Thursday, September 9, 2010

Welcome to Stand Firm!

Want to advertise on Stand Firm? Click here for rates and info

Thursday Afternoon Press Conference: Everything’s going to be alright. The bishops have been hugging

Thursday, July 31, 2008 • 8:12 am


Participants:
Archbishop Ian Ernest (chairman of CAPA)
Bishop Colin Johnson of Toronto
The Rev. Jackie Crey from the spouses conference

++Aspinall: I want to make an observation about my own indaba. We have not suddenly reached a consensus but there is significant difference between 1998 and 2008 and that has to do with the kind of engagement we’re having. Ten years ago people were distressed at some of the reactions to some of what was said. There were occasions when bishops booed and hissed.

2008 has been dramatically different. The same degree of differing opinions was evident in the views held, but in my indaba group bishops who were on opposite ends of the spectrum and thanked each other for helping one another to understand their contexts. That is a significant step forward.

++Ian Ernest: We have been given a process by the Archbishop that enables us each to have a voice. At the opening session I did my speaking in French, and invited all the bishops to be a part to the process that the ABC has been inviting us to participate in. I have to say that we have been able to form friendships from each end of the spectrum and to do it. It is has been challenging and exciting. We have been able to express our views openly and honestly and listen carefully and attentively to bishops in other contexts. I remember having spoken passionately about my convictions and then another bishop stood up and told about his convictions passionately and then we held hands and said that we have to take this journey together

The conversation cannot stop. It must continue

But we have also widened the scope of debate. We are talking about polygamy and sexual abuse and promiscuity, the whole scope of human sexuality has to be integrated. We must be able to act in generosity toward one another. I remember that in my own indaba group a bishop was rejected in his group 10 years ago but today we are able to live with one another and to shed tears together knowing that we have different ways and different understandings, but the AC allows us to take out from under the table an issue and engage in it. Even with my own African colleagues we are listening to each other. I hope this Lambeth Conference will give us opportunities for being a group together and loving one another for the love of God given on the cross.
+Colin: We have had the opportunity to discuss these issues for 2 days because we, having ownership, changed some things. A number of images I want to give you.

indaba is about conversation. To have a conversation means turning toward one another. It is related to the word conversion, but you can only have conversation when you face one another. It is not about converting one person to another’s views, but we have been changed and changed one another a lot the process. The third party in the conversation is the Holy Spirit, and in listening to one another and the Holy Spirit we can have an encounter and be transformed. No one encounters the living God without being transformed

We spoke in small groups and in the whole group. The conversation was characterized by respect, generosity and trust. We felt in my indaba conversations so far that we were engaged in common mission despite our differences.

The common mission is more important than what separates us. The common mission is the MDG’s.

Two examples: The first one is from the aboriginal context, where the aborigines stir up the dust with sticks and then go into the house together: that characterizes our indaba group

The second image is the household. The image that was presented was that the household is more than just the bedroom. And outside the house you have land that is flooded or land that is not producing. Our vision must be broader we must ask how do we live faithful lives together.

We were asked to consider the question: What do I need as a bishop from you, my fellow bishops. We spoke very personally about that and the conversation will continue because we have four more indabas and we are all coming to each.

Questions:

Q: Have any bishops changed their minds as a result of the discussion?

++Aspinal: I am not aware of bishops who have changed they’re minds, I am aware of bishops who have been thankful for the experience.

+Colin: I think probably some have nuanced their positions but we did not take about anyone changing their views.

++Ernest: I do not think anyone has changed their minds. But we will be a bridge between those who are not here and this conference.

+Colin: The conservative voice is not absent here. There are conservative voices and liberal voices and moderate voices. The full spectrum is recognized

Q: There are criticism that that you are sidestepping the issue?

++Aspinall: The ABC has made his position clear that he did not believe any useful purpose would be served by revisiting Lambeth 1.10 but the process that was used last time did not help the church move forward so a different process is used to day. The process outcome so far this morning is illustrative of how this is working. From where I sit there disagreements to be seen but there are good signs at this state that we are going to work through this process and come out with a good result.

++Ernest: We are using this process so that we can express ourselves to one another and build our relationships.

+Colin: The conversation continues. We are continuing to engage indaba. When the people who came with anxiety about indaba are now saying we are “into indaba” it means the process is working.

