tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post3901863381375204249..comments2024-03-28T22:29:52.666+13:00Comments on Anglican Down Under: The Anglican church is a liberal Protestant jelly?Peter Carrellhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comBlogger3125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-20592152633007867442013-11-20T16:10:13.626+13:002013-11-20T16:10:13.626+13:00One thing you might consider. The Code of Practi...One thing you might consider. The Code of Practice is still outstanding and must be written before anything gets approved. So it makes good tactical sense to "wobble" at this point. The required approval of the Code of Practice allows the minority to withdraw support without cost. In effect they don't have to make an irrevocable commitment of support because they can reject the CoP if they find it lacking. Alternatively they can change their position to opposition and blame the CoP for their decision. <br /><br />I am not convinced that all this wobble isn't just a Queen's Gambit.<br /><br />carl carl jacobshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05195615264891904953noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-89254133207798799292013-11-20T11:56:48.721+13:002013-11-20T11:56:48.721+13:00Hi Ron
I think you are jumping too fast to the con...Hi Ron<br />I think you are jumping too fast to the conclusion you draw!<br /><br />The point about 'principled difference' is that there should be careful evaluation of whether this also applies to same-sex relationships. I think there is an open question there (as often discussed here on ADU). My point in the post is that GAFCON may be too readily assuming 'principled difference' does not apply.<br />Peter Carrellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09535218286799156659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3915617830446943975.post-85818387319333829752013-11-20T11:39:41.222+13:002013-11-20T11:39:41.222+13:00Many thanks, Peter, for your thoughtful and princi...Many thanks, Peter, for your thoughtful and principled take on the significant inconsistencies at work in Archbishop Wabukala's pronouncement. Herein, I think, is the nub of the matter:<br /><br />" But this line is seriously exposed by ++Wakabula as frayed. If 'principled difference' over women in leadership is allowable but not over same sex partnerships, there has to be a reason if the counter charge of 'prejudice' is not to be invoked.<br /><br />"The distinction between 'primary' and 'secondary' matters might be brought into play. But what if one group of Anglicans says the matter of same sex partnerships is 'secondary' and another says it is primary? This is likely to be a matter of 'principled difference', which ++Wakabula allows as part of Anglicanism."<br /><br />From your own statement here, it can be deduced that the Chair of FCA/Gafcon group is double-minded about the qualification for being intrinsically 'Anglican'.<br /><br />He says, on the one hand, that it can accommodate 'principled difference' on the ministry of women; but not on the question of same-sex partnerships. <br /><br />How inconsistent can you be, on matters of 'principled difference' Father Ron Smithhttp://kiwianglo.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.com