SPRIT: So where from here?
+JMS: It depends much on the will of the Communion. Bishops acting unilaterally do not help this. The future of the Communion depends on those who are willing to forgo what they perceive to be their rights and their prerogatives and agree to live with and for others. We’ve been deaf to that call. It just depends on the will of those who are in leadership and who say, you know, the time has come to work together in unity. As far as I’m concerned as diocesan bishop, we have strong ties and relationships with the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury, and the Global South. The Global South bishops invited both Bishop Paul and me to a meeting with them. We cherish those relationships, and we will continue to witness and carry out our part in the Anglican Communion.
+PEL: I don’t know how I can expand upon that. We need to be faithful to the Scriptures and our Lord’s command to go forth into the world, but one of the things I’m trying to live into is what it means to be faithful to the vows I took when I was consecrated. There are some significant vows there. I think the House of Bishops and all bishops would do well to read those every day.
+JMS: It’s hard to know exactly what happened there until ”” it’s one of those odd things. It’s hard to know what happened at the meeting until you get well beyond it.
+PEL: It’s not unlike Jacob wrestling with God at Peniel (Gen. 32:30). He didn’t know it was God until after the fact. And that’s what sometimes happens during crises. You live into that crisis and do the wrestling ”” and we did some. I mean, it wasn’t all fun and games. Some hard things were said in those indaba groups.
+JMS: I like that. And I can think of Moses’ supporters saying to Moses after he had gone up on Sinai, “What happened?” We’ll see. It’s sort of the nature of God. God says to Moses, “I will be with you. That’s my name.” That’s all we can do ”” live in faith that God will be faithful.
Oh, watch out for “live into.” This is one of those verbal clues to a soft mind which uses cliches as thought substitutes. LM
#1
My thought exactly. By the second “live into” I was ready to gag.
I’m afraid that the Diocese of Dallas has chosen to “look on the sunny side of life”…”accentuate the positive”…and is enthralled by that illusive “anglicanism” which somehow magically includes all those who “bring to the table” their theologies and their gods.
DoD’s bishops are, likewise, somehow able to talk about faithfulness to the Scripture, while meeting and “indaba-ing” with those who have dismissed Scripture when it is inconvenient. I wonder how many clergy and laity in the DoD are going to “live into” the reality of these contradictions?
In answer to Fr. Smith’s question, not all of the Dallas clergy, as I will not live into it. Here is the key phrase, [b]”We need to be faithful to the Scriptures and our Lord’s command to go forth into the world, but…..”[/b] Whenever one adds “but”, after Holy Scriptures and the Great Commission, whatever it is, it is never good. As one West African Bishop at Lambeth commented, Indaba was confused with In-da-bar, where most of the comments should have been left from the groups. Maybe In-da-toilet would have been as appropriate!
I’m disappointed to regularly hear so many people put down the ‘indaba’ concept. It seems awfully dismissive to our African friends – in essence arguing that their form of communicating and making decisions is far less effective than our “western” models.