Memo to self: I am a cretin

Further to my post below about turmoil in TEC which I describe as 'Much Ado About Nothing'.

One of the leading TEC bloggers, and general leader of things TEC is Susan Russell. On a site not her own she described the bishops and theologians connected with the recently published ACI policy paper as 'cretins'. On her own site she makes reference to this and offers an apology or, perhaps more accurately, an 'apology':

"Finally, I'm taking flak for being quoted using the word "cretin" in the Washington Blade. As is often the case with the secular media (and yes, I should know by now to be more careful!) context counts. And while I could and probably should have chosen my words more carefully, the context for that particular comment was exposing the actions of those who mask their homophobia, sexism and and entitlement with a veneer of civility and rapprochement that belies the lengths to which they'll go under cover of darkness to maintain their power and the status quo.

So, for the record, I do regret using the word "cretin." I regret it because cretin infers ignorance -- and I will not grant the architects of this schism the cover of ignorance.

They know precisely what they are doing. And the fact that they doth protest so much when their schemes are brought to the light only serves to make that point."

Remember, these people she has labelled offensively are members of TEC who want TEC to remain in the Anglican Communion!!!!!!!!!!

One of them is Bishop Howe. Responding to another label, that these matters are 'tawdry', he writes in this way:

"Dear Ann,

How is this a tawdry story? The Presiding Bishop has been promoting a version of the structure of The Episcopal Church which simply cannot be supported either constitutionally or historically. The Bishops who have signed today's Statement to the contrary are not willing to have the structure of our church subverted either by fiat or by court action.

We have not one iota of desire to promote schism. Our desire is to protect our constituent membership in the Anglican Communion. The Executive Council has said that the only body that can act upon the Anglican Covenant is the General Convention. We do not believe that is accurate. We believe that dioceses and even parishes could decide to "opt into" it.

Please explain to all of us how the desire of an Anglican diocese to remain Anglican is a "tawdry story."

The private emails that Mark Harris has posted do not reveal any attempt or desire to subvert the authority of the Bishop of Colorado. They envision a possible visitation that would take place only with his explicit permission and agreement.

I am saddened that a member of the Executive Council would publish emails that were not addressed to him, without even discussing them with the principals involved.

It is interesting to be called a "Cretin" by Susan Russell. To my knowledge none of us have ever used any such epithets against those with whom we disagree. (It is good to be in such an "inclusive" church!)

Warmest regards in our Lord,

The Right Rev. John W. Howe
Episcopal Bishop of Central Florida"

Indeed, it is a good and pleasant thing to dwell in unity in an inclusive church. How may this cretin join?