One can only reflect, that when there is no clear procedure, the door is open for the arbitrary use of power. That does not empower people, since they have no access to appeal to what all have agreed on. In this case, when the chairman sought to follow the normal rules of procedure he was trumped by the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The question remains: what confidence can the Anglican Communion have in a body where those who come to make decisions have no given ground rules for how those debates and decisions are going to be conducted ahead of time, but rather are dependent entirely on the will of the chairman and above him of the president to interpret their mind?
Inadabadaveeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeda, baby! Ubuntu! Goals gained. Colonialists and imperialists hold on to power and ignore the masses. That is the rule. It’s corollary, “who has the gold makes the rules” has never been more manifestly real. Some folks should be having an epiphany along about now, for sure, mon.
We’re talkin’ Anglicanism, mon – by definition there are no grounds for confidence.
It’s advertized on TV. You can get it for $19.95. It’s called
SHAM-WOW !!!
“Western parliamentary process” (their scare-words) can indeed be abused by those who know how to work it, but it was codified to be used by people of good will to protect the rights of the majority, the rights of the minority, and even the rights of the absent.
Ironically, in a supposed effort to get away from the trappings of colonialism (with a process given an African name), the Chair and the President of the ACC seem to have wielded an overreaching power that mirrors the worst of colonial paternalism.
Jim Workman
Sometime Parliamentarian
Formal censure and vote of no confidence in and repudiation of ALL the actions of the Jamaica ‘meeting’ are not only in order, but are necessary for anyone to have any confidence in those who claim to be orthodox Primates, Bishops, Clergy and Christians.
The days of laity sitting passively, quietly waiting for bishops to BE bishops and to succor, inform and direct them is over. Too many have been disgraces to their offices and to the Name of Jesus Christ.
We now expect Bishops to be men of God with spiritual discernment and courage and whole-hearted committment to the Lord and His Church.
We have seen this in those who have ventured out and/or been cast out of TEC and in those who have offered them refuge and in those who have broken communion with this man who has given place to evil while occupying the role of ABC and the Western heretics.
Has there been any word from anyone about who was elected to the four open seats on the ACC? When the candidates were announced, it appeared we had 11, 8 of whom were perfect fits into the TEC scheme of things as near as I could tell. Was there a vote, or is the president of the ACC “discerning” the results based on the “mood” of his indaba group?
And of course parliamentary procedure in the US differs a good deal from that who use the British version and variations on that theme. Add to that a confusion of tongues and cultures and one has Babel revisited.
But, wvparson, this seems to be a question of quashing commonly-held understandings of fair procedure for a father-knows-best outcome. Maybe I’m wrong.
A competent Chair can make plain what is being voted on so that the minority has adequate opportunity to speak and then the majority view is established. It is clear and fair and way better than the result of the ACC meeting, which smells bad.
Shameful, shameful, shameful.
The new ACC standing committee members are: Dato Stanley Isaacs (South East Asia), Bishop Azad Marshall (Iran), Rec Dr Ian Douglas (TEC) and Dr Anthony Fitchett (New Zealand).
Here was the old roster:
Chair – + John Paterson, New Zealand
Vice Chair – George Koshy, S. India
Mrs. Philippa Amable, W. Africa
Mrs. Jolly Babirukamu, Uganda
Mr. Robert Fordham, Australia
+ Kumara Illangasinghe, Ceylon
Canon Elizabeth Paver, England
+ James Tengatenga, C. Africa
Ms. Nomfundo Walaza, S. Africa
Here is the new roster:
Chair – +James Tengatenga, S. Africa
Vice Chair- Canon Elizabeth Paver, England
Dato Stanley Isaacs, SE Asia
Mrs. Jolly Babirukamu, Uganda
Mr. Robert Fordham, Australia
+ Azad Marshall, Iran
Ian Douglas+, TEC
Mr. Tony Fitchett, New Zealand
Ms. Nomfundo Walaza, S. Africa
TJ, Robert just beat me to the punch. I just saw the election results at Anglican Mainstream and posted them at Lent & Beyond.
http://anglicanprayer.wordpress.com/2009/05/12/newly-elected-members-of-acc-standing-committee/
It looks like the new Standing Committee is pretty well divided in half orthodox – revisionist.
The problem is far larger than just the trampling of Robert’s Rules in Kingston, folks. As Tom Sowell pointed out in his book “The Quest for Cosmic Justice,” the pursuit of same means the ruination of actual justice when the outcomes desired by the Right-Thinkers prove elusive.
We are entering an era where the rule of law is shoved aside and the rule of men comes to the fore. God help us all.
The archbishop said,
“We did it because we heard that, through all these procedures, Christian people will be able to recognize each other a bit more fully, a bit more generously and a bit more hopefully.â€
======================================================================
More specifically he said,
“…Christian people will be able to recognize each other….”
In this statement lies the crux of the problem.
He seems to feel, that within the current melange of the Anglican Communion,
that all involved/concerned who are aware/concerned regarding the Communion’s divisive issues,
are actually Christians in their personal discernments, asserted beliefs, and aherence to “…the Faith once given….”
In fact they are NOT. The revisionists can clearly be shown by their own utterences and by their schismatic actions to NOT be adherents of “…the Faith once given….”
Why cannot we all be honest with each other? The most honest advocates in this situation are those who adhere to “…the Faith once given….”
The revisionists, some might call them secularly oriented progressives, are NOT and will not be honest in their what they want to do to the Anglican branch of the Church Catholic.
And, if what I have said seems to be an assertion that the revisionists are artful and deceitful liars, I cannot deny that that thought has passed through my mind more than once.
And so, Archbishop Williams I do believe that
“…Christian people will be able to recognize each other…” and that many of us who do adhere to “…the Faith…” find it difficult to accept the revisionists within the Anglican Communion as Christians who are free of conscious thoughts/acts of heresy and even thoughts/acts of apostasy.