There is talk this week of a deadline ignored and an Archbishop undermined. Yet when Dr Williams wrote to the Primates in July, he said no more than: “It would be a great help if these replies were received by 31 July 2007.” As we have said (Leader comment, 25 May), the US bishops have been invited in the full knowledge that their decision in September might well be to defy the Primates’ strictures. Nobody seriously believes that Dr Williams will withdraw their invitation, though that will not stop some from pressing him to do so.
The Times can see the truth of Archbishop Rowan Williams invitations, what I do not understand is why people like the Anglican Communion Instititute cannot.
The obscure we see eventually. The completely apparent takes a little longer.
Edward R. Murrow
Church Times. There you have it. Advocacy, not objectivity.
The Church Times Editorial is reminiscent of Winnie the Pooh’s comment concerning the upcoming deluge: “Tut, tut, it looks like rain.”
To suggest that for 3/4’s of the bishops to fail to respond to +RDW’s request Lambeth invitations is simply a minor matter because his invitation stated only that “[I]t would be a great help if these replies were received by 31 July 2007” certainly appears to be more ‘spin’ than a fair reading of the situation.
I would say that the US bishops have been invited with the full knowledge that their invitations to Lambeth may be contingent on their response to the primates’ request.
+RDW has said before that ‘decisions have consequences.’ It is fully within the keeping of the Windsor Report that if the American bishops reject the request of the primates, the consequences of their decision will be that they are signaling that they are, indeed, choosing to walk away from the Communion.
This “if those people come I’m not gonna come” sounds like a teenager squabble. I mean, come on, folks, grow up!
Yeah, Bob, almost like, “You can’t tell me what to do! Whaa! Whaa!”
# 5 – I think Tec has cornered the amrket in teenage ‘theology’ – if ya like it, do it!
Bob (#5), it’s unfortunate that, disagreeing with the threatened action, you are unable to make the effort to come to some understanding that there are theological concerns – not mere adolescent petulance – motivating those who’ve threated not to attend.
So much for any liberality or generosity of thought.
That’s being said, I am in complete agreement with those who urge all invited bishops to attend the Lambeth Conference, further urging the theologically conservative majority to reject manipulative planning for the Conference in favor of turning it into a forum to deal with the crisis of communion among the Anglican Churches and with the intransigence of the provincial Church – TEC – that started it all with a single-minded and ideologically-driven rejection of godly admonition.
I hope the GS Primates wait until, say October 1, 2007, before sending their final RSVP.
#8
But don’t you think – even with all your premises – that there is something wrong with ‘threatening’ (your word) not to attend? To make ‘threats’ is the characteristic of the bully, is it not?
So much for any even-handed charity of thought.