MORE ON HYPOCRISY AND POPPYCOCK

It may be said that institutions exist to serve the common good.

It may also be said that all institutions are IN the world.

It is also true that some institutions claim to be IN, but not OF the world.

That all of them are IN the world is not debatable.

That some of them are not OF the world definitely is debatable.
I suggest that all institutions are OF the world. It is just that some of their members do not know it. And some institutions are more other-worldly than others.

And then comes the matter of the purpose of the institution, the matter of serving the common good.

What is to be done with, or how is one to think about an institution which no longer serves the greater good, but instead serves a lesser good, or even serves no good at all, or even does harm to the community it serves?

And this is now the question facing folks who are disturbed by certain doings in the ECUSA, the Episcopal Church of the United States.
It also faces folks who are not disturbed by such goings-on, who are happy with said goings-on, for they are fracturing their institution.

Do the concerned folks swallow their concerns and go quietly about their traditional practices, thinking their thoughts and remaining within the Communion?

Do these folks speak out and work to correct what they perceive to be serious errors?

Do they merely withhold financial contributions?

Or do they leave the Communion they are so dissatisfied with?

Or do they change their minds regarding their concerns and go along with perceived changes?

Or do they do any other things not mentioned here?
It is late and I am sure there are other options.

I suggest that infallible human judgments/pronouncements do not exist. Institutions and individuals claiming infallibility are making fallacious claims.

Anyone who knows anything about how interpretations and beliefs came to be doctrine knows the truth: what we know of as religious doctrine comes about over time, by consensus, and, hopefully, without a lot of book burning and pain and suffering. Unhappily, there was a lot of the distressing latter developments.

Consensus is the operative word here.
And empathy.

And understanding that what has been ‘doctrine’ for ages and ages must not be tossed aside willy-nilly [sp?], regardless of the costs.

When an institution tosses out consensus; when it causes itself to fracture; when it seems to be serving other than the common good, then it will grow increasingly irrelevant to the perceptions of the public it serves.

Such an institution is currently perceived, by a growing number of its members, to be the ECUSA.

The ‘reformers’ should be aware that they are no more infallible than their more conservative forebears, those who taught that which is now in disfavor with national church leadership.

What they share with their forbears is a need to work with consensus, to avoid the trap of believing that they are in possession of a truth so sure that dissent can be ignored, even driven from the Communion.

Food for thought.