6 February 2015 A.D. Episcopal Church to Appeal Recent Ruling Favoring Breakaway Episcopalians in South Carolina

6 February 2015 A.D.  Episcopal Church to Appeal Recent Ruling Favoring Breakaway Episcopalians in South Carolina

 

Hawes, Jennifer Berry. “Episcopal Church’s local parishes plan to appeal judge’s ruling.” The Post and Courier.  4 Feb 2015. http://www.postandcourier.com/article/20150204/PC16/150209713/1015.  Accessed 6 Feb 2015.

 

Episcopal Church’s local parishes plan to appeal judge’s ruling

 

Local Episcopal parishes, led by the Right Rev. Charles vonRosenberg, plan to appeal a judge’s ruling Tuesday that allowed breakaway parishes to retain ownership of churches and other property. Brad Nettles/Staff

 

The divorce might be finalized, but who gets what isn’t settled yet, not with The Episcopal Church’s local parishes pledging Wednesday to appeal a circuit court judge’s ruling.

 

Judge Diane Goodstein ruled late Tuesday in favor of the Protestant Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina, which left the national church in 2012. She ruled the diocese and two-thirds of area parishes that left with it had the right to depart and take more than $500 million in property with them.

 

But that ruling marks just one step in a longer journey, said the Right Rev. Charles G. vonRosenberg, bishop of The Episcopal Church in South Carolina, which comprises area parishes still aligned with the national church.

 

“We will persevere as we seek justice, even though the personal and financial costs will be significant. The present cause requires us to respond in this way,” vonRosenberg wrote in a pastoral letter distributed Wednesday.

 

With an appeal ahead, those costs for both sides will keep mounting.

 

So far, the Diocese of South Carolina and 38 parishes that separated from the national church have spent $2 million on legal fees, Bishop Mark Lawrence said. They will continue to raise money to fight the appeal and noted that The Episcopal Church has spent far more nationwide to fight similar lawsuits.

 

“It’s shameful to continue using church money in this way,” Lawrence said.

 

He added that the diocese just wants to move on, independent of The Episcopal Church, which is the North American province of the global Anglican Communion. “While they speak peace, they engage in litigation,” said Lawrence, whose diocese filed the lawsuit.

 

Holly Behre, a spokeswoman for vonRosenberg’s diocese, couldn’t say how much they had spent. “Some of that information is confidential, and some we just don’t have the data available for at this point,” she said.

 

After voting to leave, the Diocese of South Carolina sued the national church and the diocese vonRosenberg now heads, arguing that those leaving had legal right to parishes’ properties along with the diocesan name, seal and other identifiers.

 

That lawsuit has dragged on for more than two years. It has included a three-week nonjury trial last summer that tapped 59 witnesses, spanned 2,523 pages of transcripts and 1,200 exhibits.

 

Both sides say it has threatened to distract them from the church’s larger mission.

“I have tried zealously and steadfastly to focus on the mission at hand — to make disciples and spread the good news of Christ,” Lawrence said.

 

Steeped in history

 

At issue is the church’s earliest history in Charleston, dating back to 1680. The lawsuit’s plaintiffs include some of the South’s oldest colonial congregations, sanctuaries and graveyards.

 

The original diocese used the name Protestant Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina — and its various iterations — for 229 years, even before it joined The Episcopal Church. And so it can continue using it, Goodstein ruled.

 

In 1789, the Diocese of South Carolina voluntarily joined The Episcopal Church as a founding member. In 1841, the diocese added a clause to its constitution saying that it “accedes to, recognizes and adopts the general Constitution and Canons of the Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America, and acknowledges their authority accordingly.”

 

So it went for 169 years.

 

But by 2010, deep divisions had formed between the diocese and national church over scriptural interpretations, including over homosexuality and salvation, and most local officials voted to remove that so-called “accession clause.” Instead, they added that the diocese’s own bylaws would prevail in any dispute.

 

They also removed language that said parish property should be held in trust for the national church. Lawrence then issued quitclaim deeds to every parish so that church properties were held in the name of their parishes — and not The Episcopal Church.

The national church’s disciplinary board charged the bishop with abandonment, and the diocese opted to leave.

Journey continues

 

Goodstein ruled those actions were legal and appropriate.

 

“The Constitutions and Canons of (The Episcopal Church) have no provisions which state that a member diocese cannot voluntarily withdraw its membership,” her ruling says. Instead, national church officials have referred to its dioceses as “autonomous.”

