Akinola said that only Sydney, Nigeria, Rwanda and Uganda were definitely not going to Lambeth (as of now). Kenya was not mentioned by him. The new head of CAPA is going as are the rest of CAPA. As for Canterbury’s Advent Letter and the support of CA bishops’ principles at DES, especially in the light of PB’s overreaching in DSJ, we shall see. A picture of disintegration so total does of course offer justification for what is here being depicted as the best way forward. This was not the spirit of SC last weekend in Hathaway’s pulpit assessment and Mark Lawrence’s consecration, for what it is worth. These must be paradoxical moments in the SC context.
Christopher Seitz uses a rather unfortunate word to describe the actions of the Presiding Bishop against the Standing Committee of the Diocese of San Joaquin here, when he wrote of his unhappiness with Bishop Duncan’s remarks at the Mere Anglicanism Conference in Charleston. “As for Canterbury’s Advent Letter and the support of CA bishops’ principles at DES,” Christopher writes at Kendall Harmon’s site, “especially in the light of PB’s overreaching in DSJ, we shall see. A picture of disintegration so total does of course offer justification for what is here being depicted as the best way forward.”
Overreaching? What we’ve learned in what Christopher calls the “PB’s overreaching” in San Joaquin is that the PB is weak. All this pontification of power is an illustration of weakness, not strength. The powerful are quiet. That’s what keeps them powerful. They don’t pontificate, they produce.
I ended up writing more on this topic here. It’s called “The P Words.”
#2 — that was a bit compressed. If you mean to say the PB is weak and in a weak position, I agree. That means strength must respond. The SC in DSJ is hitting all the right notes. The battle must be joined where the overreaching is manifest. We are not alone in this matter. Grace and peace.
I was more than a little distressed by the intemperate tone and content of Bishop Duncan’s address as well as the imbalance (favouring separation from the Anglican Communion) in the panel. Sometimes we sound happy about the disintegration of the Anglican Communion, wringing our hands in glee as we watch and wait. Where is the sadness, the prayers for those with whom we disagree, the pleading with those in error, by word and extraordinary example, the repentance for the ways in which we have contributed to the confusion and division?
Bishop Duncan spoke about how those Primates and Bishops who had said that they would not attend Lambeth could not. Is there no way of pleading with them to change their mind? Is their decision not to attend like Jephthah’s vow? If they bail, it will be to the detrimnent of many middle of the road Anglicans and other faithful Christians in the midst of more liberal dioceses/provinces.
Akinola said that only Sydney, Nigeria, Rwanda and Uganda were definitely not going to Lambeth (as of now). Kenya was not mentioned by him. The new head of CAPA is going as are the rest of CAPA. As for Canterbury’s Advent Letter and the support of CA bishops’ principles at DES, especially in the light of PB’s overreaching in DSJ, we shall see. A picture of disintegration so total does of course offer justification for what is here being depicted as the best way forward. This was not the spirit of SC last weekend in Hathaway’s pulpit assessment and Mark Lawrence’s consecration, for what it is worth. These must be paradoxical moments in the SC context.
Christopher Seitz uses a rather unfortunate word to describe the actions of the Presiding Bishop against the Standing Committee of the Diocese of San Joaquin here, when he wrote of his unhappiness with Bishop Duncan’s remarks at the Mere Anglicanism Conference in Charleston. “As for Canterbury’s Advent Letter and the support of CA bishops’ principles at DES,” Christopher writes at Kendall Harmon’s site, “especially in the light of PB’s overreaching in DSJ, we shall see. A picture of disintegration so total does of course offer justification for what is here being depicted as the best way forward.”
Overreaching? What we’ve learned in what Christopher calls the “PB’s overreaching” in San Joaquin is that the PB is weak. All this pontification of power is an illustration of weakness, not strength. The powerful are quiet. That’s what keeps them powerful. They don’t pontificate, they produce.
I ended up writing more on this topic here. It’s called “The P Words.”
bb
#2 — that was a bit compressed. If you mean to say the PB is weak and in a weak position, I agree. That means strength must respond. The SC in DSJ is hitting all the right notes. The battle must be joined where the overreaching is manifest. We are not alone in this matter. Grace and peace.
I was more than a little distressed by the intemperate tone and content of Bishop Duncan’s address as well as the imbalance (favouring separation from the Anglican Communion) in the panel. Sometimes we sound happy about the disintegration of the Anglican Communion, wringing our hands in glee as we watch and wait. Where is the sadness, the prayers for those with whom we disagree, the pleading with those in error, by word and extraordinary example, the repentance for the ways in which we have contributed to the confusion and division?
Bishop Duncan spoke about how those Primates and Bishops who had said that they would not attend Lambeth could not. Is there no way of pleading with them to change their mind? Is their decision not to attend like Jephthah’s vow? If they bail, it will be to the detrimnent of many middle of the road Anglicans and other faithful Christians in the midst of more liberal dioceses/provinces.