tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post3624284978566950798..comments2024-02-15T03:32:25.686-05:00Comments on Preludium, Anglican and Episcopal futures: Is now "the zenith of TEC's influence on the life of the Communion?"Mark Harrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06871096746243771489noreply@blogger.comBlogger110125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-13086532538705606832011-02-06T16:47:22.879-05:002011-02-06T16:47:22.879-05:00Hi David,
Future historians may also determine th...Hi David,<br /><br />Future historians may also determine that nothing is to be lamented about change to the Communion; that sticking to one's guns about specific commitments to live out baptismal covenants etc is more fruitful for the gospel and the kingdom. Your view, in short, may be lauded in the future. I accept that is a reasonable possibility to consider.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-78168798227010921062011-02-06T01:59:25.623-05:002011-02-06T01:59:25.623-05:00Perhaps it is important to examine Peter where one...Perhaps it is important to examine Peter where ones primary loyalty or responsibility to interdependence lies.<br /><br />You obviously desire that it is to the entire 38 provinces of the AC. But there are those of us who desire our provinces primary interdependence to be towards the national societies and cultures where they are called to minister. Our provinces have made a commitment to the GLBT folks in their midst based on the fact of our baptismal covenant and that we are Christians living holy lives, so they are no longer willing to sacrifice us to the wishes of certain personalities among the other provinces of the AC.<br /><br />You want our provinces to throw us under the bus for a false sense of primary loyalty to the AC. And when they are unwilling to do so, then those who demand to be considered before us throw tantrums and folks like you turn into Chicken Littles.<br /><br />The only difference that I see in the AC today, different from the AC of yesterday is that the primates are rediscovering the true purpose of what the Primates Meeting is about. In the words of ++Canada, "We recalled the fact that [the 101st ABC] Donald Coggan, 20 years ago, envisioned the primates’ meeting as a place “for leisurely thought, prayer, and deep consultation.” And then [ABC] Rowan Williams gave a history of the last 10 years of the primates’ meeting…What happened was there was a call in the communion for enhanced responsibility on the part of the primates… the primates were assuming an authority [that] as a group was never intended...The last few primates’ meetings have just been dominated by that issue [of human sexuality], [the] actions of certain provinces and the reactions of other provinces to those actions, people not going to the Eucharist. None of that happened, everybody participated fully in every aspect of the meeting…People were together at the Eucharist, they were together at tea, they were together at plenary, they were together for prayer, for meals. There was a real sense of community there… The blessing of same-sex unions was just not a big ticket item, not a topic of discussion at this meeting. Not only was it not a big ticket item but nobody was saying, “When are we going to get to this issue?” which was quite profound.<br /><br />For many of us the sky is not falling Peter.Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-25441990658037380722011-02-06T00:32:17.849-05:002011-02-06T00:32:17.849-05:00In the end, Marshall, it may be up to future histo...In the end, Marshall, it may be up to future historians to try to assess who contributed what to which part of the evolution of the Communion in the last decade.<br /><br />Right now the Communion looks like a body of autonomous, independent Anglican churches who have buried the notion of inter-dependence being a characteristic of the Communion. I am guessing that those historians might see that as a position influenced by the Western Anglican churches, if not one or two of them in particular.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-46161384957269493172011-02-05T08:51:52.363-05:002011-02-05T08:51:52.363-05:00"...you are a Person of the Lie. Say what you..."...you are a Person of the Lie. Say what you want, rail, snark. I have no more to do with you. I consign you to your own darkness and hate, and you are as nothing to me."<br /><br />May Christ's grace and peace be yours this day! Let us bless the LORD.<br /><br />Sam F.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-61717410448518220902011-02-05T01:55:02.828-05:002011-02-05T01:55:02.828-05:00Hmm. Peter, I guess we'll have to agree to di...Hmm. Peter, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree on this. We exercised membership, and attended when invited. I don't know that it indicates that we're influential as much as it indicates we're hard to influence. Well, that's true, as far as it goes; and entirely human. One could argue that it's consonant with Anglicanism. After all, many in the Global South seem to fear being influenced by us, and are proud that they're hard to influence.