 

“TEC is not organized in a fashion that its governance controls the Dioceses or the parish churches. Authority flows from the bottom, the parish churches, up,” Goodstein wrote. Church authority comes from diocesan bishops — Lawrence, in this case — and he exercised his right to leave.

 

Under South Carolina law, members of The Episcopal Church “may unilaterally withdraw from the association at any time,” the ruling says.

 

“Freedom of association is a fundamental constitutional right,” Goodstein adds in her order.

 

Of course, vonRosenberg disagrees. He remains patient The Episcopal Church and its local diocese will prevail as the case is appealed.

 

“Our biblical heritage tells of journeys experienced by faithful people,” vonRosenberg said in a statement. “Those journeys often were difficult and filled with setbacks, but people of faith were called to persevere on the way.”

 

Reach Jennifer Hawes at 937-5563 or follow her on Twitter at @JenBerryHawes.

 

6 February 1685 A.D. Restoration King Charles II Dies & Converts on Deathbed to False Gospel of Rome

6 February 1685 A.D.  Restoration King Charles II Dies & Converts on Deathbed to Romanism

 

Editors. “Charles II (r.1660-1685).”  The Official Website of the British Monarchy. 6 Feb 2015. http://www.royal.gov.uk/historyofthemonarchy/kingsandqueensoftheunitedkingdom/thestuarts/charlesii.aspx.  Accessed 6 Feb 2015.

 

Charles II (r.1660 -1685)

Although those who had signed Charles I's death warrant were punished (nine regicides were put to death, and Cromwell's body was exhumed from Westminster Abbey and buried in a common pit), Charles II pursued a policy of political tolerance and power-sharing.

In April 1660, fresh elections had been held and a Convention met with the House of Lords. Parliament invited Charles to return, and he arrived at Dover on 25 May.

Despite the bitterness left from the Civil Wars and Charles I's execution, there were few detailed negotiations over the conditions of Charles II's restoration to the throne.

Under the Declaration of Breda of May 1660, Charles had promised pardons, arrears of Army pay, confirmation of land purchases during the Interregnum and 'liberty of tender consciences' in religious matters, but several issues remained unresolved.

However, the Militia Act of 1661 vested control of the armed forces in the Crown, and Parliament agreed to an annual revenue of £1,200,000 (a persistent deficit of £400,000-500,000 remained, leading to difficulties for Charles in his foreign policy).

The bishops were restored to their seats in the House of Lords, and the Triennial Act of 1641 was repealed - there was no mechanism for enforcing the King's obligation to call Parliament at least once every three years.

Under the 1660 Act of Indemnity and Oblivion, only the lands of the Crown and the Church were automatically resumed; the lands of Royalists and other dissenters which had been confiscated and/or sold on were left for private negotiation or litigation.

The early years of Charles's reign saw an appalling plague which hit the country in 1665 with 70,000 dying in London alone, and the Great Fire of London in 1666 which destroyed St Paul's amongst other buildings.

Another misfortune was the second Dutch war of 1665 (born of English and Dutch commercial and colonial rivalry). Although the Dutch settlement of New Amsterdam was overrun and renamed New York before the war started, by 1666 France and Denmark had allied with the Dutch.

The war was dogged by poor administration culminating in a Dutch attack on the Thames in 1667; a peace was negotiated later in the year.

In 1667, Charles dismissed his Lord Chancellor, Clarendon - an adviser from Charles's days of exile (Clarendon's daughter Anne was the first wife of Charles's brother James and was mother of Queens Mary and Anne).

As a scapegoat for the difficult religious settlement and the Dutch war, Clarendon had failed to build a 'Court interest' in the Commons. He was succeeded by a series of ministerial combinations, the first of which was that of Clifford, Ashley, Buckingham, Arlington and Lauderdale (whose initials formed the nickname Cabal).

Such combinations (except for Danby's dominance of Parliament from 1673 to 1679) were largely kept in balance by Charles for the rest of his reign.

Charles's foreign policy was a wavering balance of alliances with France and the Dutch in turn. In 1670, Charles signed the secret treaty of Dover under which Charles would declare himself a Catholic and England would side with France against the Dutch.

In return, Charles would receive subsidies from the King of France (thus enabling Charles some limited room for manoeuvre with Parliament, but leaving the possibility of public disclosure of the treaty by Louis).

Practical considerations prevented such a public conversion, but Charles issued a Declaration of Indulgence, using his prerogative powers to suspend the penal laws against Catholics and Nonconformists. In the face of an Anglican Parliament's opposition, Charles was eventually forced to withdraw the Declaration in 1673.

