My understanding is that there were four, and in the public domain there is only one. Could the powers that be not release all of them into the public domain if possible?
My understanding is that there were four, and in the public domain there is only one. Could the powers that be not release all of them into the public domain if possible?
Don’t you mean “powers that be release…”
Ummm … Kendall … they weren’t talking to us. They were talking to the House of Bishops. Shouldn’t it be up to them to release their statements if they choose … or not?
Susan, they have little choice. They can release an accurate version (or their version) of the statements, or they can wait for the statements to ooze out through the cracks. Whatever is hidden will be shouted from the rooftops.
Folks, there were no written statements to be released. The other presentations were oral from notes and no one transcribed them. Bishop Anis’ statement was printed and HE handed out copies to the bishops.
Surely the bishops so expolicit about listening didn’t blow off the international testimony from folks provided by the ACC? Say it isn’t so, Percy! In one ear and out the other: the ECUSA/TEC listening process at its standard and finest and ultimate.
What are we worried about? The bishops really, really, really, really paid attention!
Want some oceanfront property here in Missouri?
Susna, I realize that, and I gathered many of them did not have notes, Brad It would still be valuable is someone present released their arguments if they felt so led.
Yes. Living Church mentioned “Aspinwall’s criticism” but gave no details or source. In light of who he is and where he stands, it would be worth knowing what he said.
Tell Matt to don a waiter’s uniform, drape a towel over his arm, carry a pitcher of ice water into the meeting room, and duct tape a tape recorder under the covered refreshments table. 🙂
w.w.
Of course, Rev. Susan. These speeches should be kept secret so the ignorant, backwoods parishoners like the one +Epting referred to as “a big guy with a red face” don’t realize that their bishops have a duty to educate their clergy in the “new thing” the Holy Spirit is doing so they can in turn re-educate their comrades, uh, parishoners. This should be done in code, of course, and with appropriate guilting techniques and inhibition and deposition of uncooperative clergy so the frogs don’t realize they are being boiled slowly and jump out of the pot before the cooking is done.
[i] The elves request that sarcasm be eliminated. [/i]