tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post5875363009470927784..comments2024-02-15T03:32:25.686-05:00Comments on Preludium, Anglican and Episcopal futures: Is Attendance at Lambeth a matter of Representative Function?Mark Harrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06871096746243771489noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-43297192321313138512008-05-08T11:50:00.000-04:002008-05-08T11:50:00.000-04:00I think one of the many flaws of the Windsor mista...I think one of the many flaws of the Windsor mistake was its use of assumed definitions.<BR/><BR/>So for instance the report, "invites" various persons to act in various ways. On this side of the pond, that means they should think about doing something. In England it was a now violated order. <BR/><BR/>"Representative" is I suspect another such word. I doubt the authors were intending to distinguish between Lambeth and ACC meetings. <BR/><BR/>In fact, one of the ongoing issues in the controversy between the neo-orthodox and the progressives is that one side treats Lambeth resolutions they agree with as canon. If Lambeth is, as the neo-orthodox insist, a sort of super-legislature, then it is clearly covered under 'representative'. <BR/><BR/>So, I think for instance, that the bishops in Rwanda, Uganda, Kenya, Southern Cone, and Nigeria responsible for the incursions into the USA and Canada should be barred from Lambeth. They do not belong at a representative meeting. Want to bet that Dr. Williams lacks the courage to make that call or more specifically to write that letter?<BR/><BR/>FWIW<BR/>jimBJimBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17312606954135884910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-51924175179154671702008-05-08T00:22:00.000-04:002008-05-08T00:22:00.000-04:00I heard a linguist refer to these as "promiscuous ...I heard a linguist refer to these as "promiscuous words" -- words which crawl into bed with anyone and take on the particular meaning of the moment.<BR/><BR/>~WayneUnknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15648035289241014871noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-15000247243188280452008-05-07T21:08:00.000-04:002008-05-07T21:08:00.000-04:00marshall,Perhaps the windsor report was deliberate...marshall,<BR/>Perhaps the windsor report was deliberately ambiguous, a not unusual situation in Anglican history. Thus progressives could be invited to view "representatative" functions as pertaining to external representations. Conservatives were left to form the view that "representative" functions included internal committees and the like.<BR/>Is it any wonder that we find it hard to attain unity?<BR/><BR/>ObadiahslopeAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-9290178351078512482008-05-07T11:07:00.000-04:002008-05-07T11:07:00.000-04:00An interesting question. I had thought that the o...An interesting question. I had thought that the original intent of "representative" was representation of <I>the Communion</I> to those outside. In that vein, Bishop Griswold stepped down from the Anglican/Roman dialogues. In the same way, I think it significant that one of Canterbury's arguments for a greater consistency, if not actual centralization, has been the capacity to speak with a unified voice to others outside. In that sense, meeting of Primates, or Lambeth, or, for that matter, the ACC are not "representative" of the Communion to outside bodies.Marshall Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02807749717320495495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-25111924688736642622008-05-07T10:21:00.000-04:002008-05-07T10:21:00.000-04:00This all sounds remarkably similar to the near dec...This all sounds remarkably similar to the near deceased Church of England's bashing and critique of the Wesleyan revival in that Church in the 18th century. While people responded to the alternative Church in that Church, the leaders of the dying Church bashed with lables like "enthusiasts" and "methodists". Yet, thank God that the Whitefields and Wesleys of that day crossed the parish borders and reinvograted the autocratic and ill Church of England. A similar history is now being written in America in the 21st century. TEC is dying out with no plan for revival. Those who have the plan are maligned. Nobody remembers the names of the 18th century C of E delegates, committees, and bishops who pouted as the Church went on without them.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com