tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post7197458452595741820..comments2024-03-19T16:52:19.962+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: Global Forum of Independent Anglican ChurchesPeter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger40125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-14000074587393059412011-02-15T15:36:17.108+13:002011-02-15T15:36:17.108+13:00I'm not aware of anytime that the Puritans wer...I'm not aware of anytime that the Puritans were in control in England except for during the Protectorate under Cromwell. Theodore Roosevelt wrote a biography of Cromwell (available on Google Books) in which he pointed out that there were no burnings at the stake during his regime.<br /><br />There were burnings in England well into the 18th Century, and there were some in New York during that same period while it was under English rule. I hate to admit it, but it sounds like burning at the stake was more of an Anglican thing than a Puritan thing. ;-)Paul Powershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04833212693999583069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-89727537649658497662011-02-14T23:01:16.293+13:002011-02-14T23:01:16.293+13:00Perhaps you are thinking of the US Puritans. So yo...Perhaps you are thinking of the US Puritans. So you are sure that the Puritans of the English Civil Wars did not burn their enemies at the stake?Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-75790277630168679862011-02-14T11:16:36.690+13:002011-02-14T11:16:36.690+13:00The Puritans didn't burn people at the stake, ...The Puritans didn't burn people at the stake, they hanged them. They were a frugal people for whom using firewood in that manner would have been considered an unnecessary extravagance.Paul Powershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04833212693999583069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-90893726728729256772011-02-13T10:37:27.563+13:002011-02-13T10:37:27.563+13:00Thus I ask, what great pressures were felt by thos...<i>Thus I ask, what great pressures were felt by those who made the first call to foreign bishops to asist them in their hour of need? There must have been more going on than a general feeling of holding to a minority viewpoint within a larger church.</i><br /><br />The fact that they could no longer do to us what their Puritan forebears did to folks in their day, burn us at the stake.Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-42913201357262419832011-02-13T05:55:25.153+13:002011-02-13T05:55:25.153+13:00Hi Ron,
Your citation is from a list of possible c...Hi Ron,<br />Your citation is from a list of possible compromises which could be considered by key member churches of the Communion in an attempt to find a way for all to return to the table.<br /><br />My own view is that truth transcends cultural and national differences and if things are going awry in Uganda or Canada or Aotearoa NZ then others have the right under God to speak prophetically and pastorally into the situation.<br /><br />Your characterization of how things got going in North America is over simplistic. Questions to consider included: the extent to which 'missionary' work from Uganda etc was initially responsive to Ugandans in America seeking Anglicanism as they knew it; the call from within North America by North American Anglicans to African, Asian, and South American bishops to come over to help; as well as, and most importantly, why that call came in the first place.<br /><br />You and I have our differences and may, at times, feel like lone minority voices within the greater mass of our church. May I presume that you like me do not feel under any pressure to call upon foreign prelates to episcopally care for us?<br /><br />Thus I ask, what great pressures were felt by those who made the first call to foreign bishops to asist them in their hour of need? There must have been more going on than a general feeling of holding to a minority viewpoint within a larger church.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-22038490384808098322011-02-12T23:22:58.104+13:002011-02-12T23:22:58.104+13:00"Uganda could be accepted as knowing best how..."Uganda could be accepted as knowing best how to handle the challenges of socio-political life within its own sovereign area." Peter Carrell -<br /><br />Precisely! and if Uganda, Nigeria, etc., could only have trusted TEC and the A.C.0f C. to do what they perceived to be the Gospel initiative in their patch, then the Communion may6 have remained 'in Communion'.<br /><br />However, Uganda & Nigeria, etc. decided to send their missionaries into the territory of both the U.S. and Canada - thereby creating their own faux-Anglican Churches in those countries - and that's what started it.<br /><br />TEC and the A.C.of C. were not asking Uganda or Nigeria to copy them in what they were doing, believing it was none of their business to judge a fellow Province of activities which they might believe to be antithetical to the Gospel.