Hooker and the Three "Legs" of Anglicanism

All right; the first Theological Question for the blog. Thomas Hooker had a three-pronged approach to Anglicanism which I think is VERY good. It is stated as such below:

1) Scripture- The most important. This part should never be abandoned.

2) Tradition- Traditions that have been handed down from generation to generation. Also very important.

3) Reason- As I see it, the second most important.

The reason I mention this is that TEC has essentially abandoned all three. Scripture has been abandoned. Read Lev. 18:22, for instance. TEC has gone as far as to ordain a non-celibate homosexual bishop. Technically, homosexuals should not even be in leadership positions in churches. People in TEC now are saying, "God is doing a new thing," Well, from what I know of scripture, God is the same yesterday, today, and forever. HE NEVER CHANGES. His Word never changes, so doing a new thing in this case would be against His nature.
Tradition has been abandoned. After hearing that there was no confession of sin at the GC '06 Eucharist, that goes to show that Tradition has been abandoned. Man has a fallen nature; he needs to confess his sin to keep his relationship with the Creator. TEC shows that they don't need to confess their sins, and that they are higher than God. At least at GC '06.
Reason has definitely been abandoned. Anybody that has the Spirit of God within them would not commit the heresies that are being committed by TEC. The PR nightmare that the PB has right now is beyond reason. Had the people who voted her in known that she was going to say what she said, that might have voted for someone else. Her theology is not Episcopal or Anglican; an individual can tell what her theology is just from reading her interviews.

All in all, it is easy to see the three legs of Anglicanism have been abandoned. Any opinions?

Erik

The new ++PB, and her views on Church Growth

I had read an article from somewhere(don't have the link right now), that ++Katharine didn't think church growth was all that important. What she thinks is important is the "Millenium Goals" that include eradicating hunger, education for all youngsters(believe me, these are all noble and good), etc., etc. What we are not seeing is that if the leader of a denomination is not concerned about church growth, then how is the church to flourish?

Erik

Welcome!

Welcome, all! My name is Erik Cowand, and I am new at this blogging business. I have been a lurker on other blogs, and have felt that I needed a voice of my own, and for other orthodox Anglicans/Episcopalians(I don't like that name Episcopalians anymore; TEC does not represent my views, and it is difficult to see having a Presiding Bishop that does not believe in Orthodox doctrine.). Anyway, I digress! Let me tell you about myself. I am a Bacculaureate Theology student at the University of St. Thomas here in Houston, TX. My wife and I live in Spring, TX, which is about 15 or 20 miles north of Houston. We have a canine child named Eddie, whom is a spoiled brat!!! :-) I will be bringing up current issues of the church, theology questions, prayer requests, and other general questions and comments. Anyway, enjoy, and let's keep it nice!

Erik