In 1677 Charles married his niece Mary to William of Orange, partly to restore the balance after his brother's second marriage to the Catholic Mary of Modena and to re-establish his own Protestant credentials.

This assumed a greater importance as it became clear that Charles's marriage to Catherine of Braganza would produce no legitimate heirs (although Charles had a number of mistresses and illegitimate children), and his Roman Catholic brother James's position as heir apparent raised the prospect of a Catholic king.

Throughout Charles's reign, religious toleration dominated the political scene. The 1662 Act of Uniformity had imposed the use of the Book of Common Prayer, and insisted that clergy subscribe to Anglican doctrine (some 1,000 clergy lost their livings).

Anti-Catholicism was widespread; the Test Act of 1673 excluded Roman Catholics from both Houses of Parliament. Parliament's reaction to the Popish Plot of 1678 (an allegation by Titus Oates that Jesuit priests were conspiring to murder the King, and involving the Queen and the Lord Treasurer, Danby) was to impeach Danby and present a Bill to exclude James (Charles's younger brother and a Roman Catholic convert) from the succession.

In 1680/81 Charles dissolved three Parliaments which had all tried to introduce Exclusion Bills on the basis that 'we are not like to have a good end'.

Charles sponsored the founding of the Royal Society in 1660 (still in existence today) to promote scientific research.

Charles also encouraged a rebuilding programme, particularly in the last years of his reign, which included extensive rebuilding at Windsor Castle, a huge but uncompleted new palace at Winchester and the Greenwich Observatory.

Charles was a patron of Christopher Wren in the design and rebuilding of St Paul's Cathedral, Chelsea Hospital (a refuge for old war veterans) and other London buildings.

Charles died in 1685, becoming a Roman Catholic on his deathbed.

Contra Mundum: Augustus Toplady Responds to Walter Sellon

Contra Mundum: Augustus Toplady Responds to Walter Sellon: “I had before been delineated, by an Arminian helpmeet of Mr. Wesley’s, as ‘sitting in my easy chair, and enjoying all the comforts of life...

6 February 2015 A.D. Breakaway Anglicans in SC Can Keep Churches Worth $500 Million, Rules SC Judge--Huge Loss for TEC

6 February 2015 A.D. Breakaway Anglicans in SC Can Keep Churches Worth $500 Million, Rules SC Judge--Huge Loss for TEC

Moon, Ruth. “Breakaway Anglicans Can Keep Churches Worth $500 Million, Rules South Carolina Judge.”  Christianity Today. 5 Feb 2015. http://www.christianitytoday.com/gleanings/2015/february/breakaway-anglicans-can-keep-churches-500-million-south-car.html.  Accessed 6 Feb 2015.

Breakaway Anglicans Can Keep Churches Worth $500 Million, Rules South Carolina Judge

Diocese of South Carolina not required to give properties and name back to national Episcopal Church.

Courtesy of Diocese of South Carolina

Bishop Mark Lawrence

In the "land and building wars" long fought within mainline denominations, the denomination usually wins. But this week, a South Carolina judge ruled that bishop Mark Lawrence and 36 South Carolina parishes had the right to leave The Episcopal Church in 2012 and take with them $500 million in property.

“In all of TEC’s governing documents, no rule exists prohibiting the withdrawal of one of its member dioceses,” Circuit Court Judge Diane Goodstein wrote in her opinion. As such, she wrote, TEC defendants have no legal or other right to the plaintiffs’ “real, personal, and intellectual property.”

The ruling mirrored an Illinois decision, in which the Diocese of Quincy was allowed to keep its property and funds for the same reason: The national denomination didn’t have a policy that kept dioceses from withdrawing their membership. Last month, the Illinois Supreme Court refused to hear the denomination's appeal.

The Diocese of South Carolina (DSC) had long distanced itself from The Episcopal Church’s liberal stance on many theological issues, including same-sex relationships. After Mark Lawrence, the diocese’s bishop, vocally opposed the Episcopal Church’s 2009 resolution to allow gay ordination, two priests and 12 lay Episcopalians brought charges against him for “abandoning the Episcopal Church and renouncing its rules.” In 2012, the diocese broke away from the national church after it attempted to remove Lawrence.

Image: Heather Thompson

Cathedral of St. Luke and St. Paul, Charleston

However, the ensuing legal fight was not over liberal or conservative theology, but over freedom, said Lawrence. “This has never been about exclusion,” he said. “Our churches, our diocese, are open to all. It’s about the freedom to practice and proclaim faith in Jesus Christ as it has been handed down to us.”

