PCUSA backs Episcopal Bishop Mariann Budde who rebuked Trump in sermon

[RileyG]

The Bishop herself asked how it could not be political in her many interviews. When will she start dressing down her party for all the wrongs they have committed? She won’t because she agrees with ideology.

Bishop’s Sermon Ignites Web Debates - The Living Church

Bishop Mariann Budde: “I wanted to emphasize respect, honor, and dignity of every human being. Unity requires mercy and compassion. Many people are really scared.”

livingchurch.org

The Episcopal Church (nowadays) is definitely progressively liberal. I'm not surprised by her statements.

 

[seeking.IAM]

The Episcopal Church (nowadays) is definitely progressively liberal. I'm not surprised by her statements.

Mercy is not about liberal or progressive, but about Jesus.

 

[RileyG]

Mercy is not about liberal or progressive, but about Jesus.

I agree.

But, it's HOW she directed him. Her statements can be interpreted differently by different people.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Speaking truth to power is time-honored. Jesus spoke truth to Pilate. Thomas More to Henry XIII. Both were executed.
Bishop Budde, you are the face of Jesus protecting the poor and defenseless against a callous leader. I join PCUSA in thanking you.

Calculating which is more time-honored --'speaking truth to power', or 'symbolism over substance'?

 

[Fantine]

The truth is always substantive.

I love the Psalms. Here is Psalm 15 set to music. I love the way the accompaniment mirrors the steadfastness and determination of the truth tellers.

 

[Mark Quayle]

I agree.

But, it's HOW she directed him. Her statements can be interpreted differently by different people.

The fact that some take her statements as important, at the cost of, for example, the many many crimes of those that ICE is actually removing, should tell us something.

Further, those who illegally enter the country, or commit other crimes, whether migrant in nature or not, SHOULD be afraid concerning their future here. Worse, I hate that those who encouraged the millions who came across illegally, at the cost the liberals go out of their way to ignore, child sex, human trafficking, drugs, fentanyl, violent gangs, criminals turned loose repeatedly by liberal policy, illegal voting, organized and disorganized crime, jobs taken, taxpayer money supporting illegal immigrants who are not an asset to the US, and on and on and on.

I personally met a not-so-very-young-anymore Venezuelan man, (and he is far from the only one in similar circumstances): legally come to the US, sponsored by capable American friends, a solid man who has held the same job about 4 years now; who has not seen his children or wife in as many years, except in video calls, because the State Department has consigned their immigration to the Green Card lottery system. He sends his earnings to his family still in Venezuela --they have no other source of income-- and he can't get ahead in life as a result. He may never see them again, though the same State Department had no intention of stemming the flow of illegals coming across the southern border. Really??? We are going to cry because the liberal representation of the facts, full of guilt-throwing and theoretical weeping, is emotional, and opposes the conservatives??

If the tear-jerking talking-points of that liberal bishop had any substance, she would have been honest about the proportion of immoral policy going on here, not to mention the illegality and immorality of the liberal policies concerning the attempted absorption of millions unvetted and unopposed.

There was a time, when a major concern in the matter of immigration, was whether or not the "immigrant" intended the USA harm. Now, some (many) who we already KNOW intend the USA harm, are welcomed in by liberal policy, by those who swore to uphold the constitution and to prosecute the law and defend our borders, all in the name of mercy and love, and are even turned loose upon conviction of heinous crimes, to do it again, and again. It's time for a some common sense, for a change.

How can she begin to compare the fear and hypothetical suffering of the illegal migrants that is actually a result of liberal policies --don't blame this on Trump, when he is only trying to reverse the madness-- with the suffering of the 350,000 missing unaccompanied minors, and the victims of the criminals who were invited here?


I'm very much into mercy and kindness. But what the liberals in this country espouse is not mercy and kindness, no matter how heartfelt the delivery of their 'symbolism over substance'.