<br /><br />You can't have it both ways!Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-72892031566361363652011-02-12T17:09:34.408+13:002011-02-12T17:09:34.408+13:00Peter, there are folks who are members of schismat...<i>Peter, there are folks who are members of schismatic parishes because they do not want to leave the building, not because they are invested in who is controlling the building.</i><br /><br />There are undoubtedly some people who are so attached the church buillding that they will stay no matter what, but I think that's less true in a place like Fort Worth than it might be on the U.S. East Coast. My early childhood parish in Delaware was founded by the SPG in 1704, and there are probably people there today whose families have been parishioners almost since then. Fort Worth is much younger. There are only a handful of parishes over 100 years old. Most were started much more recently, so people may not have the same atavistic attachment to them as they might in older parts of the U.S. <br /><br />About 15 years ago, the rector, vestry and a large portion of the congregation in one parish decided to join the Antiochan Orthodox Church. There was also a sizable number of parishioners who chose to remain in the Episcopal Church. While the Antiochan faction occupied the church, the Episcopal faction worshipped in the Chapel of a nearby parochial school. When after the settlement of a lawsuit, the Episcopal faction recovered the premises, the Antiochans went elsewhere. But there were very few (if any) people who continued to worship there regardless of which faction was occupying the church at the time. Fortunately for the Antiochans, it didn't take them long to raise the money to build their own church, which is thriving.Paul Powershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04833212693999583069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-16209608684705323162011-02-12T16:02:14.215+13:002011-02-12T16:02:14.215+13:00Peter,
Your post has been very provocative, elici...Peter,<br /><br />Your post has been very provocative, eliciting both many comments here and responses elsewhere. Readers may wish to see the two posts you inspired on my own blog <a href="http://blog.deimel.org/2011/02/after-dublinpart-1.html" rel="nofollow">here</a> and <a href="http://blog.deimel.org/2011/02/after-dublinpart-2.html" rel="nofollow">here</a>.<br /><br />As you might guess from my earlier comments, I mostly disagree with you. I do appreciate your forthrightness and your willingness to engage in dialogue, however.Lionel Deimelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08363018512775944659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-73346289880502517612011-02-12T15:50:51.764+13:002011-02-12T15:50:51.764+13:00Hi David
You make important points which have resp...Hi David<br />You make important points which have respectable content - I won't waste your or my time teasing out nuances of difference between us on them!<br /><br />Some kind of compromise, difficult though it would be for some here, others there and so forth could be made.<br /><br />Probably such compromises (or better ones!) won't be made. So what has become of the Communion is what it will be.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-52452359997801557572011-02-12T15:42:15.906+13:002011-02-12T15:42:15.906+13:00TEC could promise (and really mean it) that no mor...<i>TEC could promise (and really mean it) that no more bishops in same sex partnerships will be ordained.</i><br /><br />Of course Peter, you are well aware that not ordaining bishops in a same sex relationships is throwing them under the bus as far as we are concerned.<br /><br />As for the "and really mean it," TEC lived up to its commitment for the three years the "promise" was in force, 2006 to 2009, however the 2009 General Convention rescinded the previous resolution with an over riding resolution, and ordinations have resumed if a candidate is elected.<br /><br /><i>Uganda could be accepted as knowing best how to handle the challenges of socio-political life within its own sovereign area.</i><br /><br />Could not one say the same regarding TEC and ACCanada? And yet the North Am provinces are making positive decisions for handling the situation of responding to GLBT folks in their sovereign areas. Opposite of that, the Ugandan Church is treating its GLBT citizens and members in horribly negative forms.Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-42018726971793539762011-02-12T14:48:48.092+13:002011-02-12T14:48:48.092+13:00Hi David,
