Elizabeth and I made it to a showing last evening. Crisp and clever–KSH
Daily Archives: May 9, 2009
The Federal Reserve significantly scaled back the size of the capital hole facing some of the nation’s biggest banks shortly before concluding its stress tests, following two weeks of intense bargaining.
In addition, according to bank and government officials, the Fed used a different measurement of bank-capital levels than analysts and investors had been expecting, resulting in much smaller capital deficits.
The overall reaction to the stress tests, announced Thursday, has been generally positive. But the haggling between the government and the banks shows the sometimes-tense nature of the negotiations that occurred before the final results were made public.
The formula for restoring national confidence ”” part good policy, part good politics, part good luck ”” can be hard to find. It eluded Herbert Hoover after the Crash of ’29, Lyndon B. Johnson after the Tet offensive, Jimmy Carter after the energy shock and George W. Bush after Iraq turned from quick victory to bloody insurgency.
But President Obama has to try to do just that in a time of crisis. As the government announced this week that the nation’s largest banks had steered away from the precipice and that job losses were beginning to slow, Mr. Obama has carefully begun trying to mine any national leader’s most precious commodity in a crisis: optimism.
His past references to “glimmers of hope” were modestly upgraded at the White House on Friday, with his declaration ”” which he stumbled over, taking some of the assertiveness out of the line ”” that “the gears of our economic engine do appear to be slowly turning once again.”
The rats are out in spades this spring in North Allston, a gritty neighborhood wedged between the Charles River and the Massachusetts Turnpike, and residents are blaming Harvard.
Harvard had big plans to expand its campus into Allston with a science complex. But last winter, the university announced that the recession would force it to slow ”” perhaps even halt ”” the $1 billion project. Now Allston residents are living with a gaping hole and a bunch of vacant buildings instead of the prospect of a revitalized neighborhood.
They are not alone in feeling burned by a university. As endowments everywhere sink with the economy, town-gown relationships, often carefully nurtured during the boom years as colleges and universities sought to expand, are fraying.
Bishop Mouneer Anis of Egypt
I share the sadness of my brother Bishop Bill. There was manipulation. We had deliberated long about section 4. They put resolution A to detach section 4 and ask ABC to put a committee. When the resolution was put for voting, we praise the Lord it was rejected.
Then it was like a shock to bring the two main clauses of the resolution we rejected and put it in the resolution we wanted to vote on. It is absolutely wrong. We as members of ACC had decided that we do not want this resolution. We wanted the covenant to go straight to the provinces. This led to what seemed to me to be a lot of confusion on the role of the ACC. The ACC is not a synod to take decisions like this. All we are asking for is that this covenant be sent for a further three years, until 2012, so that every province will have plenty of time. The provinces can make amendments as well after it has passed. There will be time for discussion and reflection. There will be objections and amendments. Yet this body does not want to send it. It was very clear from the rejection of Resolution A they way that the majority in the house wanted to go. This was a shock and confusion and a manipulation.
This was deliberate. Resolution A was rejected and yet was brought back. Even if it is legal I see it as wrong. Also in the last few days, all of us were clear about section 4. Even the Church in Canada had said for the sake of the communion and unity we will receive this covenant. I personally think it is unfair to appoint people from three different provinces who are known to reject the covenant, – New Zealand, the United States and Scotland, – on the resolution committee. Part of this crisis is due to distrust. I must say that all what happened increased the distrust.
The real danger and promise from the tale of these two bishops hinges on whether this “defeat” of the Covenant will lead to a fresh wounding or to a healing of the Global South movement, which was cynically riven by the “divide and conquer” tactics of the powers that be in London and New York. There is now the potential for reassembling that movement, and Archbishops Mouneer and Orombi will be two key figures in it. Pray, brothers and sisters, for the unity of those who hold the common faith once for all delivered to the saints.
When a resolution to add this fourth moratorium was moved today, the Presiding Bishop of TEC rose to complain, among other things, that such a moratorium would enable congregations leaving TEC to “alienate their property.”
As usual, nothing could be further from the truth. The key principles set out in the appendix to the Dar es Salaam Statement required both parties “to give assurances that no steps will be taken to alienate property from the Episcopal Church without its consent or to deny use of that property to those congregations.” (WCG Report to the Archbishop of Canterbury at paragraph 34, footnote 11, page 7). It is exactly the kind of “standstill” begged for by +Rowan Williams in his presentation of the WCG Recommendations, where he called all parties to take a step back from what they are doing – that we owe it to the Lord of our Church to do so.
Dr Williams has read the report. He presented its recommendations to the ACC-14. He was present at DES and read that Statement too. Yet he allowed the misrepresentation of the Presiding Bishop to stand, without comment.