 

[RileyG]

The fact that some take her statements as important, at the cost of, for example, the many many crimes of those that ICE is actually removing, should tell us something.

Further, those who illegally enter the country, or commit other crimes, whether migrant in nature or not, SHOULD be afraid concerning their future here. Worse, I hate that those who encouraged the millions who came across illegally, at the cost the liberals go out of their way to ignore, child sex, human trafficking, drugs, fentanyl, violent gangs, criminals turned loose repeatedly by liberal policy, illegal voting, organized and disorganized crime, jobs taken, taxpayer money supporting illegal immigrants who are not an asset to the US, and on and on and on.

I personally met a not-so-very-young-anymore Venezuelan man, (and he is far from the only one in similar circumstances): legally come to the US, sponsored by capable American friends, a solid man who has held the same job about 4 years now; who has not seen his children or wife in as many years, except in video calls, because the State Department has consigned their immigration to the Green Card lottery system. He sends his earnings to his family still in Venezuela --they have no other source of income-- and he can't get ahead in life as a result. He may never see them again, though the same State Department had no intention of stemming the flow of illegals coming across the southern border. Really??? We are going to cry because the liberal representation of the facts, full of guilt-throwing and theoretical weeping, is emotional, and opposes the conservatives??

If the tear-jerking talking-points of that liberal bishop had any substance, she would have been honest about the proportion of immoral policy going on here, not to mention the illegality and immorality of the liberal policies concerning the attempted absorption of millions unvetted and unopposed.

There was a time, when a major concern in the matter of immigration, was whether or not the "immigrant" intended the USA harm. Now, some (many) who we already KNOW intend the USA harm, are welcomed in by liberal policy, by those who swore to uphold the constitution and to prosecute the law and defend our borders, all in the name of mercy and love, and are even turned loose upon conviction of heinous crimes, to do it again, and again. It's time for a some common sense, for a change.

How can she begin to compare the fear and hypothetical suffering of the illegal migrants that is actually a result of liberal policies --don't blame this on Trump, when he is only trying to reverse the madness-- with the suffering of the 350,000 missing unaccompanied minors, and the victims of the criminals who were invited here?


I'm very much into mercy and kindness. But what the liberals in this country espouse is not mercy and kindness, no matter how heartfelt the delivery of their 'symbolism over substance'.

Very well said.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

I agree.

But, it's HOW she directed him. Her statements can be interpreted differently by different people.

Let's set aside for a moment whether the sermon is progressive or conservative. Over the last decade, conservatives have often labeled the left and Democrats as “woke,” accusing liberals of intolerance towards differing opinions. I agree with many of these accusations from conservatives. There are universities where conservative speakers are not permitted to speak. In some institutions, conservative students who express their opinions are ostracized by their peers.

Don't you think conservatives are now exhibiting similar behavior towards this priest?

Some Conservatives are doing exactly what they accuse liberals of doing—wokeism.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

The fact that some take her statements as important, at the cost of, for example, the many many crimes of those that ICE is actually removing, should tell us something.

Further, those who illegally enter the country, or commit other crimes, whether migrant in nature or not, SHOULD be afraid concerning their future here. Worse, I hate that those who encouraged the millions who came across illegally, at the cost the liberals go out of their way to ignore, child sex, human trafficking, drugs, fentanyl, violent gangs, criminals turned loose repeatedly by liberal policy, illegal voting, organized and disorganized crime, jobs taken, taxpayer money supporting illegal immigrants who are not an asset to the US, and on and on and on.

I personally met a not-so-very-young-anymore Venezuelan man, (and he is far from the only one in similar circumstances): legally come to the US, sponsored by capable American friends, a solid man who has held the same job about 4 years now; who has not seen his children or wife in as many years, except in video calls, because the State Department has consigned their immigration to the Green Card lottery system. He sends his earnings to his family still in Venezuela --they have no other source of income-- and he can't get ahead in life as a result. He may never see them again, though the same State Department had no intention of stemming the flow of illegals coming across the southern border. Really??? We are going to cry because the liberal representation of the facts, full of guilt-throwing and theoretical weeping, is emotional, and opposes the conservatives??

