Like most explosions , however, this one was unfocused and it soon spread into chastising the Episcopal Church for creating all the disagreement in the Anglican Communion and keeping it going. The Episcopal Church was repeatedly charged with not responding to the Windsor process. The actions of our General Convention 2006 in responding to Windsor are not well known and are often received as new information.
The Episcopal bishops in my Indaba received this critique in respectful silence, without defensiveness, and responses actually came from other churches. The gist of the responses was that all of us are shaped in our ministries by the people and culture of our communities. Each of us is struggling to be faithful as God has given us the light. So there were voices of support, but it was a long session.
At hearings and other meetings today, there were calls to reaffirm Lambeth 1:10 or to state that the Windsor moratoria must continue. The Archbishop of Canterbury has said that there will be no voting or legislation. Rather the work of the Indaba groups will be drawn into a final statement that will be refined by an ongoing process of review in our groups and in hearings. Other processes, such as the Windsor Continuation process and the Anglican Covenant process will continue beyond this meeting. For me, the best part of this Lambeth has been the frank, respectful, and sometimes profound conversations of the Bible Study and Indaba groups. I hope we’ll find ways to continue these conversations without forcing a decision now.
[blockquote]Like most explosions , however, this one was unfocused and it soon spread into chastising the Episcopal Church for creating all the disagreement in the Anglican Communion and keeping it going. The Episcopal Church was repeatedly charged with not responding to the Windsor process. The actions of our General Convention 2006 in responding to Windsor are not well known and are often received as new information.
The Episcopal bishops in my Indaba received this critique in respectful silence, without defensiveness, and responses actually came from other churches. [/blockquote]
It would certainly be enlightening to hear how such a defense might be given, given the substance of the charges.
Kendall,
This was posted by Stephen Lane (the Coadjutor Bishop of Maine) so perhaps you should change “her” to “his” in the above title.
Thanks–I had a brain lock and was thinking of Chilton Knudesen, my bad; it is now fixed
Bp. Lane says that the main focus of the Anglican Communion ought to be on largely shared social and environmental goals; how well intentioned and myopic that is of him. The faster the church in the West realizes that it no longer is a dominant force in a Christian culture, the sooner we will realize what we actually have in common with our brothers and sisters around the world, and that is the imperative need to bring people to Christ, which is the source and sustenance of our mission.
Instead of lecturing about human rights, we should ask other churches in our communion to understand the peculiar problems the CofE, ACofC, and TEC face in evangelizing a hostile culture.
Note the calm assurance that nothing of substance will be done.
That inadabadavida non-conference at Lame-beth is certainly moving circularly if not forward. However, centrifuges not anchored fly apart.
Here’s the money quote:
[blockquote]This morning there was a small explosion in my Indaba group. What exploded was widespread frustration that all the talk about our disagreements distracts from mission and undermines the Communion’s credibility. The real issues, the real priorities of the Anglican Communion, need to be poverty, hunger, HIV/AIDS, the oppression of women and children, the oppression of the Dalits in India, war, refugees, care for creation, etc. (Indeed, if there is a consensus at this Lambeth it is that global warming is the most important matter facing humankind and that care for creation must be a first priority for the Church.) Most of the members of my group shared in some part of this frustration.[/blockquote]
To which I said at the Reformed Pastor:
Shameless traffic pitch: I have more to say about this here.
No, + Lane is entirely focused on how to re-convert the American intelligentsia so that we can save the world again, just like we did when we sent out the first batch of missionaries. There is an obstinate refusal there, but it is no more obstinate, willful, or inspired by the devil than Orombi’s or Akinola’s ingnorance of the cultural realities American Episcopalians have to deal with.
