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.
I found this part interesting (my fisking italicized):
[blockquote] [b]George Conger[/b]: The ABC was upset at what transpired. [i][I am sure he was crying rivers of crocodile tears.][/i] How might we go forward?
[b]Bishop Mouneer[/b]: The ABC should be in our prayers every day,. He was very solid and clear in what he said. He was so clear behind the covenant to keep the unity [i][Hunh? The old ditherer laid the Covenant at the feet of Ms Schori so she can vivisect it at a later date – after the GenCon Gayfest. The revisionists have been given free reign to repeal B033, etc.][/i], keep the ecumenical relations, to move the Anglican Communion forward into its mission. What we need to pray for the ABC is for wisdom, grace and good advisers around him. We should not let anger stop us from fulfilling God’s mission. Sometimes we give attention to a dispute to distract us.
The time has come not to waste any more time. Let the people who are truly Anglican and love the Lord, come together and walk forward. [i][I wonder to whom he is referring? The Comm-conners and the GAFCon-ners?][/i] That is God’s church, he promised the gates of hades will never prevail against it. I want to partner with Bishop Bill – I do not want to be distracted any more. [i][Indeed. The whole “Windsor processing” has been a distraction.][/i][/blockquote]
There is certainly no small amount of sour grapes here.
“This was a shock and confusion and a manipulation.”
=============================================================
Welcome to the world of revisionist politics.
The revisionists will use ‘whatever works’ to have things ‘their way.’ And when they manage, by whatever means, democratic or undemocratic, fair of foul, overt or devious, to ‘get their way,’ it is never enough, they want more and more and more of the same.
Thank God for these godly men. This may have at last really illumined them concerning the real character of the people who have hijacked the Gospel and want to hijack the Communion. I expect that now the prophesy of Bishop Gomez made during his presentation of the Covenant will now be fulfilled. I expect disintegration of the AC by the end of this year and Canterbury will preside over the wreck that he has wrought.
Ian Montgomery+
A light begins to dawn, perhaps unexpectedly, here:
http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/2009/05/michael-nazirali-anglicans-must-look-to-pope-for-unity.html
I will not repeat here the comment there I made there, lest I incur some eldrich elven wrath.
If these gentleman’s eyes are only being opened now, they are hardly being ‘wise as serpents.’
Rather what is surprising is the ham handed fashion the Rowan acted. Resurrecting a resolution that had just been defeated? What a travesty.
Come ON! Bishop Mouneer! YOU ARE in the center of our faith. Canterbury is for field trips. Organize your friends (some 50 million +) as the new Anglican Communion. Let Williams and Schori eat the rotted flesh of the Covenant that they dissected.
MOVE ON and watch as millions follow you.
Then stand back and watch the utter chaos of the rump Anglican Communion as each inflated ego tries to keep their lies afloat.
Dr. Tighe, while I agree with you that Bishop Michael Nazir Ali lacks consistency of thought in proposing unity with the See of Rome while still advocating women priests, I don’t think that he or the other bishops mentioned in this article are clear on what the Bible and Holy Tradition teach about unity. Were they clear on this, they as Anglicans would have steered their jurisdictions toward the Continuum. I am assuming that they desire to remain Anglicans.
Too bad we don’t have an Emperor to convene a council of the opposing parties! I can see it now: The Council opens with the bishops ranged in seats facing each other down the nave. On the left (as viewed from the altar) are the revisionists of Anglicanism, Eastern Orthodoxy and Rome and across from them are seated the bishops who hold to Holy Tradition and the Bible. The first order of business will be the deposition of Rowan Williams and the second Gene Robinson.