The lawsuit filed by the diocese requested that the court declare that TEC had no right to the diocese’s property or 36 parishes, many of which have been in the church tradition since the Revolutionary War era. In fact, the South Carolina diocese existed before the Episcopal Church and joined in its 1789 formation. The diocese left the national church briefly to affiliate with the Protestant Episcopal Church in the Confederate States of America during the Civil War, then rejoined in 1866.

“We are grateful that Judge Goodstein’s decision protects South Carolina churches from being added to the long list of properties that TEC seized then either abandoned or sold off,” said Jim Lewis, Canon to the Ordinary, in a DSC press release. “The decision protects our freedom to embrace the faith Anglicans have practiced for hundreds of years—and not the new theology being imposed on TEC’s dwindling membership.”

The Episcopal Church is expected to appeal the court decision, and the denomination’s South Carolina members are prepared for a “long legal process,” communications director Holly Behre told The State. The Wall Street Journal, Religion News Service, and The Post and Courier have also reported the ruling.

CT has examined whether legal victories by conservative breakaway churches are setting a precedent, and has noted the many hurdles facing the fractured Episcopal church.

6 February 2015 A.D. Pace-Setters: Anglican Protestantism (Part One)

6 February 2015 A.D. Pace-Setters: Anglican Protestantism (Part One)

Salter, Roger. “Pace-Setters of Anglican Protestantism: Part One.”  Virtueonline.org.  31 Jan 2015. http://virtueonline.org/pace-setters-anglican-protestantism-part-one.  Accessed 6 Feb 2015.

Pace-Setters of Anglican Protestantism: Part One

Pace-Setters of Anglican Protestantism: Part One

By Roger Salter
Special to Virtueonline
www.virtueonline.org
January 31, 2015

There will always be controversy as to the essential character of Anglicanism - Catholic, comprehensive, Calvinistic. One is aware that many folk of Reformational persuasion demur at the term "Calvinism", but anyone remotely aware of historical theology will know that Calvin was not the inventor of the doctrines he espoused, and especially predestination. Calvin was the pupil of Luther, Bucer, Zwingli and so many proponents of the doctrine prior to the Reformation. It is also to be noted that damaging calumny is often directed toward Calvin rather than credit inasmuch as the first biographies of some of the Reformers, including Calvin, were written by those who opposed them and slanted their views. As the saying goes, "Error is half way around the world before truth has its shoes on". The caustic censures cling to this day.

To ease offensiveness some would advocate the appellation "Augustinianism", but whatever brand is adopted the fact of unconditional election will always elicit opprobrium even if Calvinist monergistic convictions were to be designated "Calathumpian". It is the doctrine itself that is so strenuously opposed by "free-willers", and whatever the label it will soon become a slur. It is better to be open than opaque concerning vital Christian truths. Believers ought to be strong enough to admit and affirm their differences candidly, manfully, and live with their heartfelt convictions confidently. It is possible to relate charitably toward opponents without conceding to their principles. It can happen in an air of maturity and a climate of free speech. Differences in doctrine do not have to dictate a situation of "daggers drawn".

However, representatives of Anglicanism are notorious for blurring issues and consequently the movement generally is confused by resorting to an abundance of qualifications in order to minimize the sense of displeasure aroused in those likely to disagree. The thrusts of honest debate do not have to thwart mutual respect and robust expression.

By a stretched-out process Anglicanism has arrived at a position of beautifully balanced Augustinianism (pro-gospel and pre-destinarian) enshrined in the formularies of the 16th century. From a modern perspective this fascinating development defines Anglicanism as essentially Calvinistic, inherently pastoral, and staunchly Protestant. Bible, Confession, and liturgy combine to convey the wisest possible counsel for the believer's course through this world to the heavenly city. The summons to salvation, the security afforded by divine choices, and the certainty of everlasting life are reiterated over and over again to the mind and heart of the diligent Anglican disciple as he/she pores over Scripture and prays with the assistance of our devotional heritage.