When I deal every day with intelligent Americans who laugh at me because I am a Christian, I don’t blame TEC, I blame Orombi and Akinola and Falwell and Robertson and everyone else who bawls the Gospel without subtlety and nuance and condems people for their behavior. TEC has made an honest, but stupid, attempt to keep on preaching to its original constituency, in much the same way that Africans have compromised with Islam. Secular humanism is the religion of the elites in the US and Europe, if they have a religion at all, and they usually don’t. That is our problem, and it requires our attention, earnestly, urgently, and with a great deal of subtle understanding.
If we want to stay together, we all need to understand that wherever we are in this world, we are scorned and ridiculed as followers of Jesus. Whenever Satan drives us apart, he wins. When he uses as instruments in his culture wars, he gives us power and position and has us lay down pronouncents in God’s name.
All of you, everyone who posts here, have made my personal task of evangelism more difficult, as much as Bishop Schori has, because I am often at a loss to explain this shit to anyone else, as much as I love to discuss it.
Think about it and love one another.
Amen Ratramnus. At least this has been my experience in trying to plant a church.
Is it possible to have a little less “love,” a skin balm spread on sore muscles and itches which removes their annoyance – $1.50 at WalMart and other fine stores. It is difficult to asses the sheer vapidity of “love one another,” as if it were a traffic direction to the right crossroads.
And I might add that TEC IS the secular elite, that this is one source of their power to damage. There is not a shred of evidence that they have been honest – stupid, yes, but not honest. What we HAVE seen is constant, extended, deliberate efforts to bend, twist, re-color, redefine scripture so that their secular ends will receive sacred sanction. How unprincipled their language is, one need only look at some of the entries below for TEC bishops. Ratramnus, your argument here simply does not respond to the world TEC has created and to which we have failed to respond with t he sharp and bitter energy that is necessary to disarm a dangerous opponent.
Larry
#4 Indabadadavida? 😉
You mean, like, Iron Butterfly?
I wonder whose in the same indaba group as the PB? Have we heard anything from the group she’s in?
Larry,
I grew up in Dresden, Maine, and I aim my conservative guns straight for your New Hampshire ar*e. Let us all spend more time thinking about they way things ought to be and less time fitting things into the way we alread think about them.
Blessings,
Ratramnius
#11, I seriously doubt your potential converts have ever heard of Peter Akinola…that’s a little too “inside baseball,” it seems. OTOH, it’s uncommon for me to mention TEC without the response being, “Oh yeah, the gay church.” Not a good marketing plan, in my experience.
Doesn’t it occur to you that reasserters are indeed, “thinking about they way things ought to be?
Patty, yes. The interminable … even for the altered in consciousness.
Ratramnus, I think you should challenge the secularists rather than Christians who believe. For instance, which fabulously secular regime is most responsible for human deaths: Russia under Stalin, Cambodia under Pol Pot, or China or the USA under abortion policies? How many converts to the MDGs have there been amongst totally secular political structures formerly known as countries? How have secular values radically transformed the management of HIV/AIDS? How has the radical individualism of secularism promoted human welfare other than the purses of lawyers in the USA, for example? Finally, how does ridiculing believers by non-nuanced understanding of them as a group fit in with your alleged secular values of individual freedom?
The Gospel doesn’t need to be adapted to be acceptable to them. They need to hear the real thing, not the highly diluted vaccination sort of stuff. No matter how secular they are, when they are screwed over by another secularist, you’ll hear an “ought” come out of their mouths. Just ask why there is an ought. And you can read CS Lewis for further insight if you’d like. So could they.
Just some thoughts….
[blockquote]Indeed, if there is a consensus at this Lambeth it is that global warming is the most important matter facing humankind. . . . [/blockquote]
With all due respect to Mrs Knudsen, whose episcopacy I do not recognize, by the way, the decision she speaks of must be forced at this Conference……like it or not.
Ratramnus Dresden huh? Ha ha ha ha we forgive you anyway. Yeah, I am a New Hampshire swamp yankee who has migrated to the world of the black fly and the tough chick who drives a skidder. I generally protect my tail with a 30-30. But, anyway, see Stroud above for an excellent response. Stiff-necked and contumacious in Maine