If the tear-jerking talking-points of that liberal bishop had any substance, she would have been honest about the proportion of immoral policy going on here, not to mention the illegality and immorality of the liberal policies concerning the attempted absorption of millions unvetted and unopposed.

There was a time, when a major concern in the matter of immigration, was whether or not the "immigrant" intended the USA harm. Now, some (many) who we already KNOW intend the USA harm, are welcomed in by liberal policy, by those who swore to uphold the constitution and to prosecute the law and defend our borders, all in the name of mercy and love, and are even turned loose upon conviction of heinous crimes, to do it again, and again. It's time for a some common sense, for a change.

How can she begin to compare the fear and hypothetical suffering of the illegal migrants that is actually a result of liberal policies --don't blame this on Trump, when he is only trying to reverse the madness-- with the suffering of the 350,000 missing unaccompanied minors, and the victims of the criminals who were invited here?


I'm very much into mercy and kindness. But what the liberals in this country espouse is not mercy and kindness, no matter how heartfelt the delivery of their 'symbolism over substance'.

I don't agree with anything you've said in this post, but you have the right to express your opinion. No one should ostracize you for it. Some liberals at universities do ostracize opinions they dislike, but any American who values freedom must not do the same.

Conservatives who value Freedom of Speech and Religious Liberty should also recognize Bishop Bidda's right to free speech and her religious liberty to preach at a church in the manner she chooses.

 

[okay]

The fact that some take her statements as important, at the cost of, for example, the many many crimes of those that ICE is actually removing, should tell us something.

Further, those who illegally enter the country, or commit other crimes, whether migrant in nature or not, SHOULD be afraid concerning their future here. Worse, I hate that those who encouraged the millions who came across illegally, at the cost the liberals go out of their way to ignore, child sex, human trafficking, drugs, fentanyl, violent gangs, criminals turned loose repeatedly by liberal policy, illegal voting, organized and disorganized crime, jobs taken, taxpayer money supporting illegal immigrants who are not an asset to the US, and on and on and on.

I personally met a not-so-very-young-anymore Venezuelan man, (and he is far from the only one in similar circumstances): legally come to the US, sponsored by capable American friends, a solid man who has held the same job about 4 years now; who has not seen his children or wife in as many years, except in video calls, because the State Department has consigned their immigration to the Green Card lottery system. He sends his earnings to his family still in Venezuela --they have no other source of income-- and he can't get ahead in life as a result. He may never see them again, though the same State Department had no intention of stemming the flow of illegals coming across the southern border. Really??? We are going to cry because the liberal representation of the facts, full of guilt-throwing and theoretical weeping, is emotional, and opposes the conservatives??

If the tear-jerking talking-points of that liberal bishop had any substance, she would have been honest about the proportion of immoral policy going on here, not to mention the illegality and immorality of the liberal policies concerning the attempted absorption of millions unvetted and unopposed.

There was a time, when a major concern in the matter of immigration, was whether or not the "immigrant" intended the USA harm. Now, some (many) who we already KNOW intend the USA harm, are welcomed in by liberal policy, by those who swore to uphold the constitution and to prosecute the law and defend our borders, all in the name of mercy and love, and are even turned loose upon conviction of heinous crimes, to do it again, and again. It's time for a some common sense, for a change.

How can she begin to compare the fear and hypothetical suffering of the illegal migrants that is actually a result of liberal policies --don't blame this on Trump, when he is only trying to reverse the madness-- with the suffering of the 350,000 missing unaccompanied minors, and the victims of the criminals who were invited here?


I'm very much into mercy and kindness. But what the liberals in this country espouse is not mercy and kindness, no matter how heartfelt the delivery of their 'symbolism over substance'.

