tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post5807296161331770604..comments2024-02-15T03:32:25.686-05:00Comments on Preludium, Anglican and Episcopal futures: The Anglican Covenant has become a political tool.Mark Harrishttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06871096746243771489noreply@blogger.comBlogger32125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-75575718556734526722010-05-20T16:34:57.711-04:002010-05-20T16:34:57.711-04:00I sincerely doubt that +Katharine's personalit...I sincerely doubt that +Katharine's personality is that of a party crasher. If not invited, I cannot see her going. I cannot even see her going and sitting at the gate as +Gene did.<br /><br />But given a PB with a personality of a different bent, what would the ABC do, the unchristian act of barring the participation of a brother/sister primate? So much for <i>primus inter pares</i>. This one has already screwed his own legacy so badly that what he shall likely be remembered for is how horribly bad he has been.Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-19589461303937483762010-05-20T12:58:36.241-04:002010-05-20T12:58:36.241-04:00I don't believe it because it sounds so juveni...I don't believe it because it sounds so juvenile. I also don't believe it because I seriously doubt that if the PB were not invited, she would show up and insert herself into the proceedings, with force, as it were. At least here I'd credit her with more maturity than you. I also think her supporters (the celtic fringe, eg) would turn away in embarrasment. I sometimes don't think that americans realise how rude and self-centered most see them.<br />TOHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-18328296538577878402010-05-20T09:15:22.355-04:002010-05-20T09:15:22.355-04:00“...are you saying that the Presiding Bishop of TE...“...are you saying that the Presiding Bishop of TEC, should she not be invited, ought to go anyway and insert herself into the meeting?”<br /><br />That’s EXACTLY what I’m saying. I’ve told you time and time again (don't you read what I write?) that I believe it’s past time for TEC to take off the gloves. Believe it!<br /><br />STOEHKurthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10032216707367304535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-22100539079844406152010-05-19T11:58:10.999-04:002010-05-19T11:58:10.999-04:00Kurt--let me be sure I hear you correctly. The Arc...Kurt--let me be sure I hear you correctly. The Archbishop of Canterbury, who issues invitations to the Primates Meetings, and who has the authority not to invite (he spoke of this clearly the last time is agreed that KJS should attend and be answerable) -- are you saying that the Presiding Bishop of TEC, should she not be invited, ought to go anyway and insert herself into the meeting? Remember, this isn't a nineth grade gathering to decide who beats out the erasers and restocks the chalk. This isn't even Rosa Parks. This is a gathering of the Primates of the Anglican Communion, a gathering which happens solely at the decision of the See of Canterbury. I have a hard time believing that even the PB of TEC would be so brash as to 'crash' a meeting to which she is not invited. I am also unsure whether this will happen. But the thing that boggles my mind is the idea, repeated on this blog thread, that the PB has a kind of right to attend, or, to intrude herself. This isn't TEC's Communion and TEC has no inalienable right to it. It can of course create its own 'US-Based Episcopal Church' (so the language in the original post above) and decide who it wants to gather into that. But what you are suggesting takes tea partyism americanism a bit far. <br />TOHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-1516716540413899642010-05-19T09:40:43.205-04:002010-05-19T09:40:43.205-04:00“If, e.g., Schori is not invited to the Primates M...“If, e.g., Schori is not invited to the Primates Meeting, then she cannot attend.”<br /><br />Au contraire mon frere. As I said, I think that it’s past time we Episcopalians stopped playing nice and started playing hardball. What do you think would happen if Presiding Bishop Shori were to show up? Would the Africans physically throw her out? Who would bar her way---you? There are plenty of Anglicans in the world---maybe not many con evos--who would welcome such a confrontation. <br /><br />STOEHKurthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10032216707367304535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-6857982358817430972010-05-18T09:51:19.444-04:002010-05-18T09:51:19.444-04:00Kurt et al: So we should conclude that a request h...Kurt et al: So we should conclude that a request has been made, already, and this is to what Exec Council member Harris refers. Naughton at The Lead also suggests this, in turn leading to a squabble amongst the pro LGBT crowd over whether to attend anyway or proudly march off. <br />What one misses in this is an alternative to the view that TEC's place in the Communion is non-negotiable and is what it is on TEC's terms. <br />If, e.g., Schori is not invited to the Primates Meeting, then she cannot attend. The gathering authority belongs to someone outside TEC: The ABC. Equally, representation on the Standing Committee is not an 'inalienable right'. Mr Ashey was denied a place at the ACC because of border-crossings, and so too TEC could be denied a place becase SSBs are against the same principles used to keep Mr Ashey away.