Discussion:
Panel Says Episcopalians Have Met Anglican Directive
(too old to reply)
Dan
2007-10-04 12:21:54 UTC
Permalink
Panel Says Episcopalians Have Met Anglican Directive
By NEELA BANERJEE
New York Times


WASHINGTON, Oct. 3 - In a victory for the Episcopal Church in its
effort to remain in the Anglican Communion, a high-ranking Anglican
advisory committee said Wednesday that Episcopal bishops had complied
with a directive by Anglican leaders on same-sex unions and gay
bishops.

The Episcopal Church is the American branch of the 77-million-member
Anglican Communion, which has been torn by disputes over the church's
liberal stance on homosexuality.

Earlier this year, the communion's regional leaders, or primates,
issued a directive to the Episcopal Church to curtail the consecration
of partnered gay and lesbian bishops and the authorizing of rites of
blessing for same-sex unions.

Last week in New Orleans, Episcopal bishops pledged not to authorize
rites of blessing for same-sex unions and to exercise restraint in the
consecration of partnered gays as bishops. Conservatives in the
Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion contended at the time that
the bishops had merely restated past positions and fallen short of
complying with the directive.

But in its report on the bishops' action, the committee, the Joint
Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council and the
Primates of the Anglican Communion, said, "We believe the Episcopal
Church has clarified all outstanding questions."

And, the report concluded, the church has "given the necessary
assurances sought of them."

The presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts
Schori, said she was gratified by the panel's conclusions. "The Joint
Standing Committee report has recognized the hard work of the House of
Bishops," Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori said in a statement, "and
that our responses reflect our repeatedly expressed desire to remain
in full communion with the rest of the Anglican Communion."

But a conservative member of the committee immediately took issue with
the report, saying his input was not included.

"The response of the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church
represents a superficial shift from their previous position," the
committee member, the Most Rev. Mouneer Hanna Anis, primate of the
Province of Jerusalem and the Middle East, wrote in an e-mail
statement. "Therefore I strongly disagree with the report."

Committee members traveled to New Orleans with the Archbishop of
Canterbury, Rowan Williams, the communion's spiritual leader, to talk
to the Episcopal bishops about the tensions in the communion.

The Joint Committee submitted its report to Archbishop Williams, and
he has sent it to all the primates and members of the Anglican
Consultative Council, a representative body of bishops, priests and
lay people. They are to respond to the archbishop by the end of the
month.

"This is one voice, and other voices need to come in and say whether
the Episcopal Church has indeed satisfied" the primates' demands,"
said Canon James M. Rosenthal, spokesman for the Anglican Communion
Office.

The committee carries considerable weight, church experts said. It has
representatives from the communion's two representative bodies, the
primates' group and the Anglican Consultative Council, and it has been
asked by the archbishop to find ways to hold the communion together.

"Its opinion is not decisive, but it is significant," said Joseph H.
Britton, dean of the Berkeley Divinity School, an Episcopal seminary
that is part of Yale Divinity School.

The committee report criticized efforts by conservative primates to
ordain their own bishops in the United States to serve the minority of
Episcopalians who seek to leave the Episcopal Church but want to
remain in the communion.

"The time is right for a determined effort to bring interventions to
an end," the committee said in the report.

Last Friday, bishops from 13 Anglican and Episcopal groups in North
America announced that they had formed a partnership as the first step
to creating a rival to the Episcopal Church.
c***@gmail.com
2007-10-04 12:57:09 UTC
Permalink
On the fact of it, the response of the TEC to the Lambeth report
addresses the issues adequately. TEC has stepped back from the
positions it had taken previously on the consecration of bishops
living in immoral relationships and on the blessing of the immoral
relationship themselves. True, TEC did not unequivocally renounce
their previous position, but that wasn't the issue. TEC did
unequivocally say that it would not consent to blessing immoral sexual
liaisons and would 'restrain' itself in the consecration of bishops
living in immoral sexual liaisons.

I think that the biggest problem is that others see the assurances of
TEC as mala fide, based on the past behavior of TEC. This is not a
problem with either the Lambeth commission or the response of the NO
bishops meeting, but with the course of dealing of TEC for the last
couple of decades. We will all be waiting to see if the American
church will be true to its word or like the poster gay bishop, keep it
only as long as it can restrain its proclivity to engage in conduct
unbecoming a Christian church.