I think I understand what you are saying. But I also wonder if you are perhaps placing words in her mouth to some extent.

She did not attempt to specify what being merciful looks like when dealing with our obviously broken immigration system. She just asked the president to include mercy in the decision making. And then there is ambiguity around the word ‘mercy’; it can mean withholding punishment, but it can also mean compassionate treatment of those in distress even if they are still to face consequences for their actions.

Here are a few ways I think we could be more merciful that I suspect most of us would agree with

- not lose track of large numbers of accompanied minors
- not use family separation at the border, which essentially was a strategy of being as unmerciful as possible in the hopes that it would act as a deterrent.
- learn from our history, and not repeat some of the unmerciful wrongs that were committed under ‘operation wetback’ in the 1950s.
- ensure any temporary holding facilities are clean, humane, keep families together, etc

 

[Truth7t7]

I agree with you 100%. I am a fundamental Baptist who does not believe that the Bible approves of female pastors. (See my post #7).

Is the objection against Bishop Budda about her gender or her message? If it's about her gender, why wasn't there an objection before she gave the sermon? She likely wasn't a last-minute addition to the program. President Trump's team knew who would speak at the service.

If gender is the issue, why do conservatives not speak out against Pastor Paula White, who is President Trump's spiritual advisor and a strong supporter?

President Trump doesn't set the biblical standards in America, God's word does

Women can't be a Bishop/Pastor according to scripture it's that simple, perhaps Donald J. Trump will rethink his mistake in having a woman pretending as if she's a Bishop/Pastor

Jesus Is The Lord

 

[Truth7t7]

I don't agree with anything you've said in this post, but you have the right to express your opinion. No one should ostracize you for it. Some liberals at universities do ostracize opinions they dislike, but any American who values freedom must not do the same.

Conservatives who value Freedom of Speech and Religious Liberty should also recognize Bishop Bidda's right to free speech and her religious liberty to preach at a church in the manner she chooses.

Marianne Budde is a liberal activist dressed up in a religious costume, nobody is stating she doesn't have a right to freedom of speech

Donald J. Trump made a mistake in having her in his program, hopefully he has learned

 

[okay]

Truly the church this woman represents, other than as a "charity shakedown organization" has little to recommend it.

As a practicing Episcopalian I find your characterization of our church to be offensive.

 

[Truth7t7]

As a practicing Episcopalian I find your characterization of our church to be offensive.

I find it offensive when a woman is called a Bishop/Pastor that has no biblical authority to be there, while pretending to be a leader in God's Church

Women can't be Bishops/Pastors, it's contrary to biblical teaching, it's that simple

1 Timothy 3:1-2KJV
1 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

 

[okay]

I find it offensive when a woman is called a Bishop/Pastor that has no biblical authority to be there, while pretending to be a leader in God's Church

Women can't be Bishops/Pastors, it's contrary to biblical teaching, it's that simple

1 Timothy 3:1-2KJV
1 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work.
2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach;

I am happy to agree to disagree about women clergy, and there are entire threads on that. But you are changing the subject here. I was responding to

Truly the church this woman represents, other than as a "charity shakedown organization" has little to recommend it.

Calling our church a “charity shakedown organization” denies the work that God is doing through the Episcopal church. I have a family member who used to be an atheist, and the Episcopal church was instrumental in her finding a life-giving relationship with God. Does that sound like a shakedown?

Is our church perfect? Of course not. No church is.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Marianne Budde is a liberal activist dressed up in a religious costume, nobody is stating she doesn't have a right to freedom of speech

Donald J. Trump made a mistake in having her in his program, hopefully he has learned

I am not sure what is meant by "liberal activism." She advocated for showing mercy. If that is considered liberal activism, then the entire Sermon on the Mount and every word spoken by Jesus would be classified as liberal activism.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Do you believe Jesus meant for Herrod to collect the last mite from the widow at sword point to buy provisions for the Romans?
Is that your definition of Christian Charity?