<br />To listen to these comments is to come away with the idea that TEC's place in the Communion is a matter of self-assertion, when in fact it is not. Ugly Americanism in vestments?<br />TOHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-16507150346031544852010-05-17T13:07:31.975-04:002010-05-17T13:07:31.975-04:00“It sounds like the Exec Council is aware of a req...“It sounds like the Exec Council is aware of a request in the air. I wrote to ask if this is so.”<br /><br />In which case, I would imagine that request will be politely ignored, as it should be. Personally, I think it’s past time that we American Episcopalians took a much harder line with the con evo extremists who pretend to lead “the vast majority” of Anglicans.<br /><br />STOEH (a/k/a Kurt Hill)Kurthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10032216707367304535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-71216812341629659862010-05-17T11:02:26.094-04:002010-05-17T11:02:26.094-04:00Goodness, David! "Conspiratorial?" I w...Goodness, David! "Conspiratorial?" I wouldn't use that term, because I do imagine those who made the decision did so publically and knowing why. It may be something as simple as a statistical distribution, but that to get the distribution they wanted they set the dividing line at a membership of 200,000 or ASA at 100,000 - or something of the sort. There's not anything devious in that.<br /><br />However, the principle isn't described in the Constitution of the ACC (which is where I got my information, whether you find it convincing or not). So, hypothetically, there's no <i>stated</i> way the status could change. Of the Scottish Episcopal Church had sudden, massive growth in membership and ASA, could they qualify to change representation? If the Anglican Church of Canada had a sudden, catastrophic loss of membership, could they be required to reduce representation? If so, the parameters aren't in the Constitution of the ACC.<br /><br />Regarding the Primates, I think that comment was mine and not John's, just to take my own hits; and that is also in the ACC Constitution.Marshall Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02807749717320495495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-8248578263946764612010-05-17T08:47:29.305-04:002010-05-17T08:47:29.305-04:00Thanks for your enthusiasm David, but you did not ...Thanks for your enthusiasm David, but you did not answer the questions. That's OK as I suspect you can't. But Fr Harris can, as he wrote the entry and used the language. It sounds like the Exec Council is aware of a request in the air. I wrote to ask if this is so.<br />**<br />"Has someone suggested that TEC honor a request? as previously?<br />2. "a subtle effort to enact exclusion" coupled with the language of "gracious constraint" sounds like RDW's anticipated request of TEC in the light of this weekend's enthusiastic consecration of Glasspool. Is this so?<br />Still wondering post Glasspool.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-52560560166740355492010-05-16T09:20:28.104-04:002010-05-16T09:20:28.104-04:00Señor Anonymous.
Refrain from participation refer...Señor Anonymous.<br /><br /><i>Refrain from participation</i> refers to the ACC Meeting of 2005 in Nottingham, England, UK where the representatives from TEC and the ACoCanada were instructed by their constituent church bodies to voluntarily refrain from attending with voice and vote as was requested by the Primates Meeting of earlier in 2005, and as suggested in the Windsor Report.<br /><br />Father Mark is saying, and I heartily concur, never again!<br /><br />As far as <i>gracious restraint</i>, it is posed as a well mannered request, with a luscious <b>please</b> attached, but when folks politely decline, it is obvious from the primatial tirades that follow that it was never a request at all, but an order with which one must comply, or heaven help you with the consequences.<br /><br />Bovine fecal matter!Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-84635719065706192672010-05-16T09:06:02.971-04:002010-05-16T09:06:02.971-04:00Unfortunately Marshall, like John, you make specio...Unfortunately Marshall, like John, you make specious claims of potential conspiratorial bias in the ACC. First John, based on, I suppose, gut feeling, but no evidence, asserts that the whole shebang shows bias toward the Global North/West. Now you opine that, no if it has bias, it is that small churches could send their primate as the representative, tilting the whole shebang to an inordinate primatial representation. <br /><br />Yet the official list of representatives of the provinces of the ACC, obtained from the AC's official website, meeting in Jamaica last year does not bear out your claim. Although some sent a bishop rather than a lay person, aside from the Standing Committee of the Primates Meeting, and the ABC himself, the only two churches who sent a primate as a representative were big churches with three representatives!<br /><br /><a href="http://www.anglicancommunion.org/communion/acc/meetings/acc14/participants.cfm" rel="nofollow">Participants at ACC-14</a><br /><br />Again I say proof, Marshall, where is your proof?Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-31808838249614974732010-05-15T22:30:51.009-04:002010-05-15T22:30:51.009-04:00David, let me give the example of my own province,...David, let me give the example of my own province, Australia, which has three representives for a church with an Average Sunday Attendence of 160,000. (There are no official membership figures for the church, and the Australian church figures based on a census every five years are very reliable).<br />This gives my province the same representation as Nigeria, Uganda, and the Indian churches which each have millions of members.<br />The churches with a disproportionate number of representatives happen to be overwhelmingly white and "northern".<br />The Standing Committee in addition allocates representation by continent. Once again my region is greatly over-represented. <br />David, please feel free to disagree with me, but I do research my comments.John Sandeman / Obadiah Slopehttp://eternity.biznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-82416679523240650742010-05-14T18:34:37.553-04:002010-05-14T18:34:37.553-04:00Much in Fr Harris's most recent entry is, quit...Much in Fr Harris's most recent entry is, quite frankly, obscure...as if we are entering into a discussion amongst Exec Council members but in a sort of code. What, for example, does this mean: <br />"There must not be again a request honored that we refrain from participation in an ACC meeting. It is time to do away with the polite phrases of immoderate princes of the Church. Just as a request for "gracious restraint" is a polite form of command, so a request that we refrain from participation in ACC or the Primates Meeting ought to be viewed as no request at all, but rather a subtle effort to enact exclusion without taking a vote and by having those being punished take the responsibility for their own punishment."<br />1. "request honored that we" -- to what does this refer and to what does it now refer? Has someone suggested that TEC honor a request? as previously?<br />2. "a subtle effort to enact exclusion" coupled with the language of "gracious constraint" sounds like RDW's anticipated request of TEC in the light of this weekend's enthusiastic consecration of Glasspool. Is this so?<br />I wonder if Fr Harris or others 'in the know' can help translate this long, somewhat predictable, somewhat rambling entry by the blog owner? <br />Wondering Pre GlasspoolAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-20099390020179378792010-05-14T11:21:02.531-04:002010-05-14T11:21:02.531-04:00Come, John, David: pace.
Certainly, John, the Joi...Come, John, David: <i>pace</i>.<br /><br />Certainly, John, the Joint Standing Committee cum Anglican Standing Committee is not "<i>self</i>-appointed." Each Instrument (ACC and Primates) has a process for membership on the committee, and each national church has a process for selecting representative and primates, even if processes differ. And, yes, while I don't feel the CofE process for selecting a bishop is as clear or transparent as I'm used to in the TEC, I have some sense that the local diocese does have some participation. Don't get me wrong: I think there's good theological and sociological justification for our system. However, I won't claim it's the only possible appropriate system.<br /><br />David, there is something of a bias in participation in ACC, but it's seen less among those allowed three representatives (which includes the great numbers of Nigeria and also the much smaller numbers of the Episcopal Church) than among those allowed only one representative. Certainly, there is not stated connection of representation to number of members, contribution of the national church to the ACC budget, etc, so there's no clear challenge to a sense of bias. Moreover, while for those churches allowed one representatives are <i>encouraged</i> to choosed a lay person as the representative, there's no <i>requirement</i>; so even without a change that would make all primates ex officio members (as favored by some primates) many of those churches might send the primate as representative anyway, and ACC would have no recourse.