CC
Dan
2007-10-04 13:52:30 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
On the fact of it, the response of the TEC to the Lambeth report
addresses the issues adequately. TEC has stepped back from the
positions it had taken previously on the consecration of bishops
living in immoral relationships and on the blessing of the immoral
relationship themselves. True, TEC did not unequivocally renounce
their previous position, but that wasn't the issue. TEC did
unequivocally say that it would not consent to blessing immoral sexual
liaisons and would 'restrain' itself in the consecration of bishops
living in immoral sexual liaisons.
I think that the biggest problem is that others see the assurances of
TEC as mala fide, based on the past behavior of TEC. This is not a
problem with either the Lambeth commission or the response of the NO
bishops meeting, but with the course of dealing of TEC for the last
couple of decades. We will all be waiting to see if the American
church will be true to its word or like the poster gay bishop, keep it
only as long as it can restrain its proclivity to engage in conduct
unbecoming a Christian church.
If I may assume for a moment the role of advocatus diaboli, I would
imagine that some of the TEC Bishops might be tempted to reply that
there is a certain irony to expecting bona fides in response to
"threats".
Dana Prescott
2007-10-04 14:58:46 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan
The committee report criticized efforts by conservative primates to
ordain their own bishops in the United States to serve the minority of
Episcopalians who seek to leave the Episcopal Church but want to
remain in the communion.
"The time is right for a determined effort to bring interventions to
an end," the committee said in the report.
Last Friday, bishops from 13 Anglican and Episcopal groups in North
America announced that they had formed a partnership as the first step
to creating a rival to the Episcopal Church.
All well and good that TEC most likely will not be "stripped of its
license" to hold itself out as a fully Anglican denomination. However,
I think any attempts to quash the formation of a unified alternative
independent "Continuing Anglican" Province in the United States are
misguided, and of doubtful practical effect. Forcing traditionalist
American Anglicans to remain "in bed" with TEC (poignant imagery
deliberately and duly noted!) is not likely to work at this late
stage. I still think it's best to let the new British-Church-emulating
American Anglican realignment -- yielding "High Church/Broad Church"
vs. "Fundamentalist/Evangelical" options of choice -- run its course.
Maximum freedom of conscience is a good thing -- for all concerned.
j***@satx.rr.com
2007-10-04 15:14:27 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dana Prescott
Post by Dan
The committee report criticized efforts by conservative primates to
ordain their own bishops in the United States to serve the minority of
Episcopalians who seek to leave the Episcopal Church but want to
remain in the communion.
"The time is right for a determined effort to bring interventions to
an end," the committee said in the report.
Last Friday, bishops from 13 Anglican and Episcopal groups in North
America announced that they had formed a partnership as the first step
to creating a rival to the Episcopal Church.
All well and good that TEC most likely will not be "stripped of its
license" to hold itself out as a fully Anglican denomination. However,
I think any attempts to quash the formation of a unified alternative
independent "Continuing Anglican" Province in the United States are
misguided, and of doubtful practical effect. Forcing traditionalist
American Anglicans to remain "in bed" with TEC (poignant imagery
deliberately and duly noted!) is not likely to work at this late
stage. I still think it's best to let the new British-Church-emulating
American Anglican realignment -- yielding "High Church/Broad Church"
vs. "Fundamentalist/Evangelical" options of choice -- run its course.
Maximum freedom of conscience is a good thing -- for all concerned.
Good post! Bishops need to realize that
in today's world, they need to convince
the sheep to be with them. If they try force,
the sheep will hear the voice of the true
sheperd, and go there.