<br /><br />I wasn't so much arguing with you about "new revelation;" although I don't think of it as such. I think of it as incorporating new information from the medical and social sciences, just as we now assume issues of mental health before we determine spiritual possession. (Patience, siblings: I'm not suggesting that GLBT folks are mentally ill; but that the information that has helped us see that GLBT are "just folks" comes from the same reasoned experience - medical and social sciences - that helped us recognize that the mentally ill are sick, and not oppressed by demons.)<br /><br />It is this capacity to incorporate this new information - reflective of good Anglican sacramental theology - and not "new revelation" that we offer. After all, there is nothing new about the thought that Christ came to reconcile humans to God; but our understanding about what it means to be human has changed in a number of ways in the last few centuries. By the same token, I speak of experience as consonant in many places, places that are aware of the new learnings (again, not revelations) and have sought to make them meaningful in light of the faith.<br /><br />So, when we were invited, we attended. Should the Archbishop have not invited us? Perhaps; but he did. Should we have declined to attend, being invited? I agree that some feel that way; but we've been hard to influence. <br /><br />Does Canterbury continue to invite us because we're influential, or because he continues to believe there is room for diversity in the Communion, even in this? As near as I can tell, he's tried to keep everyone at the table, whatever his personal preferences, and whatever the calls from the various extremes to exclude someone.<br /><br />No, I continue to think we're more influential in stimulating rejection that we are at stimulating agreement, much less compliance. Frankly, I think Canterbury has found it hard to ignore us, less because he finds us compelling, than because he is also in a culture where many (including himself, based on earlier writings) have also sought to incorporate into their understanding of what it means to be human into their understanding of what God has done in Christ.Marshall Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02807749717320495495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-87488635197615934302011-02-04T23:56:27.888-05:002011-02-04T23:56:27.888-05:00They were talking about going away from Jesus, fro...They were talking about going away from Jesus, from Truth, so you equate us with Jesus?<br /><br />Sorry that was confusing to you. But, then, I imagine anything to do with Jesus is.<br /><br />Look, as far as I'm concerned, you are a Person of the Lie. Say what you want, rail, snark. I have no more to do with you. I consign you to your own darkness and hate, and you are as nothing to me.MarkBrunsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971990948866488080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-79124153540852110812011-02-04T23:37:33.069-05:002011-02-04T23:37:33.069-05:00'Where shall we go, you have the words of eter...'Where shall we go, you have the words of eternal life' <br /><br />Apostles to Jesus Christ, on the futility of 'going away' -- which was your directive to Christians you opposed.<br /><br />Sorry this was confusing to you.<br /><br />Sam F.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-16994067419712300252011-02-04T23:25:35.623-05:002011-02-04T23:25:35.623-05:00Sam F.,
Misery and despair? The point you are mak...Sam F.,<br /><br /><i>Misery and despair? The point you are making is that not having people go away whose positions irritate you causes you misery and despair. Yes, that is clear from what you write.</i><br /><br />No. What is clear is that you expect the right to <i>cause</i> misery and despair, ruin lives, hurt people, destroy faith and then be fully supported.<br /><br /><i>'Where shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.'</i><br /><br /><br />The conservative lies become even more insane! <br /><br />You tell us "You lie!!!!" then say you just <i>can't</i> leave because we "have the words of eternal life?"<br /><br />Why don't you go to one of the churches who accepts the Bad News you preach - there are dozens, as you're always harping on about how many of <i>you</i> there are as opposed to us. Go. Be with them. We neither need nor want you. Orthodox, RCC, Baptist . . . whatever. You have nothing you can do but bring harm.