Or is this the definition of Christian?
A man taking money from an old widow to buy a condom for his friends.
And bragging about his sexual practice and the need for that condom

And that gospel being preached from the pulpit?
Truly the church this woman represents, other than as a "charity shakedown organization" has little to recommend it.

Jesus taught us to feed the hungry, give water to the thirsty, shelter strangers, clothe the needy, care for the sick, and visit prisoners. Help widows and ensure justice for the weak and fatherless.

I am sorry you find all these liberal activism.

 

[Mark Quayle]

Don't you think conservatives are now exhibiting similar behavior towards this priest?

Of course. Nevertheless, they are right. Conservatism isn't the one claiming to be tolerant of all views.

Some Conservatives are doing exactly what they accuse liberals of doing—wokeism.

Well, no. "Woke" is a word Liberalism canned, to describe a new attitude toward 'inclusivism' and a few other such terms that supposedly mean only what liberalism means by them.

Second, what conservatives are after is to set right the effects of the leftists' attempts to re-orient, if not ruin, this country, and to make the notion of 'freedom' mean 'lawless' in the attitudes of the liberal-trained (read, 'brainwashed') public.

I just heard that in one year there were 100,000 American deaths from Fentanyl that came across the border as a result of liberal policies. But Bishop Budde wants us to focus on the fears of lawbreakers concerning their status here, because Trump is not kind???

 

[Mark Quayle]

I think I understand what you are saying. But I also wonder if you are perhaps placing words in her mouth to some extent.

She did not attempt to specify what being merciful looks like when dealing with our obviously broken immigration system. She just asked the president to include mercy in the decision making. And then there is ambiguity around the word ‘mercy’; it can mean withholding punishment, but it can also mean compassionate treatment of those in distress even if they are still to face consequences for their actions.

Here are a few ways I think we could be more merciful that I suspect most of us would agree with

- not lose track of large numbers of accompanied minors
- not use family separation at the border, which essentially was a strategy of being as unmerciful as possible in the hopes that it would act as a deterrent.
- learn from our history, and not repeat some of the unmerciful wrongs that were committed under ‘operation wetback’ in the 1950s.
- ensure any temporary holding facilities are clean, humane, keep families together, etc

Are those things she suggested, and is there evidence those things are not already being done?

What evidence do you have that the separation of families was intentionally meant as a deterrent?

I was born and raised in South America. I'm more than aware of the nature of 'law' there, where what is enforced is what actually constitutes law, and not what is written --in fact, even what is not written, but is enforced differently day by day, capriciously, is still considered law. Even those aware that it is in name illegal to enter the United States 'on the sly', see nothing wrong with it, if the government here clearly wants them to come across. (Roughly analogous, if nobody gets ticketed for driving 90mph in a 55 zone, people will speed.)

What needs done here, once the dust settles, is a consistent enforcing of the written law concerning immigration. THIS is what the liberal 'public servants' who ignored or even actively worked contrary to constitutional law refused to do, though they had, upon taking office, sworn to defend the constitution and enforce the law.

 

[FAITH-IN-HIM]

Of course. Nevertheless, they are right. Conservatism isn't the one claiming to be tolerant of all views.

Well, no. "Woke" is a word Liberalism canned, to describe a new attitude toward 'inclusivism' and a few other such terms that supposedly mean only what liberalism means by them.

Second, what conservatives are after is to set right the effects of the leftists' attempts to re-orient, if not ruin, this country, and to make the notion of 'freedom' mean 'lawless' in the attitudes of the liberal-trained (read, 'brainwashed') public.

I just heard that in one year there were 100,000 American deaths from Fentanyl that came across the border as a result of liberal policies. But Bishop Budde wants us to focus on the fears of lawbreakers concerning their status here, because Trump is not kind???

Are you saying conservatives don't believe in freedom of speech?