Jim

Joh 10:14 - I am the good shepherd,
and know my sheep,
and am known of mine.
Dan
2007-10-04 15:41:20 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dana Prescott
Post by Dan
The committee report criticized efforts by conservative primates to
ordain their own bishops in the United States to serve the minority of
Episcopalians who seek to leave the Episcopal Church but want to
remain in the communion.
"The time is right for a determined effort to bring interventions to
an end," the committee said in the report.
Last Friday, bishops from 13 Anglican and Episcopal groups in North
America announced that they had formed a partnership as the first step
to creating a rival to the Episcopal Church.
All well and good that TEC most likely will not be "stripped of its
license" to hold itself out as a fully Anglican denomination. However,
I think any attempts to quash the formation of a unified alternative
independent "Continuing Anglican" Province in the United States are
misguided, and of doubtful practical effect. Forcing traditionalist
American Anglicans to remain "in bed" with TEC (poignant imagery
deliberately and duly noted!) is not likely to work at this late
stage. I still think it's best to let the new British-Church-emulating
American Anglican realignment -- yielding "High Church/Broad Church"
vs. "Fundamentalist/Evangelical" options of choice -- run its course.
Maximum freedom of conscience is a good thing -- for all concerned.
Well put. People on both sides of this decades-long escalating process
of confrontation feel that they have been coerced, threatened, and
provoked. The only hope for TEC is a structure within which all can
retain their integrity while continuing in fellowship. Some might even
be surprised to discover that what they have in common still greatly
outweighs what divides them.
ChapelMouse
2007-10-05 04:23:56 UTC
Permalink
Dan wrote:

<snip>
Post by Dan
Well put. People on both sides of this decades-long escalating process
of confrontation feel that they have been coerced, threatened, and
provoked. The only hope for TEC is a structure within which all can
retain their integrity while continuing in fellowship.
Speaking of integrity...

I just spent a couple of hours reading the Integrity website, which
has a good amount of healthy outrage, and I can assure you there are
a lot of pissed-off GLBT Episcopalians out there who will continue the
fight for genuine "full inclusion." I feel a lot better now....
Post by Dan
Some might even
be surprised to discover that what they have in common still greatly
outweighs what divides them.
c***@gmail.com
2007-10-05 12:07:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by ChapelMouse
Post by Dan
Well put. People on both sides of this decades-long escalating process
of confrontation feel that they have been coerced, threatened, and
provoked. The only hope for TEC is a structure within which all can
retain their integrity while continuing in fellowship.
Speaking of integrity...
I just spent a couple of hours reading the Integrity website, which
has a good amount of healthy outrage, and I can assure you there are
a lot of pissed-off GLBT Episcopalians out there who will continue the
fight for genuine "full inclusion."
Christ said, 'If you love me, you will obey me.' He also said, 'You
cannot serve God and mammon.'

A person who claims to love Christ but doesn't follow him in
obedience, or who seeks to serve both God and mammon, doesn't have a
whole lot of integrity. Essentially, his entire life is a lie.

Bad people have a habit of claiming to be that which they are not,
thereby hoping to ensnare the unwary. For example, Nazis claimed to be
a socialist working man's party, Soviets claimed to be democratic
republicans, and scoundrels claim to love their current bedmates. ('Of
course I love you - my dick is hard, ain't it?') This group is a prime
example, those who have no integrity claiming to belong to a group
called 'Integrity.' I don't think very many people are fooled.

Lest there be any ambiguity in this post, let me say specifically that
the call of Jesus Christ is one of repentence from sin, and one that
doesn't repent, or perhaps has not even been convicted of sin, cannot
claim with any integrity to belong to Christ. An adulterer who claims
that he doesn't commit adultery, or alternatively that God loves
adultery, has no integrity.

CC
Dan
2007-10-05 12:45:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Post by ChapelMouse
Post by Dan
Well put. People on both sides of this decades-long escalating process
of confrontation feel that they have been coerced, threatened, and
provoked. The only hope for TEC is a structure within which all can
retain their integrity while continuing in fellowship.
Speaking of integrity...
I just spent a couple of hours reading the Integrity website, which
has a good amount of healthy outrage, and I can assure you there are
a lot of pissed-off GLBT Episcopalians out there who will continue the
fight for genuine "full inclusion."
Christ said, 'If you love me, you will obey me.' He also said, 'You
cannot serve God and mammon.'
A person who claims to love Christ but doesn't follow him in
obedience, or who seeks to serve both God and mammon, doesn't have a
whole lot of integrity. Essentially, his entire life is a lie.
And, as those in the Catholic tradition know, this truth tends to
become painfully clear in the sacrament of confession.
ChapelMouse
2007-10-05 13:53:23 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Post by ChapelMouse
Post by Dan
Well put. People on both sides of this decades-long escalating process
of confrontation feel that they have been coerced, threatened, and
provoked. The only hope for TEC is a structure within which all can
retain their integrity while continuing in fellowship.
Speaking of integrity...
I just spent a couple of hours reading the Integrity website, which
has a good amount of healthy outrage, and I can assure you there are
a lot of pissed-off GLBT Episcopalians out there who will continue the
fight for genuine "full inclusion."
Christ said, 'If you love me, you will obey me.' He also said, 'You
cannot serve God and mammon.'
<snip>