<br /><br />I'm sure the had a reason at the time for the representation as they set it up. I just wish they'd made that reason explicit. Without knowing the reason, it's hard to say there's no bias.Marshall Scotthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02807749717320495495noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-61899761034927983722010-05-14T02:06:45.048-04:002010-05-14T02:06:45.048-04:00AFAICT does not cut it John Sandeman. I suggest th...AFAICT does not cut it John Sandeman. I suggest that you research your claims before making them, especially where you claim the Committee is biased to the North.<br /><br />Observer claimed the Committee was self-appointed. My claim is that it is not. Regardless of whether there is an election system or an appointment system, or a combination of both, the members of the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion who come from the Anglican Consultative Council rise up from the ACC and are approved by the ACC.<br /><br />And the ACC is biased towards the largest provinces, if it biased, because they are the ones with three representatives, including your own province, as well as, Nigeria, Rwanda, Tanzania and Uganda. Whereas small churches, like mine, have one representative.<br /><br />Furthermore, I also doubt that the aggressively vocal primates of the Global South would sit idly by and let the ABC stack the deck for the North with regard to the members of the Standing committee of the AC from the Primates Meeting.<br /><br />Proof John, were is your proof?Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-73087177769153390782010-05-13T18:44:26.214-04:002010-05-13T18:44:26.214-04:00Do you all ever listen to each other? Brunson decl...Do you all ever listen to each other? Brunson declares anyone opposed to America's GLBT etc novelty, wait for it, Satanic. The world wide Anglican Communion, in what it believes, by a percentage probably of at least 75%, is Satanic.<br />With any kind of providential kindness, +RDW will give TEC what it wants and press on with the vast majority of the Communion, which of course does not have the vast resources to manipulate the Communion as does TEC. Will he do this? Well, Glasspool's consecration is about on us. TEC will again get what it wants. We shall have to see whether this decision sets TEC on its own trajectory, and all wish it well as it goes forward; and whether liberals will cut away and leave the Communion to pursue its mission, or will decide to harrass the Covenanting churches and seek to subvert their wider resolve --as urged above.<br />TOHAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-39425902335356413552010-05-13T03:11:06.063-04:002010-05-13T03:11:06.063-04:00David,
a possible weakness in your argument is the...David,<br />a possible weakness in your argument is the issue of who votes for the ACC reps. As far as I can tell they tend to be appointed by executive committees and similar bodies. (If you regard this an "elections" then the CofE is democratic too with its committees voting for bishops). The standing committee structure gives a permanent gerrymander to the "global north", much like the UN security council favours historically powerful nations.John Sandeman / Obadiah Slopehttp://eternity.biznoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-37480413892460455542010-05-13T00:13:47.595-04:002010-05-13T00:13:47.595-04:00And Akinola is a more honest orthodite "chris...And Akinola is a more honest orthodite "christian" in his hatred and violence.<br /><br />We know what you and your bloodthirsty heroes are "Anonymous" creature. Get thee behind me.MarkBrunsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971990948866488080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-31083176801551629932010-05-12T13:40:06.046-04:002010-05-12T13:40:06.046-04:00It looks like the much vaunted Global South New Co...It looks like the much vaunted Global South New Communion of the Doctrinally Correct Crusading Ueber Bishops ended in a fizzle of bland diplomacy.<br /><br />It's hard to build a new church, or anything new, on a series of negatives: hostility to gays, hostility to North Americans,etc.<br />It is precisely those hostilities that have held this loose coalition together. As soon as those threats are no longer threats, then the infighting starts. <br /><br />I expect that the Episcopal and Canadian Churches will remain in the Communion for the foreseeable future. They are not going to leave, and the momentum to toss them out seems to have passed.Counterlighthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14345956180434795401noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-64076834534732968422010-05-12T13:09:59.930-04:002010-05-12T13:09:59.930-04:00“Yes, you are tiny and insignificant, and yet you ...