Anglicanism equips the mind and cares for the soul in the harmonizing of truth and spiritual improvement. These trends travel in tandem. Head does not outpace heart and heart does not take leave of head. Edification and emotion are unified so that the life of faith is neither excessively academic nor dangerously idiosyncratic: not simply the accumulation of facts and ideas, or the weirdness produced of flights of fancy from eccentric impulse. Anglicanism teaches from the "mind of the church", and Anglicans are trained to pray with the church. Excessive individualism and rash opinion are curtailed by the daily cultivation of the communion of saints in conscious observance (common prayer). This is churchmanship in the best and most beneficial way. Such ecclesiology is a gap in much evangelical thought and practice where believers largely think in terms of being lone and independent entities.

The early centuries of the Christian Church in England do not evince a strong or consistent pattern of soteriological conviction concerning the nature and operation of grace. In this sphere perhaps the most notable voice from the Celtic Church was that of the "perverse" Pelagius (c383-409/10). It was not until the Latinization of Christianity in England that his influence was roundly refuted in a consistent, thorough, and successful way. It seems it was the renowned scholar Bede (c673-735) who first raised a banner for the doctrines of grace in Britain through his grasp of Scripture with the aid of Augustine of Hippo. Perhaps the Celtic era of Christian faith and witness in England is best summarized in the verdict of Merle d'Aubigne who stated, "Generally speaking we meet with nothing but the gospel in the earlier days of the British church. . . . They do not appear to have held the strict doctrine of St. Augustine: they believed indeed that man has need of an inward change, and that this the divine power alone can effect; but they seem to have conceded something to our natural strength in the work of conversion" (The Reformation in England, Volume One, page 29). It is probably fair to conclude that Celtic Christian leaders would be happy to concur with a position akin to semi-Pelagianism.

The great mind of Anselm of Canterbury championed the Pauline/Augustinian construction of the plan of salvation. He carefully distinguished between the voluntary faculty in man and the lack of liberty to choose against the ingrained bias of sin, quoting the Saviour himself as to the bondage of the fallen will: I tell you the truth, everyone who sins is a slave to sin (John 8:34). A successor to Anselm as Archbishop of Canterbury, Thomas Bradwardine (c1290-1349), was won to the Augustinian position through his close attention to Romans 9 and particularly the words, "I will have mercy on whom I have mercy . . . . It does not therefore depend on man's desire or effort, but on God's mercy" (verses 15-16). Bradwardine avers, "I came to see that the grace of God far preceded all good works both in time and in nature - by grace I mean the will of God" (De causa dei contra Pelagium). The good but short-lived Archbishop, dying within months of his enthronement, was certainly twinned with Augustine in the mind of Geoffrey Chaucer (1340-1400):

But whatever God foreknows must be,
According to the opinion of certain clerks.
Call to witness any perfect clerk
That in the schools there is great altercation
About this matter, and great disputing,
And has been among a hundred thousand men.
But I cannot sift it to the kernel,
As can the holy doctor Augustine,
Or Boetheus, or bishop Bradwardine,
Whether God's exalted foreknowledge
Compels me necessarily to do a thing
(By 'necessarily' I mean absolute necessity)
Or whether free choice is granted me
To do that same thing, or not do it,
Though God foreknew it before it was done;
Or if his knowing constrains not a bit
Except by way of conditional necessity.

The Nun's Priest's Tale (modern English) Canterbury Tales, Vincent F. Hopper,
Barron's Educational Series, Inc, New York, 1970.

Bradwardine set in train a mode of theological thought that came to full flower at the English Reformation. His great and earnest disciple was John Wycliffe (c1329 -1384) whose Augustinianism was preserved among many of the Lollards, Wycliffe's followers whose loyalty to his theological heritage was greater than often appreciated. It is well known that Wycliffe defined the church as the totality of the predestined, the invisible company of the elect.

The influence of medieval mysticism should not be underestimated as a force in the retention of Augustinianism in the English church. Mark Ellingsen notes, "Late medieval mysticism clearly made a significant positive contribution to the Reformation. Besides indirectly undermining the authority of catholic ecclesiology, mysticism aided in the recovery of Pauline- Augustinian emphases on sin, unconditional forgiveness, and the character of Christian life as a struggle" (Reclaiming our Roots, Vol. 2, Martin Luther to Martin Luther King, T&T Clark, Bloomsbury 1999, page 15). Two English mystics of a strong Augustinian type were Richard Rolle (c1295-1349) and Walter Hilton (d1396). Hilton demonstrates an affinity with Bernard of Clairvaux in his description of a will set free by divine love to embrace the Redeemer of God's chosen: "We do nothing at all but submit to him, and assent to him, for that is the most that we do: that we willingly assent to his gracious working in us. And yet that will is not from ourselves, but of his making, so that in my opinion he does in us all that is well done." (Book Two: 34). As with Aquinas, Bernard, and Rolle, Hilton speaks not of the free will of our nature in spiritual matters, but of the freed will of grace. This is the efficacious grace of Augustine, the Calvinists, and the admirable Jansenists. If there is any objection to the term "irresistible grace" one should ask oneself "Is the beauty of Christ to the believer, once it is displayed to the soul, resistible?" As a bee is freely but of necessity attracted to honey, so too, is the elect sinner drawn (Gk "dragged") to the loveliness of the Lord Jesus (John 6:44-45, 65).

