It is an interesting missive. It conforms with Williams’ long standing strategy – keep talking!! In the meantime, as always there are the usual potshots at the US. These are not new and after all half the Communion hates us, so he is only stating the obvious. For him to glibly suggests that the church is not homophobic is of course nonsense – and he probably knows it. But he does what leaders always do in a crisis, they fudge.
What is most interesting is that he acknowledges wide support for us. Simply stating this is, of course, a thorn in the side of our adversaries. Moreover, he does not like all the raiding going on. To say that some provision should be made for those who hate us and that the present option of boundary crossing is not good is to suggest that – after more talking!! – some other arrangements must be made which are less destructive. Now of course he knows it is too late for this, that the forming of alternative structures are already advanced and have been planned for years in advance and have come at his expense. He however will continue to overlook this and plan for something else. What would this something else be – and again after more talking!! Well whatever it is it will be less hostile and in some sense a critique of the Akinola- Duncan strategy. For such a “new” arrangement will now have to take into account all those folks who have supported us (for remember this is the first time such support has been rendered and been noted!!)
He expresses concern that our bishops’ moratorium on lbgt etc was only until GC 2009 since as one house they could at GC veto anything the other house came up with short of a moratorium. He is no fool and knows our bishops simply can’t say they rule even if they technically have a veto. And of course alluding to the special teaching charism of the office of bishop is romantic nonsense (which he may as an academic and an old Anglo-catholic really believe). He knows full well that politically our Bishops – charism or not – cannot simply rule. So I suspect this pot shot while maybe heartfelt was said to please the hostiles – and at a point where they are miffed. It of course means nothing at all.
Someone on another thread already said it:
[blockquote] Much nothing about ado. [/blockquote]
…still in the Briar Patch,
The cynicism suffusing the phrase “of course alluding to the special teaching charism of the office of bishop is romantic nonsense” is thick enough to cut with a knife. I am genuinely sad about that. The day the episcopte traded their teaching charism for cultural politics was the day they sealed the fate of their office and communion within the church catholic.
Coats is assisting revisionist bishops in their polity shell game. True, bishops who do not prevent SSBs in their dioceses cannot be disciplined absent a change in the canons, but nothing prevents them from enforcing such a provision absent a canon. The polity argument is a stalking horse, and ++Rowan was right to call it what it is.
How can he whistle in the dark so loud while holding that sneer? … These revisionist guys sure are versatile…
Blather as a charge against the ABC for the author of this “assessment” is rather an ironic twist. And romantic notionality underlies this entire assessment in its totality. It is an exercise in denial of the first order. 3/5’s of the Communion does not support “us” if only 2/5’s of the Communion does. Do they have to pass math classes for seminary application anymore?