As we all agree.

The people who support Integrity and Oasis ( which include me )
would counter that obeying Christ means following His call to
love all His children as ourselves, and His call to
justice for the poor, the oppressed, and the marginalized,
who include GLBT people in the church and the world. They
would heartily agree you cannot serve God and mammon, and
that includes abandoning our call to justice and love of our
neighbor in order to retain membership in an organization
which requires them to sell their birthright for a mess of
stale false doctrine based in bigotry and homophobia.

Gay people in the church are angry partly because many of them
came to the Episcopal church based on its efforts to reach out
to them over the last thirty or so years. Many gay people joined,
many gay clergy came out, or began the process of seeking
ordination, based on that effort by the church and the firm
assurances of liberal bishops like Swing ( in the Bay Area ) that
the church would support full inclusion and justice for them.
They now feel a bit betrayed. Not that the Episcopal church
isn't trying -- the HOB has refused to state categorically that
no gay/Lesbian bishop will ever be consecrated again, or that
local parishes and dioceses must stop all blessing of gay unions
in quiet, unofficial ceremonies if they feel it is vital to
their pastoral mission. The church's heart is in the right place,
and I think most gay people realize that. They just wish the
bishops -- and Canterbury -- had shown the courage of their
convictions rather than trying to appease people who hate them
anyway.

<snip>
c***@gmail.com
2007-10-05 14:25:33 UTC
Permalink
Post by ChapelMouse
which requires them to sell their birthright for a mess of
stale false doctrine based in bigotry and homophobia.
Here it is in a nutshell. The Birthright is sexual preference and the
freedom to exercise sexual license. The exchange is the 'stale false
doctrine' of scripture, apostolic teaching, and the church.

Yep. I can see how you wouldn't want to sell your birthright. After
all, your Right to Have a Relationship is far above any advantage to
following Christ.

CC
Dan
2007-10-05 15:12:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Post by ChapelMouse
which requires them to sell their birthright for a mess of
stale false doctrine based in bigotry and homophobia.
Here it is in a nutshell. The Birthright is sexual preference and the
freedom to exercise sexual license. The exchange is the 'stale false
doctrine' of scripture, apostolic teaching, and the church.
It is important never to confuse the symptom with the disease. To do
so is to invite accusations that one is "obsessed with sex".

The real problem is that the same method employed to justify "gay
marriage" and other such anomalies, is then almost always invoked in
order to jettison the whole body of "stale, false" Christian doctrine.
Nothing remains untouched. Thus, what starts as an attempt to "update"
one aspect of moral teaching ends up as wholesale apostasy.

It is no accident that Spong has been a vigorous champion of TEC gay
rights.
Post by c***@gmail.com
Yep. I can see how you wouldn't want to sell your birthright. After
all, your Right to Have a Relationship is far above any advantage to
following Christ.
My impression is that CM really does try to follow Christ according to
her lights. IMHO this counts for a lot. She does not (at least not
yet) appear to have followed the rational process to its logical
conclusion, and for this we must be thankful.

We Christians have to accept responsibility for a lot of past
"muddying of the water" -- in particular, for our failures to
discriminate between sinners and their sins. That, the real
"homophobia", is-- at least in part-- what has caused the anger to
which CM refers.
ChapelMouse
2007-10-05 18:16:22 UTC
Permalink
Dan wrote:

<snip>
Post by Dan
My impression is that CM really does try to follow Christ according to
her lights. IMHO this counts for a lot.
Thank you, Dan. That means a lot to me!