Q: ++Ernest you said you engaged with your African colleagues and brothers and are a bridge for their concerns. Are you speaking to them as you are here?

++Ernest: I have not engaged myself with them yet while here. For the time being I am in conversation here/

Q: Both of you sound hopeful about this process, what words of hope do you have for LGBT Anglicans who are watching this conference? It looks like their lives are being used as bargaining chips?

+Colin: I would not say that. In the initial conversions we were talking about how all the bishops contexts were impacted by this issue and people were speaking out of their own experience and clearly people are in communities where there is great openness about these issues, and they are bringing that into he conversation.

Ernest: and we also take into consideration what Lambeth 1.10 tells us about listening to those who are lesbian and gay.
Q: Is there an expectation that the word of the bishop will influence the Windsor process and whether that will make an impact on the Covenant?

A: Some of that ground has been chewed over and there is a self select session, a special one, planned for this afternoon, to get these ideas on the table so they can make into the Reflection.

Q: The process sees well designed to include all the voices here. When will the LGBT voice be heard?

++Ernest: we are representatives of our provinces and dioceses so we speak for our people.

+Colin: I come from a diverse diocese and I have many LGBT people in my context. So I am not speaking only for myself or one bodyu but for a range of people in my own diocese. We have a large LGBT population and so I am speaking that experience into the sessions and I am also representing other voices. We have a large very conservative group in my diocese as well. I am trying to hold paradoxes in tension.

Q: If at a meeting you do not have present someone who speaks for the conservative camp, does that represent in some way how little progress has been made here?

+Aspinall: I reject your premise. Archbishop Ernest is clearly in the conservative camp

Q: ++Ernest: what has the GAFCON movement done to the unity of CAPA?

A: I have invited my brother primates to attend an meeting of CAPA in September. Both GAFCON and Lambeth are on the agenda.

Q: After the ABC’s address, many felt as though a diminution of the place of TEC might be a result, but now that it seems as though relationships have been formed and the indaba process is working, is this possibly avoidable?

A: +Colin: within our indaba group we have not reached consensus there are voices who would favor that and others who would oppose it. Both were expressed forcefully

Ruth: +Ernest: AB Orombi has written a piece that will appear in the Times tomorrow accusing the ABC of betraying the communion and speaking of colonialism. In light of these comments could you explain more about this bridge you discussed earlier?

A; as you know some of my brothers are not here but we are the bridge to bring their voices here. We have attended at the invitation of the ABC to engage ourselves with the covenant process. I am someone whose life is based on the bible and biblical principles and I will defend them with love and respect.

Andrew Carey: we are hearing a lot about process. It is all very nice hearing about how you are getting along but it looks like navel gazing from the outside.

++Aspinall It does not feel like navel gazing from the inside. There is a lot of growing together going on. Bishops are moving closer. We may not have reached one mind or consensus but growth is coming and that is significant.

+Colin: consensus has gathered around the environment, MDG’s, womens issues and many of the bishops think that the media attention around sexuality has disallowed the kind of conversation that should go on around these more important issues.

end
Comments:

More sharing to follow the Sweat Lodge…

[1] Posted by monologistos on 07-31-2008 at 07:20 AM • top

This whole pretense and mockery of truth is perhaps the most outrageous waste of time and money in the history of Christianity!  “Process.  Blah, blah, blah.  Listening.  Blah, blah, blah.  Conversation.  Blah, blah, blah.  Openness, diversity, honesty.”  It’s nothing short of brainwashing into a Christ-less Christianity and a cross-less discipleship.  We cannot be disciples on our own terms.  If we claim to be Christians we say and do what Christ commands us to say and do - especially if it is uncomfortable, unpopular, offensive, or divisive (as He was!).  That’s the deal.

[2] Posted by JRandall on 07-31-2008 at 07:29 AM • top

Okay, I now understand that you are REALLY NICE and I still disagree with you.

Now what?

[3] Posted by Paul B on 07-31-2008 at 07:31 AM • top

If only Athanasius and Arius had been able to hold hands in an indaba session!

[4] Posted by Katherine on 07-31-2008 at 07:36 AM • top

Matt - I love the headline.

[5] Posted by Eclipse on 07-31-2008 at 07:36 AM • top

Katherine—
Are you suggesting that the way Athanasius and Arius behaved towards each other is an appropriate model for Christians to follow?