Let me stress, because I don't part...Hi David,<br /><br />Let me stress, because I don't particularly want a long argument about the following, that these are ideas that come to my mind.Whether they would work is for leaders of Anglican churches to work out. <br /><br />What would draw missing bishops and primates into sitting at table with all other Communion bishops in a spirit of compromise (supposing that is possible) is for the primates and bishops to say, not me. So,<br /><br />Uganda could be accepted as knowing best how to handle the challenges of socio-political life within its own sovereign area.<br /><br />Uganda could compromise by ceasing cross-border episcopal incursions and by not demanding of TEC and ACCan as much 'cease and desist' stuff as they seem to be asking.<br /><br />ACCan could hold the line where it is at and not push forward over it (i.e. the line which the ABC has accepted as meaning that its reps need not be demoted on Communion commissions).<br /><br />TEC could promise (and really mean it) that no more bishops in same sex partnerships will be ordained. (And, concomitantly, Uganda, as a corresponding compromise, could accept that progress towards same sex blessings will continue to unfold towards the legislative goal they are heading in).<br /><br />I presume you and others would say, 'Never.'<br /><br />So be it. We will be a federation of independent churches and we will lose the prospect of most African Anglicans not being represented at Lambeth or the Primates' Meeting.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-3478843251446757292011-02-12T14:36:51.464+13:002011-02-12T14:36:51.464+13:00So, I do ask you not to make statements that are n...<i>So, I do ask you not to make statements that are not true to what I am seeking for the future of Anglicanism.</i><br /><br />In order to do that we need to have a firm idea of what it is that you really are seeking. You at times speak in vague generalities and allusions.<br /><br /><i>and (say) Uganda as it is</i><br /><br />Please, explicitly, what does this mean? What about the AC Uganda do you wish us to accept just the way that it is?<br /><br /><i>Could TEC and ACCan compromise a bit? </i><br /><br />Please, explicitly, what compromises do you wish TEC and ACCanada to make? What are they doing that needs to stop? What are they doing that needs to be changed?Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-2075993380406065342011-02-12T12:53:06.561+13:002011-02-12T12:53:06.561+13:00Hi Ron,
I have been trying to take care not to arg...Hi Ron,<br />I have been trying to take care not to argue for the exclusion of TEC and ACCan from the Communion, so I am sorry that you think that is what I want.<br /><br />What I want is a Communion of 38 (or more!) provinces working and meeting together. In an ideal world that would include (say) TEC as it is, and (say) Uganda as it is, having reached an 'agree to disagree' approach to life with differences.<br /><br />But we are not in that ideal world, so I lament the absence of bishops from Lambeth and primates from the Primates' Meeting, and wish it could be otherwise. Could TEC and ACCan compromise a bit? (Seems not, but I think it pertinent to ask the question as one seeking an 'all in' Communion. Ditto asking the question of Nigeria etc).<br /><br />Also, since we are not in that ideal world, I am looking for a bit of honest talking. The Communion has a problem, could our leaders please talk about that? Apparently not, if the PM is anything to go by.<br /><br />I would like to see ACNA included within the Communion but that is not equivalent to seeking the exclusion of TEC and ACCan. (Of course I know that TEC and ACCan do not support their inclusion and ACNA has shot itself in the foot in various ways with things it has said about TEC and ACCan).<br /><br />So, I do ask you not to make statements that are not true to what I am seeking for the future of Anglicanism.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-43128217807990887722011-02-12T12:23:56.277+13:002011-02-12T12:23:56.277+13:00"I agree with you about ++Katharine Jefferts ..."I agree with you about ++Katharine Jefferts Schori: she is most worthy to be leader of TEC." <br /><br /> - Peter Carrell -<br /><br />Your agreement with me on the issue of the worthiness of Bishop Katherine to be Leader of TEC, though bordering on the subtlety of 'ad hominem', is not lost upon me!<br /><br />Your unhappiness with the inclusion of the Anglican Churches in North America is by now well known, and I did not expect any other comment - either from you or B.B., whose evangelical views are very well known within the limitations of the Christchurch Diocese of ACANZP.<br /><br />When the Communion has settled into it's new environment, no doubt, those of us who really care for filial relationship with one another - on the basis of acknoiwledging our common human sinfulness, rather than acting like Scribes and Pharisees - wll find the grace to accept the differences between us as 'grist to the mill' which makes us struggle to keep 'The Unity of the Spirit in the bonds of Peace', which the Gospel of OLJC demands of us.<br /><br />Schism is always the wrong way to go about things, and its advocates will never be content to accept the fact that they, too, may not have all the fullness of The Truth. Orthodoxy can not be self-proclaimed (an ACNA problem); it has to be lived into on the bass of honesty and reality.Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-79742341956382680132011-02-12T11:49:20.883+13:002011-02-12T11:49:20.883+13:00Oh Dear! I'm sorry Peter, but the most recent ...Oh Dear! I'm sorry Peter, but the most recent posting which you have named 'Anonymous' was never meant to be so named. I wondered what had happened to my careufl response to Bryden Black. In the process of typing in my identification, I must have done something that entered the content of my posting without identifying me. I wondered what had happened. - So much for teachnology. There was certainly no intention of dodging resposnibility - despite Bryden's remark.<br /><br />Further to his subsequent post: I am under no illusion about his opinion on the value of Bishop Katherine in Communion affairs. I have always been made acutely aware of his personal stance on such matters. I am not too suprised, either, that he has been disappointed with Rowan's belated attempt to mollify the North American parts of the Communion by refusing to go along with GAFCON and ACNA's disdain for their championing of the human rights of the LGBT community in the Church - despite having 'sat at the feet' of +++Rowan at one time in his (BB's) varied theological pilgrimage.<br /><br />Truth has various ways of asserting herself - mainly through experience and the work of the Holy Spirit. This was promised by Jesus before his departure, so we shouldn't be too surprised when the ABC changes direction in his understanding of the need for an 'Inclusive Church'.Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-32616774364542515732011-02-11T22:43:49.823+13:002011-02-11T22:43:49.823+13:00They say of txt msgs there is little re tone, into...They say of txt msgs there is little re tone, intonation, etc. Well; after your reply, Anonymous, I guess the same goes for pixelation and blogs! For you have got my tone, and all that, absolutely 180 degrees out of kilter ...<br /><br />Thereafter, whether I too was one of those fawning fans: that’s another story altogether, alas!Bryden Blackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15619512328964399016noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-48718560056310863882011-02-11T20:06:13.058+13:002011-02-11T20:06:13.058+13:00Hi Anonymous,
It is the normal policy of this blog...Hi Anonymous,<br />It is the normal policy of this blog not to publish anonymous comments, but because I suspect this may be your first comment I shall let it through. Please comment again, but provide at least one name!<br /><br />I agree with you about ++Katharine Jefferts Schori: she is most worthy to be leader of TEC.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-57692417796350493312011-02-11T19:11:52.747+13:002011-02-11T19:11:52.747+13:00"Moreover, if you cannot see how a visit by T..."Moreover, if you cannot see how a visit by TEC’s PB to ACANZ&P is received by the ‘faithful’ Down Under, then once again ....!"<br /><br /> - Bryden Black -<br /><br />Well, Bryden, I don't know who exactly you are speaking for here. You seem to have assumed that everyone in the ACANZP thinks the same as you do about Bishop Katherine. <br /><br />I can assure readers of this blog who happen to come from outside of N.Z. that Bishop Katherine has a very viable fan club - of N.Z Anglicans who were gald to see and hear her on her visit to Aotearoa/Ne Zealand. She was in fact gladly hosted by the local Maori Bishop in Christchurch on the Marae, and at St. Michael and All Angels' Church here in the City.<br /><br />I personally think that +Katherine is a very worthy Leader of the Epsicoapl Church in North America and beyond, and has been a catalyst in bringing<br />world-wide Anglicanism into a position where the Gospel is being proclaimed to ALL - regardless of race, ethnic diversity, gender and sexual-orientation - something Jesus might have been proud to instigate in today's world - not limited to the scientific understanding of his day and age.<br /><br />I do not want to be part of a world-wide Communion which does not include the liberality of TEC and the A.C.of Canada. To me, they bring a breath of fresh air into the Gospel kerygma.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-4340329053450171522011-02-10T18:33:45.342+13:002011-02-10T18:33:45.342+13:00Peter, there are folks who are members of schismat...Peter, there are folks who are members of schismatic parishes because they do not want to leave the building, not because they are invested in who is controlling the building. They are oblivious to the antics of their leaders.<br /><br />I am not so removed from the ongoing scene in TEC as you want to paint me. I have friends in TEC throughout the province. I lived in Dallas, where I attended seminary, and I am very familiar with both Dio Dallas and Ft Worth, their current bishops and I visit the Metroplex 5 or 6 times a year.Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-67974439592020662092011-02-10T11:42:59.230+13:002011-02-10T11:42:59.230+13:00Hi David,