The document, which was advocated by Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams earlier this week as the only way to save the fractured Communion, has divided opinion across the Church. In addition, legal questions have been raised as to whether the Church of England itself will be allowed to adopt it.
Now, the representatives of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) decided yesterday (May 8) that the Ridley Cambridge Draft of an Anglican covenant needs more work before it can be presented to the communion’s provinces for adoption. And in a narrow vote, the ACC voted against calling for a moratorium on legal battles over property.
The 14th Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) by a tight vote on May 8 rejected a move to add a fourth moratorium on issues related to divisions over human sexuality that would have asked for a “cessation of litigation” among member churches of the Anglican Communion involved in disputes over property.
The ACC, however, said it “affirms” the recommendations of the Windsor Continuation Group (WCG), which included not just moratoria on the blessing of same-sex unions, the ordination of persons living in same-sex unions, and cross-provincial interventions, but also “relational consequences” for those who breach them. The original text of the resolution had used the word “notes,” instead of “affirms.”
The word “notes” had been used to reflect the “range of views” expressed by delegates in discernment groups, said Anthony Fitchett, chair of the resolutions committee and a lay delegate. Opponents said, however, that using a “more neutral” word was not useful, since the ACC “needs to give an indication of how it feels” about the WCG recommendations.
At the ACC-14 meeting in Kingston Jamaica the concept of An Anglican Covenant was a central theme on this, the 6th day of the meetings. Over the past few days the delegates had a number of sessions in Discernment Groups discussing the Covenant and the resolution that would be presented.
Much of the debate today centered on the fourth section ”˜Our Covenanted Life Together’ which, unlike the other three sections, some delegates felt had not had the time for comments and feedback from the provinces. After some strong and a vigorous debate the following resolutions were passed by the Consultative council
The Anglican Communion Covenant
1. thanks the Covenant Design Group for their faithfulness and responsiveness in producing the drafts for an Anglican Communion Covenant and, in particular, for the Ridley Cambridge Draft submitted to this meeting;
2. recognises that an Anglican Communion Covenant may provide an effective means to strengthen and promote our common life as a Communion;
3. asks the Archbishop of Canterbury, in consultation with the Secretary General, to appoint a small working group to consider and consult with the Provinces on Section 4 and its possible revision, and to report to the next meeting of the Joint Standing Committee;
4. asks the JSC, at that meeting, to approve a final form of Section 4
5. asks the Secretary General to send the revised Ridley Cambridge Text, at that time, only to the member Churches of the Anglican Consultative Council for consideration and decision on acceptance or adoption by them as The Anglican Communion Covenant;
6. asks those member Churches to report to ACC-15 on the progress made in the processes of response to, and acceptance or adoption of, the Covenant.
After the Council had passed the resolutions the Secretary General Canon Kenneth Kearon explained to the media how the covenant process would be moving forward over the next year and responded to questions.
After a long, drawn-out debate, and what some delegates referred to as a “confusing” process, the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) on May 8 asked that a “small working group” be appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury to “consider and consult with the provinces” on Section 4 of the Ridley-Cambridge draft, “and its possible revision.” That group was asked to report to the next meeting of the Joint Standing Committee of primates (senior bishops of each Anglican province) and the ACC, which will meet before the end of the year.
The ACC had, by a vote of 47 against, 17 in favour, and one abstention, defeated a section of the resolution that sought to detach the draft’s controversial Section 4, Our Covenanted Life Together, “for further consideration and work.”
Prior to the vote, however, Archbishop Philip Aspinall, primate of the Anglican Church of Australia, noting that the process had bogged down so that session had to be extended, introduced an alternative resolution that addressed the concerns of both proponents and opponents of the issue. Some delegates spoke against the resolution while one, Rev. Janet Trisk of the Anglican Church of Southern Africa, introduced an amendment to include two sections from Archbishop Aspinall’s resolution. Those sections were those that called for the appointment of a small working group and for the JSC to “approve a final form of Section 4.” The amendment was carried by a vote of 33 for, 30 against, and 2 abstentions.
Forgive some academic jargon, but the most common education reform ideas ”” reducing class size, raising teacher pay, enrolling kids in Head Start ”” produce gains of about 0.1 or 0.2 or 0.3 standard deviations. If you study policy, those are the sorts of improvements you live with every day. Promise Academy produced gains of 1.3 and 1.4 standard deviations. That’s off the charts. In math, Promise Academy eliminated the achievement gap between its black students and the city average for white students.
