« Javalujah (or "What if Starbucks marketed like the Church?") | Main | Advent Blogging & Songs of Praise »

03 December 2008

Comments

Tim

This has to be the saddest piece of news I've heard in a long while (especially since I've not been keeping up with the wider Anglican scene of late).

It matters because it makes clear that the revisionist agenda cannot be pushed without there being serious consequences.

I think you mean there is sufficient weight of conservative tradition that the church, and therefore the Church, will be seen as increasingly out of touch, tied to an erroneous view of a culture ~2000 years ago as though it prescribed how today's culture should operate; this being a view which has only been in place since the times of Luther and Calvin.

the North American hierarchy never had any intention of repenting for their actions (apologising for upset caused is not the same thing as repentance)

What actions? Ordaining +Gene as bishop? I'm won't bother asking why that needs repentence, because it does not. Nor should it even interest anyone else in the wider Communion, because it's TEC's polity.

TEC ...could have made room for conservative dioceses and congregations

How much more room do they need? Where is the problem with the current system in TEC? Where is the prescription, "ooh, you *must* have a lesbian for your new rector" when handling vacancies, etc?
I have thought this for a long time: there seems to be a faction that persists in seeing themselves as oppressed and ill-catered-for, while the polity of TEC caters for the *whole* spectrum. Thus such factions are merely separatist, not actually interested in finding solutions or accepting the status quo.

They could have clearly stepped away from their support for practicing homosexual bishops and same sex blessings.

Why would they want to? No, better not ask that; I only expect a boring blast of a select handful of verses devoid of contextual understanding as an answer.

If they did the Global South provinces would have ceased their involvement in supporting new church structures in TEC/ACC territory.

Yeah RIGHT!

If the various provinces calling themselves `Global South' had been interested in having influence in the US, in a Biblical manner ("if you see your brother sinning...") then they would have opened a forum for discussion. What they actually did was leech a parasitic organization, CANA, onto TEC for the express purpose of stealing gullible congregations and dioceses away, from the outset.

If they had been interested in discussion, including possibly pointing out fault, they would not have walked away from Lambeth in advance, either.

Is this new entity be truly Anglican? Because of the support from other parts of the world, I venture to say, "Yes, it is".

I fail to see where the rest of the world, other than Canterbury, comes into the definition of `Anglican'.

Of course I can see how there might be fragmentation of which-province-recognizes-which all over the place; is that not a *bigger* fragmentation than letting TEC go its own way, and even worse still than learning to have dialogue between provinces?

Frankly, I am muchly saddened (and struggling not to let anger through) at the "conservative"s' black-and-white and bigoted attitude to a viable subsection of humanity being given such credence.

The comments to this entry are closed.

My Photo

GadgetVicar serves with: