tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post3147910021742505581..comments2024-02-15T03:32:25.686-05:00Comments on Preludium, Anglican and Episcopal futures: The Anglican Covenant: One Flamingo is not enough.Mark Harrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06871096746243771489noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-31148748687746530852012-07-07T18:48:16.981-04:002012-07-07T18:48:16.981-04:00It is ironic that this is being considered at the ...It is ironic that this is being considered at the same time that the Diocese of Fort Worth is requesting what amounts to a loyalty oath under which prospective bishops would be required to adhere to that diocese's interpretation of the church's property laws. WHile this may be an apples and oranges comparison, it seems that such declarations of loyalty, or affirmation, or whatever they may be called, are at the heart of the objections to the Anglican Covenant. <br /><br />There is also irony in the danger you cite of "Star Chambers" under the Covenant, which you cite in your entry, for dissenters from the Affirmation. The appearance, from my great distance from Indianapolis, is that those who wish to punish the bishops who filed the amicus brief in the Fort Worth diocese litigation seem all too eager to initiate a Star Chamber in the House of Bishops. The letter of Bishops Ohl and BUchanan suggsts that they wish to punish the other bishops for things that they manifestly did not say in their brief. <br /><br />I am not a fan of Bishop Iker, and hope he and his diocese lose the lawsuit. I am also not a fan of Bishop Ohl, who was manifestly unsuccessful in dealing with dissent in his old diocese. Yet, I think that springing an 11th hour surprise on this Convention is dirty politics, and, whatever the merits, the tactic reeks.<br /><br />Paul<br />DallasHaldave48https://www.blogger.com/profile/10792944089387874600noreply@blogger.com