[6] Posted by Ruach on 07-31-2008 at 07:40 AM • top

The common mission is more important than what separates us. The common mission is the MDG’s

I thought the common mission was about sharing the good news of Jesus Christ?

[7] Posted by Observing on 07-31-2008 at 07:43 AM • top

The common mission is the MDG’s.

They didn’t tell me that when I was in seminary.  I remember something about the common mission being the Kingdom of God.  Now, the MDG’s may be a result of that, but I hope there remains a difference between the common mission of the United Nations and the common mission of the church.

[8] Posted by revrj on 07-31-2008 at 07:49 AM • top

The common mission is the MDG’s

Since the MDG’s end in 2015 and the Lambeth is not until 2018, isn’t it very irresponsible for the bishops not to figure out a common mission that might last them all the way through to the next Lambeth, I mean what are they going to do for those three years?

[9] Posted by Hosea6:6 on 07-31-2008 at 07:50 AM • top

Pat themselves on the back? Have more parades?

[10] Posted by oscewicee on 07-31-2008 at 07:52 AM • top

Matt+, thanks for the live blogging.  You’re amazingly fast and accurate at that.  Well done.

But where’s the commentary?  I hope that will follow in due time, and I’m sure you didn’t want to wait in getting the live blogging out for people to respond to.  I’ve listened to the live broadcast, and I would only add that I’m disappointed in the lack of pointed questions being pressed by the journalists at the press conference.

I wasn’t surprised a bit at the spin attempts by +Colin Johnson of Toronto, especially his valiant efforts to change the subject and focus on the infamous MDG’s.  Nor was I surprised, just disappointed, at ++Ian Earnest’s remarks.  As ++Aspinall pointed out by way of introduction, the Archbishop of the Indian Ocean is not only the current Chairman of CAPA but also a key member of the Lambeth Design Group.  He has a vested interest in the success of the indaba format etc., just as +Tom Wright has a huge vested interest in the success of the Windsor Report and process.  But both are clearly sincere and dedicated Com Cons as well.

Of course, all is NOT well, if all the bishops are hugging.  Athanasius wouldn’t have hugged Arius, or Irenaeus have hugged Marcion, Valentinus, or Basilides, nor would Augustine have hugged Pelagius etc. 

There is still the problem of squarely facing the call to ex-communicate and shun open heretics, as mandated by biblical texts like 1 Cor. 5:11 and Romans 16:17-18.  Of course, what these three bishops (including ++Aspinall of Australia) represent is just the public face that the organizers of Lambeth 2008 want us to see and who spout the kind of reassuring “All is well” stuff they want us so desperately to hear.  But fortunately, there are plenty of other bishops present who will give us a more honest and revealing glimpse into what’s really been happening in Kent.

But if the indaba groups do lead to prominent, orthodox GS leaders like ++Earnest (or ++Chew or ++Gomez, both of whom have been remarkably silent and out of sight so far) compromising that need for shunning open heretics and even hugging their theological enemies, then it only underlines and confirms the correctness of the 230+ bishops who stayed away and refused to participate in such an expensive and scandalous public farce.

David Handy+

[11] Posted by New Reformation Advocate on 07-31-2008 at 07:54 AM • top

Good to know they are all hugging.  Now, how about TEC stops suing 7 provinces and many thousands of parishioners.

[12] Posted by tjmcmahon on 07-31-2008 at 07:55 AM • top

I say again, be sure and tell the children that haven’t eaten in a couple of days that our “church” had a march, and a great lunch in their honor.  Oh, and then didn’t do a blasted thing about the weakening of the body of Christ that has been going on for years. 

What a huge waste of resources.  However,I am glad they had a good time at the party, met the queen, and determined that they all like each other.

[13] Posted by Looking for Leaders on 07-31-2008 at 08:00 AM • top

David Handy, I think you are very right about +Ernest and +Chew and +Gomez.  I just left two comments on the GAFCON Primates Council thread below which discuss this very real threat, that institutional loyalty will cause some of these orthodox Primates to shun GAFCON.
(+Ernest is now also chairman of the Anglican Francophone Network, +Chew is on the Windsor Continuation Group)

my two comments are here:
http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/14508/

[14] Posted by Karen B. on 07-31-2008 at 08:02 AM • top

Matt+, Let me second NRA’s comment and thanks above.  Not only are you willing to do it (given the nonsense coming out of some bishop’s mouths, I would be “kicking the furniture” by now), but you are a remarkable typist.  My 40 wpm would never hold up, especially given the propensity of Anglicans to use words like propensity.

The “Athanasius” of this conference so far is ++Deng Bul.  We haven’t heard about him hugging anyone so far.  And as was pointed out by a couple people last night, KJS and others have reassigned VGR to a much lower profile since the good bishop of Sudan made his remarks.

[15] Posted by tjmcmahon on 07-31-2008 at 08:03 AM • top

#5, Eclipse, perhaps you are thinking of Nicholas of Myra (St. Nick of legend) who reportedly slapped Arius to the ground at the first council of Nicaea.  He was expelled and defrocked for this but reinstated and reseated the next day after several members dreamed of Jesus handing him a Gospel book and Mary handing him a omophorion.  This tradition is not mentioned by Methodius but it could have happened.  Here is an icon of him.

[16] Posted by monologistos on 07-31-2008 at 08:10 AM • top

#15 tjmcmahon, I agree on your assessment of ++Deng Bul—he belongs in the “heroes of faith” category. 

I would add ++Mouneer Anis to that list.  Looks at his comments on his blog site:  http://episcopalegypt.blogspot.com/ 

His realism and cynicism about TEC are refreshing.

David Handy’s comments are right on the mark.  Can you imagine what would have happened to the Christian church if the early church fathers had taken this Rodney King (can we just get along) attitude toward the many heretics of their day.  The Christian church would have died.

[17] Posted by hanks on 07-31-2008 at 08:12 AM • top

The household is more than the bedroom. Boy, they’re really getting intellectual on this, aren’t they?

[18] Posted by oscewicee on 07-31-2008 at 08:29 AM • top

“The household is more than the bedroom. Boy, they’re really getting intellectual on this, aren’t they?” Yes, my wife would probably agree, on the other hand I really like the possibilities of considering the whole house as the bedroom.

[19] Posted by FrVan on 07-31-2008 at 08:32 AM • top

The scripture tells us that we can not serve two masters. The MDG’s are about reducing the entire world to a plantation status. The corporate interests as masters, the “governments” as overseers, and the vast majority of the people as slaves (and no matter how much the majority of the revisionists, who are drinking the koolaid that KJS, the ABoC and the rest might not want to believe it, they will be among those slaves, perhaps even eliminated when they no longer serve their purpose. History shows many examples of useful idiots being discarded once they no longer are necessary) serving the almighty dollar, euro, yuan or whatever is used to label the golden idol.

There won’t be justice, and in no way can you consider such a system to be of peace. It’s an unmaking of all that was good, decent or indicative of freedom in our world.

[20] Posted by mari on 07-31-2008 at 08:32 AM • top

monologistos -

Well, I just thought Matt was funny.  I also have my own ‘hugging’ stories - A person on a vestry stating that a pastoral candidate was their choice because, “He began hugging everyone” - my remark was “Is this new the indicator of Spirituality?” 

“In the Multitude of Hugs there wanted not sin, but he who refrains his arms is wise”

I note that Nicholas is not hugging anyone… except the Bible… obviously one of those horrid conservatives…

[21] Posted by Eclipse on 07-31-2008 at 08:40 AM • top

I simply can’t imagine a press conference with a participant present from the spouses conference (Rev Jackie Crey), where no questions were asked about yesterday’s outrageous performance that accused one or more Anglican Bishops of being wife beaters and the rest of them as being capable of it.

[22] Posted by illinisouth on 07-31-2008 at 08:42 AM • top

Non illegitimis carborundum est!

[23] Posted by Daniel on 07-31-2008 at 08:43 AM • top

This is touchy feel-good - no one is going to raise anything <gasp> controversial. It might look as if they approved of wife beating. That was so deeply offensive - I wish someone would address it.

[24] Posted by oscewicee on 07-31-2008 at 08:44 AM • top

Nice title. But if they don’t start addressing the real issues, including the authority of Scripture and the basics of faith, the hugs and kisses will end in schism. It seems that the divide is so clear that none of the Reverends has changed minds despite hearing others. Did someone was so naive to think that anyone in Lambeth would change his/her mind?

