?) got elected.

So; my advice is to go back and tell the pastor frankly what you thought of his sermon. Then go back and see if politics pop up again in the sermons. If they do, do as you think best.

BTW, with regards to Vicki Gene Robinson (apparently his parents really wanted a girl that they were going to name Victoria Imogene), it’s my understanding that while he definitely got divorced over his understanding of his sexuality, the relationship with his current paramour did not start until a year or two afterwords. Not that it makes much of a difference to me; I’d disqualify a straight priest who’d divorced their spouse from being bishop.

How do we know when we walk away that we aren’t actually walking toward our calling? Like Joseph, our only hope is to pray for guidance, and be true to our convictions as we pursue it.
May He be with you and your family.

The label on the bottle should describe the contents. If the sign outside the church says “Baptist”, the doctrine preached inside should be Baptist. (e.g.)

The same goes with Romans, Whiskeypalians, Lutherans, whatever.

Otherwise, what’s the point of calling yerselves by different names, if the names don’t differentiate?

Sometimes we should not be comfortable sitting in church; particularly when we are faced with our sins, failings, and shortcomings. We do need to come face-to-face with Jesus, repent, and with the Spirit’s help, be changed into a new creation in Christ. Unfortunately, there is no call for repentance in today’s liberal churches – just a call to fight poverty, social injustice, and global warming. For many, Jesus is not the Son of God – just a radical ahead of his time and a great teacher. (Reminds me of a great C.S. Lewis quote from Mere Christianity)

Your church, like mine (a new start UMC in an affluent area south of Jax), bought into Children’s Sabbath which was a lobbying effort by the Children’s Defense Fund to push for expanded national health care. It meshed well with our sermon series on “A call for radical faith – God’s word through the music of U2.”

Funny that when liberal churches preach “social justice,” it becomes a call to live our faith through expanded political involvement so that that the government can do what Jesus would want done (usually more government programs and taxes). Hypocritically, one’s faith can never be used to support (or limit) government involvement on social conservative issues such as faith-based charities, abortion restrictions, or homosexual marriage.

One problem (as I see it) with liberal churches focused on social justice issues is that they see that Jesus’ life and work as a call for inclusiveness, acceptance, and service and ignore his call for repentance and rightousness. He accepted the woman at the well – changed her life – but told her to sin no more. The liberal churches today would accept her, yet not hold her responsible for the consequences of her actions nor would they seek to change her behavior as it would be judgmental. Instead, they would lobby for more social programs and so the cycle continues.

The hard part is for the “church” to accept and love her, while supporting the work of the Spirit to change her (and our) life. Tough love??

Enough rambling on a tough issue. – Cheers