<br /><br />Yet, now you claim that, somehow, wanting you to get lost and stop bothering us, personally, deprives you of the "words of eternal life!" Wow. What arrogance. What diabolic arrogance. We <i>owe</i> it to you to abuse us. <br /><br />We're not preventing you from yelling from the rooftops, if you want, that God Hates Fags - there's a whole congregation devoted to the message you send out, and they are even allowed to picket funerals - but, somehow, unless you can hunt us out and whine in our faces, you are being spiritually hurt!? <br /><br />Yeah. I can see where the joy and renewal is for someone with no decency and no compassion and no humanity. <br /><br />Like I said, no hope for this world or humanity.MarkBrunsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971990948866488080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-91433026885988681702011-02-04T20:56:32.810-05:002011-02-04T20:56:32.810-05:00There is nothing "natural" about loving ...There is nothing "natural" about loving your spouse---self-sacrificially, in Christ---whether your spouse is of the same-sex, or opposite-sex.<br /><br />It's hard work.<br /><br />It's the cross.JCFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-61301116133931451452011-02-04T17:02:46.441-05:002011-02-04T17:02:46.441-05:00Hi David,
You are right re Canada: as I understand...Hi David,<br />You are right re Canada: as I understand some of the absenteeing primates (may be all), they did have a problem with ++Fred Hiltz attending, as well as ++Katharine Jefferts Schori. <br /><br />I see on the blogosphere strong words looking forward to the rest of the Communion catching up with TEC. I am assuming that these voices are not unrepresentative of the mind of TEC's leadership. But I am aware of the leadership line that it is not seeking to impose anything on anyone.<br /><br />Yes, TEC's presence at Lambeth etc is an exercise of membership. But in the face of all that has been going on since 2003 - Windsor Report recommendations, Primates' Meetings statements, etc, etc - I think it not unfait to characterise persistence in attendance as exercising the right to bear the new revelation.<br /><br />++Rowan is his own man. Funnily enough I happen to think that he listens to his fellow primates, has cups of tea with ++Bob Duncan, etc. Since 2003 he has always made his mind up about the invitations he has the right to issue in favour of TEC and not against it. That seems to mean that the views of TEC have told more highly in his decision-making than the views of others. But I could be wrong. TEC may have no influence at all. As little as I imagine ACANZP ... or Mexico has!!Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-8082625771605141472011-02-04T12:19:08.699-05:002011-02-04T12:19:08.699-05:00Erika--I do not believe you ignore scripture. Sam ...Erika--I do not believe you ignore scripture. Sam F.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-6703949032104025842011-02-04T12:15:58.429-05:002011-02-04T12:15:58.429-05:00A Gospel that categorises people as created ‘Gay’ ...A Gospel that categorises people as created ‘Gay’ or ‘Straight’ or ‘Bi’ and then seeks to affirm a ‘state of nature’ will for the vast majority of Christians consititute no Gospel at all, but a losing of compass points. There is nothing about us in a natural state that Christ has come to ‘affirm.’ He is making us new creations! Our lives are hid with God in Christ. In Christ there is neither Jew nor Greek, neither ‘Gay’ nor ‘Straight,’ but a New Creation. <br /><br />It is for this reason that so many 'conservatives' halt and say, ‘we cannot go there.’ It disorients in a direction away from the Gospel and its power in Christ. ‘Conservative Christians’ don’t have any secret wisdom about some special impropriety of ‘Gay sexual behavior.’ We are all sinful and live by the faithfulness of Christ Jesus, which is the Righteousness of God.<br /><br />The new progressive view is that such Christians loathe and hate ‘Gays’ and are homophobic and so on. They come to bring pain and cause brother David to cry. No, most Christians are sensitive to their own sins and failings and do not have an special view regarding Gay sexual conduct; it is for them of a piece with God’s redeeming work on all sin. <br /><br />But when the Gospel as expressed by Paul – or Christ himself, or James, or Hebrews, or whatever – is recalibrated to speak of ‘affirmation’ and ‘created states’ and ‘Christ as moral change agent’ they see a Gospel without a Cross and a dismissal of the compass points that Jesus Christ holds up for us all. Behold I make all things new. Come unto me, all that are weary and heavy laden.<br /><br />Erika is correct at one point. This is NOT about a single issue (God’s intention for sexual relations). It is about the character of the Gospel itself. Christians who halt over the affirmation message do so because they fear it robs the Gospel of its truth and its power. Until this is grasped, calling such Christians homophobic and so forth will simply miss the issue that is central to their confession of faith in Christ.<br /><br />This is about the character of the Gospel Christ came to bring. It is not about figuring out who is in the most pain or distress. That road leads to nowhere.<br /><br />The King of Love hung on a Cross and there all pain was redeemed and made a victory. His Cross has the power he has promised.<br /><br />Sam F.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-41017771960752756202011-02-04T12:15:50.858-05:002011-02-04T12:15:50.858-05:00Sam,
thank you for that.
