Certainly the Archbishop is within his rights to invite whomever he pleases. However, I cannot help but express my dismay that he would treat these men in the same way. Whatever you may think of Bishop Robinson, I do not believe that his manner of life has caused division or scandal in the communion, rather it is the actions of those who have used his ordination in an intentional effort to divide both our own Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion who are responsible.
Bishop Robinson’s participation at the Lambeth Conference might be awkward for some of the other participants, but that is hardly new. There are plenty of bishops whom I have a hard time working with, and doubtless they feel the same about me. But I can tell you from my own relationship with Bishop Robinson that he has been exemplary in maintaining an honest and open attitude of trust within his own Diocese, and in the House of Bishops, he as worked tirelessly to be an agent of reconciliation and resolution.
That is not the case with Bishop Minns and his supporters. He has been aided in his efforts to divide the American church by African bishops who have crossed jurisdictional lines in open disregard of the most ancient canons of the church, but also in violation of the Windsor Report itself. They have attempted to steal the rightfully owned buildings and property of Episcopal Congregations in Virginia and elsewhere and have caused untold hardship and division to faithful parishioners.
It also seems to me remarkably odd that the Anglican Communion, which has pledged itself to a “listening process” of the experience of Gay and Lesbian Christians, should exclude from that process one of its leading witnesses.
.
.
Surely this statement is prima facie evidence of delusion.
2 Th 10b-12, NIV
This has to qualify as one of the less intelligent things said by a bishop in the history of the Church. Before Robinson+ was ever consecrated +Robinson the primates said that if his consecration went forward it would “tear the fabric of the communion at its deepest levels.” Is the bishop now surprised that this is happening? As for the listening process, the rest of the communion is only following what it sees TECUSA doing. We didn’t listen to anyone except our own desires on this issue. We didn’t listen to Lambeth, the ACC, the ABC, the Primates, our ecumenical partners or even to our own House of Bishops’ Theology Report or past resolutions of (sarcasm) the highest decision body in Christendom (end sarcasm)- General Convention.
I suppose the rest of the communion will begin listening when we do.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
As noted before these ecusa prelates appear to be copying talking points propaganda.
+AZ:
That is not the case with Bishop Minns and his supporters. He has been aided in his efforts to divide the American church by African bishops who have crossed jurisdictional lines in open disregard of the most ancient canons of the church, but also in violation of the Windsor Report itself. They have attempted to steal the rightfully owned buildings and property of Episcopal Congregations in Virginia and elsewhere and have caused untold hardship and division to faithful parishioners.
+OH
As Bishop of Ohio, I cannot say the same about those bishops who have come into this diocese to exercise episcopal ministry in contempt of the centuries old practice of jurisdictional respect, bishops of our own province and from abroad, beginning the month before I became the Bishop of Ohio and continuing even until last week, including the Archbishop of Kenya who presided at an ordination in Cleveland only weeks before last February’s meeting of the Primates.
Well, I see the official script is making its way among the loyalists. Hmm, who will be next?
Did anyone else notice the capitalization of “Gay” and “Lesbian”? Perhaps this is the new way of designating its importance as a heritage group marker, such as Italian, Haitian, Brazilian, etc. (Strangely, Bp. Smith didn’t capitalize “gay” as a descriptor of Bp. Robinison.)
Br_er and Phil summarized it well. This is, at best, massive denial, more likely, coordinated spin, and, quite possibly, outright lying.
It is simply beyond dispute that VGR should never have been consecrated. In addition to Phil’s list, there is the more basic, long-term, open violation of the doctrine, discipline, and worship of TEC, including the reappraisers’ holy grail of General Convention. So it was logically and obviously impossible for VGR, in good conscience, to make his vows to uphold that same doctrine, discipline, and worship.
If VGR truly had integrity, after his election but before his consecration, he would have withdrawn, saying that he could not proceed while his g/l brothers and sisters were denied full affirmation by TEC rules. He would have honestly admitted (as many reappraisers privately do) that his consecration could not be supported unless and until TEC authorized gay marriage/blessing.
All this other spin is logical nonsense. And that’s before we even get to the theological issues.
Interesting this new mantra “irregular” in relation to Minns. Of course he isn’t a Bishop in the US Episcopal Church and his consecration and enthronement as far as I am aware are perfectly regular under his church. Is this the rubbish we are going to hear from now on?
Presumably also Mrs Smith has dutifully resigned herself to the fact that there will be no need for any new outfits for next year.
Bp. Smith inhabits a topsy-turvy world.
Just think of the career he could have had using analogous reasoning to defend Soviet communism, denounce civil rights protesters, criticize the Chinese house-church movement, and pledge eternal allegiance to King George III.
And did anyone notice the slap at +++Rowan’s “minions” in the so-called ‘humorous’ cartoon?? This bishop is preparing those in his diocese to denigrate the Anglican Communion and its institutions, even as the leadership of TEC has denigrated each of the instruments of unity by its actions.
Too much Arizona sun for the good bishop. He’s hallucinating.