Efficacious grace is misunderstood if it is perceived as duress brutally exerted upon the soul. Grace is irresistible in the sense that it operates with the compulsion of overwhelming love. It so inclines the enslaved will that it abandons base affections and desires the good and holy that is supremely manifested in Christ. Grace woos the sinner until it gains the assent of the sinner. It is the magic of divine virtue and power that subdues the natural resistance and enmity of the sinful self. It is the force of good overcoming the fatal dominion of evil within us. Grace restores our true liberty and elicits our positive response to the allurements of divine beauty. From the thrall of sin we find ourselves enthralled by God, the Three-in-One. John Donne extols the grace that batters its way into the obdurate and unyielding heart. John Newton revels in the divine affection that forced its sweet way into his life. The assent of the will in salvation could never be denied by Calvinists. It is the mark of God's conquest of the rebel heart consistent with the insight of St. Paul, "For it is God who works in you to will and to act according to his good purpose" (Philippians 2:13). God bends, as it were, the warped will back into shape and without that work of renovation the fallen will would never elect to return to God (Romans 8:5-8). The question of free will in theology principally concerns the spiritual incapacity of fallen man to make right choices as Martin Luther acknowledges, "I speak only of that which is good in divine things, and according to the Holy Scripture" (Table Talk CCLXI).

These comments catapult us to the career of John Colet (c1465 1519), humanist scholar, theologian, and Dean of St. Paul's, London. Colet delivered a series of lectures on Paul's Letter to the Romans with the intent of discovering what it was that Paul actually said. Author Frederic Seebohm in his study entitled The Oxford Reformers: John Colet, Erasmus, and Thomas More, alleges that Colet was not an Augustinian but, rather, a mystic. As is already apparent either category need not exclude the other, and with a proper understanding of the nature of the effectual call of divine grace it is not necessary to view Colet as anti-Augustinian. Whichever interpretation of Colet is ultimately correct, he can be seen as taking a precaution against an errant variety of crude determinism without the interaction of the divine will and the regenerate human will empowered to make choices that coincide with the will of God. In short, here is some of what Colet actually said when expounding Romans 9: "And when we speak of men as drawn, called, justified, and glorified by grace we mean nothing else than that men love in return God who loves them", and previous to this: "But here it is to be noted that this grace is nothing else than the love of God towards men - towards those i.e. whom he wills to love, and in loving, to inspire with his Holy Spirit; which itself is love and the love of God; which (as the Saviour said, according to St. John's gospel) "blows where it lists". . . Thus you see that things are brought about by a providing and directing God,and that they happen as He wills in the affairs of men, not from any force from without (illata) - since nothing is more remote from force than the Divine action - but by the natural desire and will of men, the Divine will and providence secretly and silently, and as it were, naturally accompanying (comitante) it, and go along with it so wonderfully, that whatever you do, and choose was known by God, and what God knew and decreed to be, of necessity comes to pass' (MS Gg fols 16 &18). All of this is in accord with a carefully crafted Augustinianism. The point is that Colet cleared the way to a rational reading of Scripture that facilitated Reformational understanding of the Bible.

The Rev. Roger Salter is an ordained Church of England minister where he had parishes in the dioceses of Bristol and Portsmouth before coming to Birmingham, Alabama to serve as Rector of St. Matthew's Anglican Church

6 February 2015 A.D. Winston Churchill: Quotations on Islam from Notable Non-Muslims

6 February 2015 A.D.  Winston Churchill: Quotations on Islam from Notable Non-Muslims

Besides Winston Churchill, there are 88 additional quotes from other leaders regarding Jihadi-Reprobates, see:  http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2014/08/25-august-2014-ad-quotations-on-islam_25.html

Winston Churchill

Sir Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill (1874 – 1965) was a British politician known chiefly for his leadership of the United Kingdom during World War II. He is widely regarded as one of the great wartime leaders, and was voted the greatest Briton of all time.^[135] 

How dreadful are the curses which Mohammedanism lays on its votaries! Besides the fanatical frenzy, which is as dangerous in a man as hydrophobia in a dog, there is this fearful fatalistic apathy. The effects are apparent in many countries. Improvident habits, slovenly systems of agriculture, sluggish methods of commerce, and insecurity of property exist wherever the followers of the Prophet rule or live. A degraded sensualism deprives this life of its grace and refinement; the next of its dignity and sanctity.

