Just an hour ago I wrote, "If this is indeed the appointed working group fine. If this group is somehow a second group, well, less fine." I was referring to the Stephen Bates list of people trying to put together a compromise. It turns out this is not the official drafting committee.
The drafting committee made its first report at about 12:45 PM. None of the people on the Bates list were on this list. Matt Kennedy at Stand Firm has a rough list of those bishops - with some errors corrected later.
So either Bates is wrong or there is both an official drafting committee and a second group whose proposals will come out in one way or another.
9/24/2007
2 comments:
OK... Comments, gripes, etc welcomed, but with some cautions and one rule:
Cautions: Calling people fools, idiots, etc, will be reason to bounce your comment. Keeping in mind that in the struggles it is difficult enough to try to respect opponents, we should at least try.
Rule: PLEASE DO NOT SIGN OFF AS ANONYMOUS: BEGIN OR END THE MESSAGE WITH A NAME - ANY NAME. ANONYMOUS commentary will be cut.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's hard to believe that Bates would be so wrong. Further, the draft statement, to me, is barely responsive to the Primates DES communique - which feels like a disconnect with the ABC's visit.There's also supposed to be a minority report. Maybe it's not until the minority report draft is made public that the Bates compromise will be offered.
ReplyDeleteI wonder if the "Healy" on M Kennedy's list should be +Ely of Vermont?
ReplyDelete