tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post1313618811355550362..comments2024-02-15T03:32:25.686-05:00Comments on Preludium, Anglican and Episcopal futures: Church of NIgeria on Primates, CANA and GaysMark Harrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06871096746243771489noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-29006707496224400922007-06-02T21:14:00.000-04:002007-06-02T21:14:00.000-04:00Scotist,I think you will find that martyn Minns ha...Scotist,<BR/>I think you will find that martyn Minns had been consecrated a missionary Bishop Before the Tanzanian talksAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-20003394600907102462007-06-01T00:48:00.000-04:002007-06-01T00:48:00.000-04:00What is wrong with establishing a Diocese in the g...What is wrong with establishing a Diocese in the good old US of A?<BR/><BR/>In this day and age don't we need a little more Jesus in this country?<BR/><BR/>What is wrong with spreading the gospel? The Episcopal church has not been doing a very good job of it, growing at a rate of -3% a year.<BR/><BR/>Why is CANA a threat to anyone? You think the people in these congregations would have just stayed in The Episcopal Church forever? Whatever dude. They would have gone somewhere.<BR/><BR/>Why aren't you happy for CANA Mark? They are creating more Christians, the same religion you profess! New brothers and sisters in Christ! Rejoice brother Harris!<BR/><BR/>For crying out loud Mark, you act like these people are killing puppies and peeing in your pool. All they are doing is doing church.<BR/><BR/>Peace, brother Mark! CANA will not hurt you. Now stop crying about it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-55273925563984562672007-05-31T12:36:00.000-04:002007-05-31T12:36:00.000-04:00Mark, I think you should come back to pointing out...Mark, <BR/><BR/>I think you should come back to pointing out no consultation has ever taken place between the Nigerian and Episcopal Churches. <BR/><BR/>Dan is simply wrong to imply Nigeria ever sat down with TEC's leaders and said "If TEC doesn't do X, we will establish a diocese on your turf over your objections." <BR/><BR/>The fact that Nigeria supported the realigment effort and intended to establish a diocese in America has only recently come to light--and was in no way implied even at Tanzania.The Anglican Scotisthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09715779952262032127noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-29320187980152527162007-05-31T11:57:00.000-04:002007-05-31T11:57:00.000-04:00(Don)The issue was discussed in the WR and at late...(Don)<BR/>The issue was discussed in the WR and at later primates' meetings. Although the concensus frowned upon border crossings, Nigeria, Rwanda, Uganda, Southeast Asia, etc., have made it very clear that absent change in TEC (real Alternate Ovesight, not phony DEPO; cessation of blessing of SSU, etc.), the crossings would not cease. You (and others) have complained about it for several years. The former PB and the present one have addressed the issue with the "invaders" and with the rest of the Communion. Since unilateral action is the name of the game (don't nobody tell me what my province can and can't do), that is all the consulation and approval needed.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-82882384755126060722007-05-31T11:41:00.000-04:002007-05-31T11:41:00.000-04:00Well Dan, you certainly are right - good for the g...Well Dan, you certainly are right - good for the goose good for the gander. The thing is we may have consulted, argued, muttered, etc badly about the actions of TEC, but the argument was out there, alive and in motion.<BR/><BR/>When was there a conversation that said, "Unless you change we are going to establish a diocese in the US?"<BR/><BR/>Granted there were clear signals that the CofN was not about to let TEC simply walk on as if nothing had happened. But that is a far cry from what the CofN has done.<BR/><BR/>Meanwhile, I agree consultation does not mean agreeing. Perhaps it means serious conversations about a particular topic. However, for the CofN to have a missionary diocese in another province can be done with consent, but it was not done with consent here. The point is without that consent it is simply and clearly schismatic. <BR/><BR/>And for that matter where have we had the conversation about a missionary diocese being formed by the CofN in the US before? <BR/><BR/>As to the AC implementing proposals without any approval from within TEC, no one - even the CofN - is going to put up with that in the long run.Mark Harrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06871096746243771489noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-48565063566835564802007-05-31T10:25:00.000-04:002007-05-31T10:25:00.000-04:00(Dan)I take issue with the statement you make that...(Dan)<BR/>I take issue with the statement you make that "Therefore the Church of Nigeria without any consultation with The Episcopal Church has established a diocese in the US." The CofN has consulted with TEC since 2003 about the consequences of TEC's actions. CANA arrived rather late on the scene and only in response to TEC standing firm in its dealing with a tear in the fabric of the Communion. I have heard many in TEC proclaim that it has consulted widely with the rest of the AC about its understanding of human sexuality and Scriptural morality. Consulting does not imply agreement. So what is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. The CofN has "consulted" extensibvely with TEC. It has expanded the role of CANA out of a deep sense of Gospel imperative and only because its efforts at consulting have not produced the desired result. It has offered to either give up CANA if TEC repents or turn it over to the AC if and when the AC implements Tanzania's proposals regarding alternate primatial oversight for diocese and parishes in the US. Enough cosultation? I would say so even if you now claim consulting requires the consent of TEC.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com