But don't you see tha...Sam,<br />thank you for that.<br />But don't you see that liberals also follow Scripture, that we only have a different way of understanding it? That we focus on other verses than some conservatives? <br /><br />You might not agree with us, but I do feel that it is hurtful to be told over and over again that I ignore Scripture.<br /><br />If you read good liberal theology and good pro-gay theology, you will find a very deep engagement with Scripture.<br />Different conclusions, I grant you, but certainly no blanket dismissal of what is written.<br /><br />I matters that we understand that about each other, because otherwise we will never respect each other enough to listen to what we have to say. And constant misunderstandings and shouting across the divide are not helping anyone's position.Erika Bakerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01812376497361267014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-52460956705729258062011-02-04T12:05:40.354-05:002011-02-04T12:05:40.354-05:00Thank you JCF.
Your words caused me to cry. Wow, ...Thank you JCF.<br /><br />Your words caused me to cry. Wow, someone understands a little.Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-1748475883767381002011-02-04T10:59:05.190-05:002011-02-04T10:59:05.190-05:00No, Erika, I do not think that.
How was slavery br...No, Erika, I do not think that.<br />How was slavery brought down in the British Commonwealth? By ardent evangelicals like Wm Wilberforce, who declared unwavering allegiance to the Scriptures' true word, not by preaching 'new revelation.' How will proper treatment of Gays in Uganda be secured? By the same means. Paul condemned hypocrisy and self-righteousness in Romans 1-2, but he did not preach a 'new revelation' re: Christian sexual conduct and nor did he tell people to 'go away.' No progress in God's will is made by altering it, but by the Gospel's graceful embrace of sinful men and women, of which I am the utmost. That is the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This Gospel is not about death penalities for sexual misconduct; it is not about chattel slavery (which IS condemned with the death penalty in Leviticus); it is not about rejoicing in the death of a David Kato; and it is not about finding a way to claim the Holy Spirit as a warrant for something never endorsed by the Same. This is the Gospel proclaimed by Christians the world over. Sam F.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-29511340485625620872011-02-04T10:41:36.833-05:002011-02-04T10:41:36.833-05:00"The point you are making is that not having ..."The point you are making is that not having people go away whose positions irritate you causes you misery and despair. Yes, that is clear from what you write."<br /><br />Isn't it rather than having people who wish for your exclusion, who debate the death penalty for someone like you, who will not honour and respect your relationships, who will not grant you legal equality, who slander you in public, who vilify you, call you sick, depraved and immoral, that causes misery and despair?<br /><br />Regardless of what you may think of homosexuality, do you really really think that none of this causes real people actual misery and despair?<br />It costs some of us our very lives!<br />What does it cost you?Erika Bakerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01812376497361267014noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-23050083839171289902011-02-04T09:23:55.043-05:002011-02-04T09:23:55.043-05:00Misery and despair? The point you are making is th...Misery and despair? The point you are making is that not having people go away whose positions irritate you causes you misery and despair. Yes, that is clear from what you write. <br /><br />'Where shall we go? You have the words of eternal life.'<br /><br />Sam F.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-34756898015860313562011-02-04T08:59:28.038-05:002011-02-04T08:59:28.038-05:00Mr Brunson -- joy, renewal, enthusiasm for Jesus C...Mr Brunson -- joy, renewal, enthusiasm for Jesus Christ and the spread of His Gospel -- kindly see the figures given by Professor Jenkins. The joy is palpable where Christianity is growing; and elsewhere, where God has placed his Christian followers, there is joy as well, even as the Church departs from his teaching. The church in every age must bear witness through difficult times, and that is the season we find ourselves in as 'new revelation' purports to speak the mind of Christ but departs from his teaching and will for his Body.<br /><br />Thank you ++Henry for your comments of reminder, what the Anglican Christian Way is and remains. <br /><br />Sam F.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-25105637323871074892011-02-04T04:34:03.516-05:002011-02-04T04:34:03.516-05:00I don't, JCF. Seriously.
