3. Regarding the contravening of agreements by interventions:
“In the Dar es Salaam communiqué we said, “Furthermore, those Primates who have undertaken interventions do not feel that it is right to end those interventions until it becomes clear that sufficient provision has been made for the life of those persons.”
On the other hand the bishop of New Westminster within the ACOC a few hours after the appearance of the Primates’ letter from Brazil in 2003 went ahead with the very action the letter had pleaded should not be taken. It also went against the Bible and the consensus of 2000 years of Christianity.
The implication of this violation and the resulting crisis was ignored.
Since then there have been egregious examples in clear rejection of Lambeth 1 10, Windsor and the requests of the Communion leadership. Once again nothing has been said even though this has meant the tearing apart of the Anglican Communion and an exodus from the church.
Now suddenly those who seek to take care of those who side with historic, biblical Christianity and the Anglican Communion are accused of the very lapse that has produced the crisis.
Is it possible in the real world to use the very agreements that one is contravening to protect oneself”.
Read it all (note it is apended at the bottom of the first letter).
It is best not to parade foolishness before ++Gregory Venables.
“Is it possible in the real world to use the very agreements that one is contravening to protect oneself?”
Ouch.
It appears that just because the King of Canada is ignorant of his nakedness, his brother primate can see just fine, thank-you.
PoSC 1, ACoC 0