The fact that in Mohammedan law every woman must belong to some man as his absolute property, either as a child, a wife, or a concubine, must delay the final extinction of slavery until the faith of Islam has ceased to be a great power among men. Individual Moslems may show splendid qualities - but the influence of the religion paralyses the social development of those who follow it. No stronger retrograde force exists in the world. Far from being moribund, Mohammedanism is a militant and proselytizing faith. It has already spread throughout Central Africa, raising fearless warriors at every step; and were it not that Christianity is sheltered in the strong arms of science, the science against which it had vainly struggled, the civilisation of modern Europe might fall, as fell the civilisation of ancient Rome.^[136][137]

Fanaticism is not a cause of war. It is the means which helps savage peoples to fight. It is the spirit which enables them to combine--the great common object before which all personal or tribal disputes become insignificant. What the horn is to the rhinoceros, what the sting is to the wasp, the Mohammedan faith was to the Arabs of the Soudan--a faculty of offence or defence.^[138]

It is, thank heaven, difficult if not impossible for the modern European to fully appreciate the force which fanaticism exercises among an ignorant, warlike and Oriental population. Several generations have elapsed since the nations of the West have drawn the sword in religious controversy, and the evil memories of the gloomy past have soon faded in the strong, clear light of Rationalism and human sympathy. Indeed it is evident that Christianity, however degraded and distorted by cruelty and intolerance, must always exert a modifying influence on men's passions, and protect them from the more violent forms of fanatical fever, as we are protected from smallpox by vaccination. But the Mahommedan religion increases, instead of lessening, the fury of intolerance. It was originally propagated by the sword, and ever since, its votaries have been subject, above the people of all other creeds, to this form of madness. In a moment the fruits of patient toil, the prospects of material prosperity, the fear of death itself, are flung aside. The more emotional Pathans are powerless to resist. All rational considerations are forgotten. Seizing their weapons, they become Ghazis--as dangerous and as sensible as mad dogs: fit only to be treated as such. While the more generous spirits among the tribesmen become convulsed in an ecstasy of religious bloodthirstiness, poorer and more material souls derive additional impulses from the influence of others, the hopes of plunder and the joy of fighting. Thus whole nations are roused to arms. Thus the Turks repel their enemies, the Arabs of the Soudan break the British squares, and the rising on the Indian frontier spreads far and wide. In each case civilisation is confronted with militant Mahommedanism. The forces of progress clash with those of reaction. The religion of blood and war is face to face with that of peace. Luckily the religion of peace is usually the better armed.^[139][140]

AND NOW, for illustrative quotes on Islam from the son and grandson of Kenyan born Muslims, a world class and credentialed historian, and a man notable for his robust and unimpeachable honesty and integrity, Imam Barack Hussein Obama, see: 

http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2014/08/40-theological-quotes-from-barack.html

20 Quotes By Barack Obama About Islam and Mohammed

#1 “The future must not belong to those who slander the Prophet of Islam”

#2 “The sweetest sound I know is the Muslim call to prayer”

#3 “We will convey our deep appreciation for the Islamic faith, which has done so much over the centuries to shape the world — including in my own country.”

#4 “As a student of history, I also know civilization’s debt to Islam.”

#5 “Islam has a proud tradition of tolerance.”

#6 “Islam has always been part of America”

#7 “we will encourage more Americans to study in Muslim communities”

#8 “These rituals remind us of the principles that we hold in common, and Islam’s role in advancing justice, progress, tolerance, and the dignity of all human beings.”

#9 “America and Islam are not exclusive and need not be in competition. Instead, they overlap, and share common principles of justice and progress, tolerance and the dignity of all human beings.”

#10 “I made clear that America is not – and never will be – at war with Islam.”

#11 “Islam is not part of the problem in combating violent extremism – it is an important part of promoting peace.”

#12 “So I have known Islam on three continents before coming to the region where it was first revealed”

#13 “In ancient times and in our times, Muslim communities have been at the forefront of innovation and education.”