Even if I hate hi...I don't, JCF. Seriously. <br /><br />Even if I hate him, I can't bring myself to wish a life like mine on him, or a life like mine made miserable by people like him.<br /><br />I want him to just . . . go away and be happy, someplace else, without feeling the need to bring all this misery and despair on the rest of us, without expecting that, somehow, those who are repelled by his message must still make a place and support him in that message.MarkBrunsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971990948866488080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-34898087847210466962011-02-04T04:30:15.954-05:002011-02-04T04:30:15.954-05:00Sam, I wish you could walk in MarkBrunson's sh...Sam, I wish you could walk in MarkBrunson's shoes. [But walk in Dahveed's first, as you'll need to toughen up.]<br /><br />That is all.JCFnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-26833836183309755892011-02-04T04:11:49.076-05:002011-02-04T04:11:49.076-05:00You may think the church catholic, the mind of the...<i>You may think the church catholic, the mind of the Communion and ++Henry wrong but attempts to link their views with a tragic murder, unless you have evidence of a direct link, look like a crude attempt to discredit....and does not really work even on social liberals, as you can see from the ABC's defence of ++Henry. </i><br /><br />Let's start with - what does that have to do with anything?<br /><br />I don't have to link this to Orombi to discredit, he's done it himself with the ugly display at the funeral which is a direct result of the environment of his church. <br /><br />The murder <i>is</i> linked to Orombi because he helped foster the environment that led to it. You do realize that the Ugandan police have changed their tune - now it's a "gay panic" murder. Even if this is true, the panic is the direct result of this teaching of the alleged "church catholic" (hardly catholic, as it is anything but universal!) <br /><br />You want to know who else that murder is linked to: Rowan Williams, Peter Akinola, Martyn Minns, Scott Lively, our friend Sam F., and <b>you</b>, Anonymous. <br /><br />Wash your hands all you like, yell "I was just following church catholic orders!" all you like, the blood stays until you repent.MarkBrunsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971990948866488080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-55034675947409868232011-02-04T04:07:28.396-05:002011-02-04T04:07:28.396-05:00David - why do you think the ABC defended ++Henry?...David - why do you think the ABC defended ++Henry? You talk as if Lambeth 1.10 has been overturned and the AC has a new expression of 'the mind of the Communion' - but it doesn't .... and most of the AC still holds ot it and that is why the ABC defends ++Henry.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-24572436115205908852011-02-04T04:03:05.648-05:002011-02-04T04:03:05.648-05:00Anonymous,
Wasn't addressing you, but, since ...Anonymous,<br /><br />Wasn't addressing you, but, since you chime in.<br /><br />It is a backward and morally repugnant position. I don't care if it's the mind of everyone from here to Beixing, it's still repugnant to refer to homosexuality as a choice of lifestyle, to speak of recruiting children into homosexual sex, to call for criminalization of homosexuality.<br /><br />Seriously, we've been over this so many times I wonder if you people can read! Really. Not being ugly, just really asking . . . Do you actually know what it is you're defending?<br /><br />Are you seriously defending a position that criminalizes homosexuality - even speaking of it? Seriously? Do you believe homosexuals are recruiting children to have sex? Really? Do you honestly think that numbers make it right? Before you answer, there's a lot of Muslims out there! Do you really not understand the difference between being in love with someone of the same sex, and murdering, torturing, and desecrating the graves of gay people? Are you that depraved? <br /><br />Yes. I know that Mr. Williams defended Mr. Orombi, that is why I now, officially and publicly, believe that Rowan Williams has never had a legitimate vocation to the ordained ministry. He is a shameful bureaucrat, afraid to stand up to a mob of people who cannot grow up. <br /><br />You don't seem to get it. I don't care if this is what you believe - go believe it wherever you want, as long as it is far, far, far away from me and my church. Go be Catholic or Orthodox or Baptist or be part of ACNA or AMiA or