The Diocese of Connecticut is one of the diocesan websites we visited on our diocesan news trawl last night (see “it’s awfully quiet…”, below). Although Connecticut didn’t have any recent news that we could find about the HoB meeting or the Sept. 30 deadline to respond to the Primates, we did check out the page for their upcoming Diocesan Convention in mid-October. Of particular interest was the Resolutions page, and especially the anti-B033 Resolution.
Well, well. If at first you don’t succeed, try try again. Last year Connecticut also had an anti-B033 resolution, as did at least 8-10 other dioceses. Connecticut was one of the few dioceses [a more complete list is here] where such a resolution failed. So, they’re trying again….
Just for the record, ours passed in Los Angeles
I really hope some folks will forward this (and the links from last year of dioceses that passed anti-B033 resolutions) to their bishops this week!
Since there is a good chance that TEC leaders are going to try and argue that by passing B033 they complied with the Communion’s request, it’s important to be reminded that many of the reappraisers are strongly committed to overturning B033.
Thanks Susan. I regret that I never was able to update the list of anti-B033 resolutions. After all our work in October/November on diocesan news, “real life” and “real work” got crazy and we had to stop doing all the diocesan news roundup posts.
Susan, if you have a complete list or links to the B033 resolutions, we’d appreciate it. I know Integrity used to have that, but it looks like the link has been lost following a website synchronization. Thanks.
I see from the INTEGRITY infoletter (http://www.standfirminfaith.com/media/integrity-2007-08.pdf) that there are 1931 members in a church of 2.3 million (or 2.5 depending on the quoted source). Integrity’s goals are allegedly those of the majority where they have been achieved. That works out to a 1931/2,300,000 majority. I wonder why more anti-BO33 resolutions have failed to pass. After all, I think that 0.0839% of the reported membership of the ECUSA/TEC ought to determine the direction of the whole. And it makes even more sense that a majority of 1931/77,000,000 (that is 0.002507%) Anglicans worldwide should decide matters for the Communion. Wonderful to see the importance of numbers and goals and the true value of “listening” in its effects, is it not? It is even more enlightening to acknowledge that the HOB, consisting of 1/10th that number of persons is going to decide the fate of the relations of the ECUSA/TEC with the Anglican Communion based on their perceptions of “majority” opinions. The American Bishops acting in absolute unanimity would represent 0.000246% of the Anglican Communion and 0.00826% of the 2.3 million Episcopalians. The numbers won’t be any where close to unanimity. But, by golly, by gee, it’ll be according to ECUSA/TEC polity. Which is fine by INTEGRITY except where anti-BO33 resolutions fail, then we need repeated attempts.
Does this ever get you wondering about the excessive (mis)-representation of INTEGRITY adherents on the Executive Council? The numbers making decisions fall by another factor of ten. You do the math. And reflect on justice, too, while at it.
dwstroudmd — Did you happen be anywhere yesterday where they were preaching Luke 15? You might want to check it out and then ask yourself WWJD. (Hint: it’s not about the numbers — it’s about the Gospel)
Yeah, I’m not sure if I’ll be attending this year’s CT convention, considering the verbal spanking Smith gave to me and my friends last year. I haven’t heard of any resolutions calling for the dismissal of Smith’s staff, who were found by the Title IV Review Committee to have performed the un-canonical deeds that everyone *thought* Smith was responsible for. Since they presumably acted without his knowledge and consent (otherwise he would have been brought up on presentment), perhaps they ought to be dismissed.
Hi Susan
As I recall Bishop Gene Robinson himself stated that one of the wonderful things that would happen as a result of his consecration would be the return to the church of those who felt unable to attend because it was “exclusive” I believe he also stated later that he had proof that it was happening. So numbers were been seen as important then.
If I recall Jesus himself wanted his disciples to go into the world and make disciples of everyone — so numbers were important even to him, not withstanding your one proof-text (I thought you didn’t believe in using the Bible like that anyway — so why do you do it? It opens the way for inconvenient passages like Romans 1 etc to be quoted in other fora.)
However, I may have misunderstood your comment above. Perhaps you intended to indicate that so long as a minuscule number had the right Gospel, God is happy to ignore the rest of humanity.
Of course, they are trying again. I’ve seen the same thing in the Presbyterian Church: the GLBTetc crowd comes back with their divisive efforts again and again and again, unity, polity, scripture and tradition be damned.
But once they win, the orthodox are to put up with it or else . . . for the sake of unity, of course.
Gordian
Is there a recent T1:9 thread where you haven’t posted this news? Once is surely enough.
[i]Note: we’ve removed all of Gordian’s other posts of this link. We’d remove it here too, but we want to comment on this behavior, so we’re leaving it. See below for our comment[/i] –elfgirl
Let me know if I’ve missed any, Derek! 🙂 I just looked at the title of this story and thought: Surely this is a sign!
Eleves, forgive me, but I think this is quite a story in its own right: the idea of a ‘secret eucharist’ with names being given in advance then the list being shredded hardly fits in with the Anglican idea of ‘public worship’.
#5, you say it’s not about numbers, but that’s not what you said in 2003 (I think it was you on TV), when Gene Robinson was consecrated. You said “a tiny minority” was opposed, very dismissively, as if that minority didn’t even matter.
Susan, how do you interpret Luke 15:17-21?
Susan,
I think you might miss part of Jesus’ point (Luke 15;31 & 32). what would Jesus do? I think he would walk yoo through the old testiment, talk about how his Father had created male an female for a purpose, guide you throught the concept of the Fall of Man, and then he would ask you to do the hardest thing – to Love and Serve Him, by going forth to sin no more.
Surely Heaven celebrates the return of the lost sheep and the son who finds himself unworthy. surely Heaven celebrates even more when that son or lamb tries to walk the narrow path that is obedience to Him.
May the Lord give us both strenght to struggle in his footsteps, and the will to pick ourselves back up when we fail.
RSB
And if at first your parish doesn’t secede from ECUSA, then try, try again.
Susan, I just wanted to say that it seems to me (and I could be wrong) that I’ve seen you commenting more lately on T1:9, and I wanted to let you know that (even though I usually disagree with you) I appreciate you staying in conversation.
Susan+, I was at service and did hear the Gospel – extremely well “sermoned”, too. The identity problem you refer to based on the INTEGRITY available data and permutations would be exactly whom is acting the part of the elder brother. I leave you to your conscience on that one. You may leave me to mine. However, if you have a well-funded miniscule political action group utilizing the cover of the ‘gospel’ as you proclaim it, it really does not behoove you to mischaracterize any and all who might oppose your demonstrably private interpretations. Sauce for the goose et alia, one might say. “Listening” in not a one way street. And you might wish to really think about WWJD because in my hearing of the gospel actually read, it is the elder brother who has the final say about his own destiny (or the elder person who decides the ultimate fate of the elder person’s relations to the Oldest Person and Sibling, if that helps you focus).
Gordian, Kendall’s posted the story you’ve linked.
For future reference, we do not appreciate commenters posting multiple links to the same story in many threads, or posting off-topic links or articles in a given thread because you think it’s important and Kendall should post it! If you have something you want us to post, e-mail us and/or Kendall.
Thank you. –elfgirl (who’s been offline all day until now)