Dreadful reporting here in an NZ Herald report about the forthcoming ACC in Auckland. (Don't be fooled by the "NZ" in the newspaper's title. It is an Auckland paper which is simply being true to the fact that up in Auckland they think they are NZ!).
Somewhat typically of the lowest quality of journalism hereabouts, the article starts with an interview of someone (a friend of mine, as it happens) who is not a member of the ACC and who cheerfully predicts what the ACC will decide. But if one can be bothered to read on to the end, you will find an actual functionary of the ACC, Kenneth Kearon, who knows the agenda backwards, draws the opposite conclusion!
I do understand that "Nothing much will be decided at ACC meeting" does not sell newspapers!
What some of us would like to see from journalists at ACC is a focused interview of Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori (TEC) and Bishop Douglas (Connecticutt). Here are the questions I would be asking:
(1) Are you going after every bishop of TEC dioceses which does not fully accede to the canons and constitution of TEC?
Should be an interesting answer since Connecticutt is deficient in this matter also!
(2) Given the amount of legal machinations going on against conservative bishops in TEC (not just South Carolina, also against these bishops), does "E" in "TEC" stand for "exclusive"?
(3) Which word better describes these moves against conservative bishops in TEC, "purge" or "cleansing"?
Hopefully we would get straight answers and no unctuous vacuity.
It is just that the NZ Herald report doesn't fill me with hope that any reporter will show up ready to ask tough questions ...