Let me repeat that. It eliminated the black-white achievement gap. “The results changed my life as a researcher because I am no longer interested in marginal changes,” [Roland Fryer, a meticulous Harvard economist] wrote in a subsequent e-mail. What Geoffrey Canada, Harlem Children’s Zone’s founder and president, has done is “the equivalent of curing cancer for these kids. It’s amazing. It should be celebrated. But it almost doesn’t matter if we stop there. We don’t have a way to replicate his cure, and we need one since so many of our kids are dying ”” literally and figuratively.”
These results are powerful evidence in a long-running debate. Some experts, mostly surrounding the education establishment, argue that schools alone can’t produce big changes. The problems are in society, and you have to work on broader issues like economic inequality. Reformers, on the other hand, have argued that school-based approaches can produce big results. The Harlem Children’s Zone results suggest the reformers are right. The Promise Academy does provide health and psychological services, but it helps kids who aren’t even involved in the other programs the organization offers.
Kondo, sudan: I want to add my voice and thank the cdg…it seems to me section 4 is the most important…to accept this resolution is to mean we will debate this issue again and again…
Anis: without section 4..we can not call the covenant a covenant..it is section 4 that makes the whole covenant a covenant…the crisis we are going through now is because of the absolute autonomy that this covenant with 123 and 4 affirms the interdependence…we are a communion with autonomy…i would appeal that you would vote against this b/c 1. if we accept this we will lose a great chance to be united…i assure you that there are churches that affirm the whole covenant…and the communion will be divided…if we don’t approve 1234 together…if we wait 10 years we will never get a perfect covenant…the cdg has worked for 3 years very hard..they have broght us a good covenant…we can not undermine the work of the cdg…section 4 is from lambeth and the responses of the diocese/provinces…all that has been done is the commentary has been brought in..its not truet that it hasn’t received any study…it is the outcome of a lot of study…
SE Asia, Stanley Isaac. I want to say that this resolution a should be rejected because it would be disastrous to send to the provinces the text of the covenant without 4 because it would mean nothing for all the rest of us who have been waiting for this document to find a ray of hope for a problem that has divided the communion and embarrassed the churches. This is a defining moment for the communion, We grab it or we dont. It would be a way of united the communion once again in the bond of Christ and truly regard ourselves as one body. That will be a unity only in the past if we do not pass section 4…We have not been taken by surpruse by section 4. I want to express the appreciation of my province we feel disappointed that the concerns to tighten up the appendix, was watered down. We think it is a weak provision of measure for achieving a soluton to the problem. Allow this full text to go forward..
Diocese of Peru Bishop Bill Godfrey, representing the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone, unsuccessfully called for a “listening process for those involved in litigation,” so that they “feel that justice is being done” and that “the ACC hears them.”
Episcopal Church episcopal representative Diocese of New York Bishop Catherine Roskam suggested that, a listening process should include the voice of “joyful Episcopalians — both liberal and conservative — in the re-constituted dioceses of the Episcopal Church.”
“There’s much good there,” she continued. “They’re faithful Episcopalians and their voices need to be heard as well.”
Earlier in the debate, Episcopal Church lay representative Josephine Hicks spoke against having the resolution’s second resolve to “affirm” the continuation group’s recommendations. She argued that while the Episcopal Church had “complied with all the moratoria — at a significant cost,” others have not honored the ban on cross-boundary interventions. These interventions occur when bishops and priests from other communion provinces enter the territory of the Episcopal Church to minister to disaffected members of the church, without the traditionally required permission of the local bishop.
I find it in-credible when I read that some of the bishops withholding consent around the issue of not adhering strictly to the BCP are, as I know personally, adapting Enriching Our Worship because he does not like the Eucharistic liturgies contained therein. He has exacting standards and, in fact, his revisions are very good. So why deny another gifted and talented priest from exercising his gifts of leadership as a bishop when he is exercising great care and love for the liturgy of the church?
I’m also curious about Anglo-Catholic parishes that still use the 1928 Prayer Book and the 1951 American Missal and wonder whether bishops must insist that such parishes adhere to the 1979 BCP? Again one of Forrester’s strongest detractors allows such diversity in his diocese. And what about parishes that feel strongly about inviting all, even the unbaptized, to the Eucharistic table? This happens all over the country and, shy of instituting a Liturgy Patrol, my guess is it will (and should) continue.
I have heard it said that the model of ministry being practiced and lived out in the Diocese of Northern Michigan is also a cause for some concern. This truly is disturbing. Our church is struggling to find new ways of being the church. What I find amazing is that one small diocese, completely faithful to TEC and having never considered leaving it, is being judged so harshly for its choice of bishop. Here is a man who loves TEC, loves his diocese and is proud of his Anglican heritage and is now facing the possibility of not being able to live out the vision of his diocese which has been the model for dioceses in Scotland, Canada and other parts of TEC.