“Yes, you are tiny and insignificant, and yet you seek to manipulate the vast majority of anglicans [sic] due to american [sic] self-referentiality and the assumption that what you are, everyone will need to be as well.”<br /><br />What can one say about the priorities of the con evo “Anglican” Primate of Nigeria, (as just one example), who spends so much time on issues related to the “tiny and insignificant” American Church, while in his own nation: the GNI per capita is only $1,160 a year (in one of the richest countries on the planet); when the life expectancy of his congregants is only 48 years; when nearly 50 percent of his people are illiterate, and where 27 percent of the children under 5 years old suffer from underweight”/malnutrition? One would think that the man--and the Nigerian Primate is a man--would have better things to do than worry about what is happening among American Episcopalians.<br /><br />Still Tired of Evo Hypocrites<br />(a/k/a Kurt Hill)Kurthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10032216707367304535noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-37995641930510197412010-05-12T08:50:27.388-04:002010-05-12T08:50:27.388-04:00Smug? What is astonishing is the blinkered america...Smug? What is astonishing is the blinkered americanism and how it assumes that what it wants is righteous (anti-Jim Crow = pro Glasspool) and must be had by all. When Acts 15 concluded that it had a consensus on gentile inclusion (in accordance with the constraints of Lev 18-19 and in agreement with the scriptural witness of the prophets) I guess it was being specious in its concern for 'a majority' -- of apostles, prophets and OT testimony. <br />What boggles the mind is the self referentiality of americanism and its confidence that its way is the way. <br />BTW, it does not take a covenant to establish the simply fact that a vast majority of anglicans hold to a view of Christian marriage TECism is altering with enthusiasm.<br />And, Brunson is a more honest american in his commitment to LBGT and loathing of communion with bigots etc (the bulk of the Communion, in his view).<br />Tired of HypocrisyAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-87651909783673968992010-05-11T23:40:03.016-04:002010-05-11T23:40:03.016-04:00You can't "commune" with unrepentant...You can't "commune" with unrepentant people like Jensen, Akinola, Nazir-Ali.<br /><br />They are violent and bloody men, even if they've never lifted a weapon, backwards, covered in the blood of their victims. What does it profit us if we gain the World ("Communion") and lose our souls?MarkBrunsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16971990948866488080noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-14064944405546399242010-05-11T23:36:05.610-04:002010-05-11T23:36:05.610-04:00Tired, the status quo ante was amazingly unjust. ...Tired, the status quo ante was amazingly unjust. Christianity is a cry of "justice" to power not a nice safe place for the terminally smug. <br /><br />By the way, at this moment the precise count of provinces that have signed the deader than a doornail document is precisely zero. At the (non) Global South conference the planners seem to have expected a mass signing and they did not in fact have the votes. Several primates did not even bother to show up, they sent deputies.<br /><br />The South has failed and the document is dead. Move along.<br /><br />FWIW<br />jimBJimBhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17312606954135884910noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-58207567129799074912010-05-11T22:21:06.852-04:002010-05-11T22:21:06.852-04:00I get very tired of the phrase "the majority&...I get very tired of the phrase "the majority" of the AC when that majority means nothing other than the opinion of bishops who are appointed and represent nobody.PseudoPiskiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12070541512355253553noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10326675.post-7362856641601768072010-05-11T18:03:43.500-04:002010-05-11T18:03:43.500-04:00Yes, you are tiny and insignificant, and yet you s...Yes, you are tiny and insignificant, and yet you seek to manipulate the vast majority of anglicans due to american self-referentiality and the assumption that what you are, everyone will need to be as well. And when that does not work, and the covenant exposes that your definition of Communion life in Christ is not shared except with 10% of the Communion, we now learn that you will not walk in the 'integrity' of your own views and so leave the Communion to carry on. Yes, it would be a pleasure to not have to continue to endure your manipulations. That was indeed my question: why not move forward on your own and leave the Communion to its own desired path, as shared by the Communion's own self-description in covenant.<br />Tired of Hypocrisy and Ugly AmericanismAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com