#14 “Throughout history, Islam has demonstrated through words and deeds the possibilities of religious tolerance and racial equality.”

#15 “Ramadan is a celebration of a faith known for great diversity and racial equality”

#16 “The Holy Koran tells us, ‘O mankind! We have created you male and a female; and we have made you into nations and tribes so that you may know one another.’”

#17 “I look forward to hosting an Iftar dinner celebrating Ramadan here at the White House later this week, and wish you a blessed month.”

#18 “We’ve seen those results in generations of Muslim immigrants – farmers and factory workers, helping to lay the railroads and build our cities, the Muslim innovators who helped build some of our highest skyscrapers and who helped unlock the secrets of our universe.”

#19 “That experience guides my conviction that partnership between America and Islam must be based on what Islam is, not what it isn’t. And I consider it part of my responsibility as president of the United States to fight against negative stereotypes of Islam wherever they appear.”

#20 “I also know that Islam has always been a part of America’s story.”

AND NOW, for more scholarly quotes from Imam Obama, see the URL.

http://reformationanglicanism.blogspot.com/2014/08/40-theological-quotes-from-barack.html

OR, beside Imam Obama’s insights above, a few Quranic verses that have insired many Islamo-fascists.

Qur'an 3:32—Say: Obey Allah and the Apostle; but if they turn back, then surely Allah does not love the unbelievers.

Qur'an 48:29—Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah, and those who are with him are severe against disbelievers, and merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and falling down prostrate (in prayer), seeking Bounty from Allah and (His) Good Pleasure. The mark of them (i.e. of their Faith) is on their faces (foreheads) from the traces of (their) prostration (during prayers). This is their description in the Taurat (Torah). But their description in the Injeel (Gospel) is like a (sown) seed which sends forth its shoot, then makes it strong, it then becomes thick, and it stands straight on its stem, delighting the sowers that He may enrage the disbelievers with them. Allah has promised those among them who believe (i.e. all those who follow Islamic Monotheism, the religion of Prophet Muhammad SAW till the Day of Resurrection) and do righteous good deeds, forgiveness and a mighty reward (i.e. Paradise).

Qur'an 4:24—Also (forbidden are) women already married, except those (captives and slaves) whom your right hands possess. Thus hath Allah ordained (Prohibitions) against you: Except for these, all others are lawful, provided ye seek (them in marriage) with gifts from your property—desiring chastity, not lust, seeing that ye derive benefit from them, give them their dowers (at least) as prescribed; but if, after a dower is prescribed, agree mutually (to vary it), there is no blame on you, and Allah is All-knowing, All-wise.

Qur'an 5:33—The punishment of those who wage war against Allah and His apostle and strive to make mischief in the land is only this, that they should be murdered or crucified or their hands and their feet should be cut off on opposite sides or they should be imprisoned; this shall be as a disgrace for them in this world, and in the hereafter they shall have a grievous chastisement.

Qur'an 9:5—Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due, then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful.

Qur'an 9:29—Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day [notice it says "fight those who do not believe," not "fight people who are attacking you"], nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the Religion of Truth, from among the People of the Book [the people of the book are Jews and Christians], until they pay the Jizyah with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued.

Qur'an 9:73—O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites and be unyielding to them; and their abode is hell, and evil is the destination.

Qur'an 9:111—Surely Allah has bought of the believers their persons and their property for this, that they shall have the garden; they fight in Allah's way, so they slay and are slain; a promise which is binding on Him in the Taurat and the Injeel and the Quran; and who is more faithful to his covenant than Allah? Rejoice therefore in the pledge which you have made; and that is the mighty achievement.

Qur'an 47:35—Be not weary and fainthearted, crying for peace, when ye should be uppermost: for Allah is with you, and will never put you in loss for your (good) deeds. 

Qur'an 2:106—Whatever communications We abrogate or cause to be forgotten, We bring one better than it or like it. Do you not know that Allah has power over all things?

From the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, the Collect for Good Friday:

O MERCIFUL God, who hast made all men, and hatest nothing that thou hast made, nor wouldest the death of a sinner, but rather that he should be converted and live; Have mercy upon all Jews, Turks, Infidels, and Hereticks, and take from them all ignorance, hardness of heart, and contempt of thy Word; and so fetch them home, blessed Lord, to thy flock, that they may be saved among the remnant of the true Israelites, and be made one fold under one shepherd, Jesus Christ our Lord, who liveth and reigneth with thee and the Holy Spirit, one God, world without end. Amen.