I have spent many years discussing the issue which preoccupies
Carter -- I had doubts, too. I prayed. I talked to parish
priests in several parishes. I talked to my bishop ( Swing). I talked
to a deacon during a church retreat at Bishop's Ranch retreat
center in the Bay Area. I talked with my sponsor for Cursillo.
I spoke with the person who nominated me as a Lay Eucharistic
Minister in my diocese ( I was approved ). I spoke with the
person who appointed me co-head of the parish altar guild in
one parish. You see -- I *have* given the question prayerful
consideration, and have spoken with many spiritual advisers
among the clergy. I spoke with my partner of over 25 years,
who said she was quite willing to make our relationship
completely celibate if the church required it and/or I wanted
it. We are Christian people, church members, who listen to
our clergy and read the Bible, the Prayer Book, and
devotional literature, and who pray daily and confess daily.
I am far from sinless -- "my sin is always before me". But
it is *not* that gay people in the church are thoughtless,
sex-crazed hedonists. It is that the authorities in the
church differ on their views on this.
Post by Dan
She does not (at least not
yet) appear to have followed the rational process to its logical
conclusion, and for this we must be thankful.
I believe I am an orthodox Anglo-Catholic. Not a perfect one,
not a sinless one, but basically fairly conservative and
traditional in my views.
Post by Dan
We Christians have to accept responsibility for a lot of past
"muddying of the water" -- in particular, for our failures to
discriminate between sinners and their sins. That, the real
"homophobia", is-- at least in part-- what has caused the anger to
which CM refers.
Dan
2007-10-05 18:58:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by ChapelMouse
<snip>
Post by Dan
My impression is that CM really does try to follow Christ according to
her lights. IMHO this counts for a lot.
Thank you, Dan. That means a lot to me!
I have spent many years discussing the issue which preoccupies
Carter -- I had doubts, too. I prayed. I talked to parish
priests in several parishes. I talked to my bishop ( Swing). I talked
to a deacon during a church retreat at Bishop's Ranch retreat
center in the Bay Area. I talked with my sponsor for Cursillo.
I spoke with the person who nominated me as a Lay Eucharistic
Minister in my diocese ( I was approved ). I spoke with the
person who appointed me co-head of the parish altar guild in
one parish. You see -- I *have* given the question prayerful
consideration, and have spoken with many spiritual advisers
among the clergy. I spoke with my partner of over 25 years,
who said she was quite willing to make our relationship
completely celibate if the church required it and/or I wanted
it. We are Christian people, church members, who listen to
our clergy and read the Bible, the Prayer Book, and
devotional literature, and who pray daily and confess daily.
I am far from sinless -- "my sin is always before me". But
it is *not* that gay people in the church are thoughtless,
sex-crazed hedonists. It is that the authorities in the
church differ on their views on this.
That has been the point of some of my recent posts. I suspect that gay
people in the church have sometimes been unwittingly exploited in the
service of radical agendas to which many of them would not otherwise
be sympathetic.