whatever alphabet soup you want -- just get away from me. You are a threat to me, my life, and, frankly, my soul. If you want to tell everybody that'll stop and listen that I'm the worst sinner since Judas Iscariot because I get excited by guys instead of gals, that's fine. But keep out of my life, spiritual, political and especially private. If you want to tell everyone you know that we Episcopalians are no longer Christians or Anglicans - FINE! I don't care. You have every right to do what you want . . . as long as it doesn't disrupt my life. <br /><br />While TEC said gay relationships were absolutely <i>verboten</i>, I accepted that. I eschewed relationships, would not back clergy in active gay relationships, and respected the decisions. <br /><br />Clearly, you guys are unable to do that. I stayed <b>because</b> I respected the structure and the rules, while working within that structure to change the understanding. You should leave us, honestly and without drama, because it is <i>your choice</i> to not live within that structure and rules.<br /><br />Now, you can make that argument about us and the AC. Fine. I agree. We in TEC should cut ties. What will be different? We won't be paying in to Lambeth's power grab, anymore. We won't be helping to fund Orombi's puppet, Williams, anymore. TEC will lose nothing because it is no longer called Anglican. We have nothing to lose, and everything to gain. So, by all means work to get us thrown out! Then we'll be forced to stop playing at baby RCC and start living a Gospel imperative.MarkBrunsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971990948866488080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-63315226416788547012011-02-04T03:38:56.525-05:002011-02-04T03:38:56.525-05:00you speak as if Archbishop Orombi takes a particul...<i>you speak as if Archbishop Orombi takes a particularly backward and strange moral position</i><br /><br />He does Anonymous. Over the years Henry Orombi has continually told vicious and malicious lies regarding GLBT folks. Period.<br /><br />I have never heard the ABC say anything vaguely similar to Orombi's position. But I think that it is shameful and to the ABC's discredit that he recently defended Orombi in a press conference.<br /><br />If you wish to see Orombi's unChristian behavior well documented, go visit Leonardo Ricardo's blog, Eruptions at the foot of the volcano.<br />http://leonardoricardosanto.blogspot.com/Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-45867683783459182772011-02-04T03:27:58.159-05:002011-02-04T03:27:58.159-05:00Peter, there are a number of problems with what yo...Peter, there are a number of problems with what you state in your last comment. But first there is a side issue that I wish to point out. As a member of one of the smaller Anglican churches in N. America looking northward, I see TEC and ACCanada on pretty much the same course, and yet you constantly zero in on TEC only. The one thing that has occurred in TEC that has not occurred in Canada is the election and consecration of a sexual minority bishop living in a committed relationship. Is this some fear that you have of saddling your own bishop's mother church in your denunciations of TEC?<br /><br /><i>There are Episcopalians firmly acclaiming that the sooner the rest of the Communion catches up to TEC the better.</i><br />Who are these Episcopalians? I know of no one in a position of authority, nor any influential organizations which hold this position. This sounds like another falsehood that if repeated often enough must actually be true.<br /><br /><i>TEC has steadfastly maintained its right to attend Communion meetings as the bearer of this new revelation</i><br />False. TEC attends AC meetings because it is a constituent member of the AC. As I and other progressive Anglicans repeatedly tell you,TEC, ACCanada and any other progressive Anglicans have never pushed our beliefs on anyone.<br /><br /><i>It has attended such meetings (through its representatives) because it has had a greater influence on the decision-making of the ABC</i><br />Also false. The ABC is his own man, he makes his decisions, and oft times many progressives disagree with him. If you are going to make such an outrageous claim where is the evidence to support it? To me, your claim is a falsehood you perpetuate because the ABC does not do what you want him to do. Any true believer would agree with you, so he must be being influenced to make the decisions he makes.Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.com