Q&A #1: from New Jersey, by phone (at 18.35ff. on the telecast): “I keep hearing about a deadline of September 30, that it’s a line in the sand. I’m not sure what happens if no action is taken by September 30th.”
KJS: “A decision not to decide is also a decision”¦. What is likely to happen is that we would be excluded in some way from the councils of the Anglican Communion. My guess is that the Archbishop of Canterbury will respect the will of the majority of the primates expressed in this communiqué, and impose some sanctions in that regard.”
Nunley: “And what does that mean for the church?”
KJS: “What it means for the church is we lose our voice at the table; we might lose our voice in that conversation. It could mean that we lose our ability to influence, our ability to share experience, our ability to challenge people to consider other options, in our conversations with other leaders around the Anglican Communion.”
#2: from France, by email (19:47ff.): “A hypothetical question that no one wants to answer, but: Could the Episcopal Church go it alone?”KJS: “I don’t think this church is ever alone. We have many, many partners around the world, partners in mission, partners in theological discussions. The body of Christ is never meant to be divided up into pieces; and I think that’s the underlying struggle in this”¦.”
#16: from Cedar Falls, Iowa, by phone (37:38): “Good morning. I’m here with my partner”¦. And, Bp Schori, you’ve stated that the communiqué is a gracious offering to us to have some space to work. But in reading it, it feels like, to us, that the answers are already specified for us that we must meet. The primates have not accepted what we’ve done in Convention; the sanctions are already specified: for if we do not do A, B, and C, this is what’s going to happen. So, in reading it, we don’t feel like there’s much space or much graciousness; it feels very harsh. Thank-you.”
KJS (38:27): “I understand that and I share some of that sentiment; Americans don’t like anybody to tell them what to do; that’s part of our DNA. At the same time, to live together in Christian community means that each member takes seriously the needs and concerns of the other members. And it is in that sense that, I think, what we’re being asked may have some gracious elements in it. It is a response that is asked for a season, until the Covenant process is completed. And if this church decides that it wants to continue to be a partner at the conversation table in the process of creating that Covenant, we have some expectations set before us.”
“Americans don’t like anybody to tell them what to do;”
Not even God, it seems.
I bet that the person that called in who said “I’m here with my partner” was PLANNED. I would bet she was told what to say and what to ask. How dumb do these people think we are?
Look. One can wax cynical about anything +KJS says or writes. She often drives me up a tree also. But let us look for glimmers of clarity/hope/whatever when they show up.
(1) She recognizes the American tendency not to like anybody to tell… Yes Anglican Papist point taken. But… can we give her credit for recognizing (to some extent) a characteristic of the American psyche? and how it might explain (good or bad) responses to the rest of the Anglican Communion?
(2) Zoot – yes perhaps one might agree. But…
(3) I think +KJS deserves some credit for:
[blockquote]At the same time, [i]to live together in Christian community means that each member takes seriously the needs and concerns of the other members[/i]. And it is in that sense that, I think, what we’re being asked may have some gracious elements in it. It is a response that is asked for a season, until the Covenant process is completed. [i]And if this church decides that it wants to continue to be a partner at the conversation table in the process of creating that Covenant, we have some expectations set before us.[/i][/blockquote]
Does she get it? completely? No not completely. Her remarks right there indicate such. But she seems to have something of a clue about what’s going on here. “If we want to be part of this larger community… we have to take seriously needs/concerns of other members… we have some expectations before us”. Well!
That is so, like, yesterday, Androgyne! Get with it! Let’s decide the meanings for those words TODAY, Gynandro! You are so retrogressive about content!
Rick,
I might give her credit for that, except for the fact that she is continuing to support and fund the lawsuits against orthodx believing congregations, as well as not speaking out against clergy inhibitions, while allowing reappraising congregations to continue non-baptised communion access.
Her actions speak very loudly. Her words, not so much.