While we do differ somewhat in our views of marriage and sexuality, I
respect your sincerity. It sounds like TEC is lucky to have you, and
many others who have sought it as a place of refuge. My quarrel
(insofar as I have one) is not with you or them.
Post by ChapelMouse
Post by Dan
She does not (at least not
yet) appear to have followed the rational process to its logical
conclusion, and for this we must be thankful.
I believe I am an orthodox Anglo-Catholic. Not a perfect one,
not a sinless one, but basically fairly conservative and
traditional in my views.
I have gradually been coming to realize this.
Post by ChapelMouse
Post by Dan
We Christians have to accept responsibility for a lot of past
"muddying of the water" -- in particular, for our failures to
discriminate between sinners and their sins. That, the real
"homophobia", is-- at least in part-- what has caused the anger to
which CM refers.
brig
2007-10-07 09:14:57 UTC
Permalink
Post by ChapelMouse
Post by c***@gmail.com
Post by ChapelMouse
Post by Dan
Well put. People on both sides of this decades-long escalating process
of confrontation feel that they have been coerced, threatened, and
provoked. The only hope for TEC is a structure within which all can
retain their integrity while continuing in fellowship.
Speaking of integrity...
I just spent a couple of hours reading the Integrity website, which
has a good amount of healthy outrage, and I can assure you there are
a lot of pissed-off GLBT Episcopalians out there who will continue the
fight for genuine "full inclusion."
Christ said, 'If you love me, you will obey me.' He also said, 'You
cannot serve God and mammon.'
<snip>
As we all agree.
The people who support Integrity and Oasis ( which include me )
would counter that obeying Christ means following His call to
love all His children as ourselves, and His call to
justice for the poor, the oppressed, and the marginalized,
who include GLBT people in the church and the world. They
would heartily agree you cannot serve God and mammon, and
that includes abandoning our call to justice and love of our
neighbor in order to retain membership in an organization
which requires them to sell their birthright for a mess of
stale false doctrine based in bigotry and homophobia.
Gay people in the church are angry partly because many of them
came to the Episcopal church based on its efforts to reach out
to them over the last thirty or so years. Many gay people joined,
many gay clergy came out, or began the process of seeking
ordination, based on that effort by the church and the firm
assurances of liberal bishops like Swing ( in the Bay Area ) that
the church would support full inclusion and justice for them.
They now feel a bit betrayed. Not that the Episcopal church
isn't trying -- the HOB has refused to state categorically that
no gay/Lesbian bishop will ever be consecrated again, or that
local parishes and dioceses must stop all blessing of gay unions
in quiet, unofficial ceremonies if they feel it is vital to
their pastoral mission. The church's heart is in the right place,
and I think most gay people realize that. They just wish the
bishops -- and Canterbury -- had shown the courage of their
convictions rather than trying to appease people who hate them
anyway.
<snip>
Without full inclusion there is no church!
Brig
j***@satx.rr.com
2007-10-08 17:46:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by brig
Post by ChapelMouse
Post by c***@gmail.com
Post by ChapelMouse
Post by Dan
Well put. People on both sides of this decades-long escalating process
of confrontation feel that they have been coerced, threatened, and
provoked. The only hope for TEC is a structure within which all can
retain their integrity while continuing in fellowship.
Speaking of integrity...
I just spent a couple of hours reading the Integrity website, which
has a good amount of healthy outrage, and I can assure you there are
a lot of pissed-off GLBT Episcopalians out there who will continue the
fight for genuine "full inclusion."
Christ said, 'If you love me, you will obey me.' He also said, 'You
cannot serve God and mammon.'
<snip>
As we all agree.
The people who support Integrity and Oasis ( which include me )
would counter that obeying Christ means following His call to
love all His children as ourselves, and His call to
justice for the poor, the oppressed, and the marginalized,
who include GLBT people in the church and the world. They
would heartily agree you cannot serve God and mammon, and
that includes abandoning our call to justice and love of our
neighbor in order to retain membership in an organization
which requires them to sell their birthright for a mess of
stale false doctrine based in bigotry and homophobia.
Gay people in the church are angry partly because many of them
came to the Episcopal church based on its efforts to reach out
to them over the last thirty or so years. Many gay people joined,
many gay clergy came out, or began the process of seeking
ordination, based on that effort by the church and the firm
assurances of liberal bishops like Swing ( in the Bay Area ) that
the church would support full inclusion and justice for them.
They now feel a bit betrayed. Not that the Episcopal church
isn't trying -- the HOB has refused to state categorically that
no gay/Lesbian bishop will ever be consecrated again, or that
local parishes and dioceses must stop all blessing of gay unions
in quiet, unofficial ceremonies if they feel it is vital to
their pastoral mission. The church's heart is in the right place,
and I think most gay people realize that. They just wish the
bishops -- and Canterbury -- had shown the courage of their
convictions rather than trying to appease people who hate them
anyway.
<snip>
Without full inclusion there is no church!
Brig-
Does that include the orthodox?
Alternative oversight?