Scenarios in which allegations that lies...Hi David,<br />Scenarios in which allegations that lies and duplicity are involved are more likely to make a media story than not. There are such stories, but I do not think that makes the whole schismatic enterprise a matter largely built on lies and duplicity. Such a characterization is a form of ad hominem attack as it presumes that many Anglicans not involved in the duplicity are gullible. You will find, if you are willing to talk to them, that many of the Virginian Anglicans are very sharp people indeed, holding high academic offices and governmental positions commensurate with their lack of gullibility.<br /><br />I am prepared to respond to your final questions because they do engage with the substance of my responsive argument.<br /><br />I think conservative Anglicans feel life has been made difficult for their continued belonging to TEC or ACCan because they have found that the public pronouncements of their bishop or the political machinations within their diocese, or for that matter at General Convention, have lessened their confidence that they are actually welcomed and supported within their own church.<br /><br />In other cases I think people leaving their parishes for other churches of other denominations has made clerical and lay leaders anxious for the future of their churches, catalysing a quest for another way.<br /><br />(You in Mexico, I in New Zealand may find it hard to understand exactly why people have felt life has become difficult in these ways, but that is a question of trust in the integrity of the testimony being given by these folks).Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-33363821087484391612011-02-10T11:24:27.409+13:002011-02-10T11:24:27.409+13:00not all North American Anglicans have been telling...<i>not all North American Anglicans have been telling lies and not all situations in which cross-border episcopal interventions have been requested are based on duplicity.</i><br /><br />Peter, it is not ad hominem, I believe that they are. There may be individual Anglicans that are unaware of their leadership's fun & games, but I think that we have more than enough evidence that shows that duplicity abounds among the schismatic. But you may certainly choose not to respond. That does not change the evidence that can speak for itself.<br /><br />What would constitute throwing conservatives under the bus in your mind? What would that entail in effect on the individual lives of conservatives?Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-89748787821169105642011-02-10T10:46:48.820+13:002011-02-10T10:46:48.820+13:00Hi David,
If I am to continue to accord your argum...Hi David,<br />If I am to continue to accord your arguments the effort of replying to the points you make, then I ask that you engage with my arguments and not resort to ad hominem attacks on other Christians.<br /><br />Some people tell lies; perhaps some North American Anglicans have told lies. But even if some North American Anglicans have told lies, not all North American Anglicans have been telling lies and not all situations in which cross-border episcopal interventions have been requested are based on duplicity.<br /><br />Unless you engage with the substance of my reply to you in my previous comment then this particular conversation is at an end.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-3058654995479623322011-02-10T10:29:44.698+13:002011-02-10T10:29:44.698+13:00Unfortunately, many of the conservatives in North ...Unfortunately, many of the conservatives in North America have been duplicitous in their behavior and lying to the "outside" world for years.Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-31284815243482706212011-02-10T08:50:22.809+13:002011-02-10T08:50:22.809+13:00Hi David,
The moratoria involve theological decisi...Hi David,<br />The moratoria involve theological decisions and the way we make those decisions as a global Anglican community.<br /><br />It is possible that we should make such decisions according to whether or not people are going to be 'thrown under buses.'<br /><br />Note that if we did make decisions that way, then we should agree with cross-border episcopal interventions, because the Anglicans they are ministering to are making the claim that they (conservatives) are being thrown under (liberal or progressive) buses.Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-67744126397622726502011-02-10T08:18:37.596+13:002011-02-10T08:18:37.596+13:00What I think is unreasonable is to argue against i...<i>What I think is unreasonable is to argue against interdependency on the basis that it involves throwing people under buses.</i><br /><br />Conservatives argue for moratoria, or they will break/have broken Communion. Conservatives argue for moratoria as a sign of respect for interdependency.<br /><br />For us at this point moratoria is throwing folks under the bus.Brother Davidhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06333089314994730330noreply@blogger.com