A work in progress … we’ll be adding to this throughout the day as we come across interesting blog entries, etc. Feel free to post links in the comments.
This is for now very rough, but we’re juggling a lot of stuff. (Note posts are in the order I came across them in my RSS feed reader.)
Peter Ould
it seems a bit one-sided of the House of Bishops to demand that the rest of the Communion engage in the Listening Process while they ignore every other line of the relevant 1998 Lambeth Resolution. And if the best defence for this weekend’s activities in Holywood is that the rite used for this ceremony wasn’t authorised, and therefore didn’t conflict with B033, then it’s really time to move on isn’t it?
=========
Baby Blue: A Few Thoughts
http://babybluecafe.blogspot.com/2007/09/few-thoughts.html
What really struck me more than anything from not only this “draft statement” but also from the comments from the bishops themselves, is that they are “reinventing the subreport” that was presented to the primates in Dar es Salaam and rejected.
==========
David Trimble:
The Native Americans are Circling the Caucasian Cavalry Oppressors
http://stillonpatrol.typepad.com/still_on_patrol/2007/09/the-native-amer.html
With deference to the clear words of Archbishop Mouneer Anis (see below post), this seven points draft is but another way TCGC is saying to the rest of the Anglican Communion that “we know the truth and you don’t.” While this document is yet another collection of TCGC obfuscation and politically correct phrasing, its meaning and import are clear. TCGC has no intent to admit that it has chosen to walk apart from the remainder of the Communion, but instead thinks the Communion should continue the ubiquitous “listening process”, i.e., listen to TCGC until your brain turns to mush and you agree.
==========
Anne Kennedy+
Communion Chaos
http://undercurrentofhostility.blogspot.com/2007/09/communion-chaos.html
Second, it occurs to me, after these many months and years of Anglican Conflict, that while all of us have been taking this seriously-pouring over documents, trying to understand the Windsor Report, the Dromontine Communique, the Dar Communique, various letters from Rowan Williams, Camp Allen Statements, and now resolutions in the HOB-these Bishops HAVE NEVER TAKEN THIS SERIOUSLY. If they’ve read any of the necessary documents, they haven’t bothered to understand them. If they’ve listened to advice and counsel from Primates and others, they bothered to HEAR. In other words, this has never been a real engagement. They’ve never been serious about the communion. Even this morning, after Matt’s careful study of Howe’s Proposal, and we, reading carefully and considering and praying for God’s will, these Bishop’s Never Considered the option before them.
==========
Dave Sims at Covenant
Not Exactly “Radical”: The Proposed HOB Statement
It’s pretty disheartening on a first read. Keep in mind that this is a “Preliminary Draft Document.” But it seems +Howe’s proposal didn’t get much traction. The requested clarification on B033 seems to sum up the general attitude of the entire document:
We have attempted to respond to the Primates questions regarding Resolution B033. in honesty we must report that within the HOB there is disagreement as to how this resolution is to be interpreted and applied. As we live with this painful reality, conversation study and prayer will continue. We recognize the challenge our disagreement presents for some in the Communion and we respectfully ask for their patience and forbearance.
=========
Ruth Gledhill
Fishy Business
http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/
A source in New Orleans tells me the House of Bishops, due to finish their deliberations later today, are like a ‘shoal of fish’. The source, who is inside the meeting, says: ‘They are all swimming in the same direction. The difficulty is knowing which direction they are going in. They could suddenly move off together in a completely different direction. It is wide open still.’
==========
Captain Yips
Rated R for Gore and Violence
http://captainyips.typepad.com/journal/2007/09/rated-r-for-gor.html
It’s painful reading. +Howe’s plan offered a flicker of light. But at this point, absent genuine repentance and reversal of course, we should be happy for the completely stand-pat statement that seems likely to emerge.
Over the last couple of days, I’ve begun to wonder if ++Rowan Williams has not found a formula for dealing with TEC that can be unanimously accepted by all the primates, based on whether TEC can be taken at its word. I grasp at straws, maybe, because I do not want to see the Anglican Communion wrecked upon TEC’s infatuation with the Newest Thing.
============
More from Baby Blue:
Afternoon Session
http://babybluecafe.blogspot.com/2007/09/afternoon-session.html
There is something sort of surreal here about talking about Lambeth as though there isn’t anything wrong, as though it’s “business as usual.” The presentation is as though this is 1997, not 2007 and we’re all One Big Happy Family. It’s sort of weird to hear Ian talking about and there’s Gene Robinson sitting there. TEC must be pretty confident that he’s going, no matter what. Why else would they be so rude to talk about a party that he’s not invited to.
=============
Chip Webb
Words Matter: The House of Bishops Continues in Denial
http://anglicanaction.blogspot.com/2007/09/words-matter-house-of-bishops-continues.html
Arguably the strongest word in the document is “imperil,” and take two guesses as to in which context the writers use it.
Do they say that the Episcopal Church’s actions have “imperiled” the Anglican Communion? Nope.
Do they say that the Episcopal Church’s actions have “imperiled” the unity of the Episcopal Church, even with the loss of thousands of Anglicans as a result of those actions? Guess again.
Here it is:
“We pray that a way forward can be found which will bring an end to the incursions of extra-provincial bishops. These incursions imperil the Communion’s principle of honoring one another as we work together in good faith on these very difficult issues” (emphasis my own).
I fail to understand why anyone is suprised by any of the report or the comments. The majority of these Bishops are hard core leftists or utopians. They believe that they are bringing in a new order and they are not going to be detered by Anglophilia or a sense that they are violating some sacred traditions. Leftists exist to destroy traditions – they take pride in doing so. Undoing 2000 years of Western civilization time ordered traditions regarding marriage would be like George Bush saying “Mission Accomplished” (remember some of them believe that marriage is a last bastion of male dominated patriarchy). They are playing for time – and if the Anglican Communion shatters I am failry certain that some would see it as a victory for the new order – last vestige of British Empire destroyed by Americans and/or modern progressive Americans free selves from constraints of backward thirdworld postmoderns and their 1st world right wing allies. These guys have infused left wing poliitcs/social justice with religion to the point it has become the religion – anything that is a barrier to the new religion must/will be jettisoned.
Chip – you have hit the nail once again. They are prophets. TEC is the Messinger….
So why don’t Mrs Jefferts Schori et al just pull the glove off and give the rest of the Anglican world the finger in broad daylight? That’s what they’re doing (discreetly) anyway, and +Rowan et al are simply pretending that TEC isn’t really doing that.
Let the formation of the new province begin!
Let me be as clear as mud.
If the bishops want “clarity,” then the Presiding Bishop needs to fire these guys and appoint an entirely new committee of bishops who do not speak with forked tongue to the drafting committee.
This sort of “clear fudge” is precisely why the Primates at Dar Es Salaam asked for clarification. It obviously is not going to be forthcoming from the mendacious leadership at work in New Orleans.