Jim

The only heresy in TEC
is orthodoxy
brig
2007-10-07 09:13:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by ChapelMouse
<snip>
Post by Dan
Well put. People on both sides of this decades-long escalating process
of confrontation feel that they have been coerced, threatened, and
provoked. The only hope for TEC is a structure within which all can
retain their integrity while continuing in fellowship.
Speaking of integrity...
I just spent a couple of hours reading the Integrity website, which
has a good amount of healthy outrage, and I can assure you there are
a lot of pissed-off GLBT Episcopalians out there who will continue the
fight for genuine "full inclusion." I feel a lot better now....
Post by Dan
Some might even
be surprised to discover that what they have in common still greatly
outweighs what divides them.
Good! You are correct!
Brig
ChapelMouse
2007-10-04 15:52:47 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
On the fact of it, the response of the TEC to the Lambeth report
addresses the issues adequately.
Why, Carter -- one might almost believe you actually want the
evil Episcopal church to remain among the pure elect of the
Anglican communion. I'm shocked -- shocked!

Of course, I assume you would expect the "Orthodox Anglicans"
among the flock to autoclave their chalice and patten after
each Mass....

(irony, for the humor-impaired )
<snip>
c***@gmail.com
2007-10-04 22:52:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by ChapelMouse
Why, Carter -- one might almost believe you actually want the
evil Episcopal church to remain among the pure elect of the
Anglican communion. I'm shocked -- shocked!
Yes, as long as they cease ordaining and consecrating those living in
immoral relationships and do not authorize the blessing of people
intent on living in immoral relationships.

I think that it's pretty clear that they feel like they got their hand
severely slapped and like a sullen child have said very reluctantly,
'I'm sorry.'
Post by ChapelMouse
Of course, I assume you would expect the "Orthodox Anglicans"
among the flock to autoclave their chalice and patten after
each Mass....
And I would expect the "Catholic Anglicans" to do the same.

CC
Dan
2007-10-05 12:46:52 UTC
Permalink
Post by c***@gmail.com
Post by ChapelMouse
Why, Carter -- one might almost believe you actually want the
evil Episcopal church to remain among the pure elect of the
Anglican communion. I'm shocked -- shocked!
Yes, as long as they cease ordaining and consecrating those living in
immoral relationships and do not authorize the blessing of people
intent on living in immoral relationships.
I think that it's pretty clear that they feel like they got their hand
severely slapped and like a sullen child have said very reluctantly,
'I'm sorry.'
This is a very good image. A sullen, provocative child, but a child
nonetheless--one dearly loved by its parent.
Charles Hohenstein
2007-10-04 15:52:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dan
Panel Says Episcopalians Have Met Anglican Directive
By NEELA BANERJEE
New York Times
Not all the members of the Primates' Standing Committee had a chance to
give their input before this response was given. We haven't heard the
end of this story.
--
Charles Hohenstein
To reply, remove Gene Robinson
"The sad huddle of affluent bedwetters, thumbsuckers, treehuggers, social
climbers, homophiles, quavery ladies, and chronic petition signers that
makes up the current Episcopal Church . . ."--Thomas Lipscomb
brig
2007-10-07 09:12:01 UTC
Permalink
On Oct 4, 8:52 am, Charles Hohenstein
Post by Charles Hohenstein
Post by Dan
Panel Says Episcopalians Have Met Anglican Directive
By NEELA BANERJEE
New York Times
Not all the members of the Primates' Standing Committee had a chance to
give their input before this response was given. We haven't heard the
end of this story.
--
Charles Hohenstein
To reply, remove Gene Robinson
"The sad huddle of affluent bedwetters, thumbsuckers, treehuggers, social
climbers, homophiles, quavery ladies, and chronic petition signers that
makes up the current Episcopal Church . . ."--Thomas Lipscomb
The primates need to return to their respective areas and see that
their people are served properly. This before they attempt to take
over the US.
Now that their income from America is being cut back rather drasticly
watch them return to their own areas and abandon those who have run
after what they thought were greener pastures.
Brig
Stanley F. Nelson
2007-10-09 03:52:49 UTC
Permalink
I can say the sun rises in the west, but that does not express reality.
Denying reality is neither mature nor responsible, nor of any more appeal
even if splendidly vested.

Stanley F. Nelson
Dallas.
Jeff Miars
2007-10-09 09:21:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Stanley F. Nelson
I can say the sun rises in the west, but that does not express reality.
Denying reality is neither mature nor responsible, nor of any more
appeal even if splendidly vested.
Stanley F. Nelson
Dallas.
Seems to me even you are capable of such denial.

Loading...