[25] Posted by Armando on 07-31-2008 at 09:13 AM • top

I’m an advocate of hugs between friends ... granting appropriateness.  But the Leo Buscaglia solution of hugs all around as the universal solution to the world’s problems is nonsense.  Arius probably deserved to be slapped down.  Perhaps we all do.  But I try not to put myself in the place of the saints, not being one.  If Nicholas did that today, he’d be in jail before the sun sets on the slapee’s wrath.  Of course, VGR would be happy for any kind of attention, being a slap happy kind of fellow.

[26] Posted by monologistos on 07-31-2008 at 09:47 AM • top

I almost wish that a bishop would follow the Goldy example of St Nicholas and start punching out heretics.

[27] Posted by AndrewA on 07-31-2008 at 09:50 AM • top

Because he’s been brought up through previous postings here above:
In the year 325 St Nicholas was a participant in the First Ecumenical Council. This Council proclaimed the Nicean Symbol of Faith, and he stood up against the heretic Arius with the likes of Sts Sylvester the Bishop of Rome (January 2), Alexander of Alexandria (May 29), Spyridon of Trimythontos (December 12) and other Fathers of the Council.
St Nicholas, fired with zeal for the Lord, assailed the heretic Arius with his words, and also struck him upon the face. For this reason, he was deprived of the emblems of his episcopal rank and placed under guard. But several of the holy Fathers had the same vision, seeing the Lord Himself and the Mother of God returning to him the Gospel and omophorion. The Fathers of the Council agreed that the audacity of the saint was pleasing to God, and restored the saint to the office of bishop.
Having returned to his own diocese, the saint brought it peace and blessings, sowing the word of Truth, uprooting heresy, nourishing his flock with sound doctrine, and also providing food for their bodies.
_______________________________________
Notice the year when this meeting took place? Notice how Nicholas was dealt with for striking Arius? Notice the visions by different bishops? And then notice how he went back to Myra and strengthened the Church? Think anything like that is happening here?
_________________________________
A very good comment on the treatment of these issues by Orthodox Christian Churches is here: (especially the last two paragraphs) http://conciliarpress.pinnaclecart.com/index.php?p=page&page_id=books_hopko_same-sex_attraction

[28] Posted by Margaret on 07-31-2008 at 09:56 AM • top

Margaret:
Notice that there’s no contemporary historical evidence that Nicholas was even at Nicea, nevermind that he acted as described?  Notice that this legend comes from a source written, oh, 900 years later?
If you’re going to argue, please argue from actual evidence.

[29] Posted by Ruach on 07-31-2008 at 10:15 AM • top

Q: The process sees well designed to include all the voices here. When will the LGBT voice be heard?

Was this question actually serious? Isn’t half the self select sessions dedicated to just that presented by LGBT?
What about the “Lambeth Witness” and GR? Isn’t a significant number of the vendors there pushing LGBT agenda?

The real question is will th “LGBT voice” ever shut up long enough for people to actually discuss the issue?

[30] Posted by Rocks on 07-31-2008 at 10:34 AM • top

Ruach, do you feel the same way about the Resurrection?  Where’s the actual evidence?  St. Camber preserve us!  smile

[31] Posted by monologistos on 07-31-2008 at 11:30 AM • top

How much of the MDG funds are going toward finding the LGBT gene, developing a cure for LGBT, or at least helping the the poor souls understand that their behavior is the cause of their problems? 

How much of MDG funding is going to Anglican churches and organizations that have a proven record of success in helping LGBT change their behavior?

Physican cure thyself first.

[32] Posted by MasterServer on 07-31-2008 at 12:38 PM • top

[20] mari,

Could you please elaborate on how you understand the Millenium Development Goals (i.e., the 8 goals themselves, not the program to get every national government in the developed world to spend a fraction of a percent on the (mysteriously unexplained) means for achieving the goals? Or, is it that latter part about which you are so pessimistic? I would like to understand how you conclude that the various assertions in your referenced comment follow from the MDGs.

Blessings and regards,
Martial Artist

[33] Posted by H. Potter (aka Martial Artist) on 07-31-2008 at 01:27 PM • top

[32] MasterServer,

You asked

How much of the MDG funds are going toward finding the LGBT gene, developing a cure for LGBT, or at least helping the the poor souls understand that their behavior is the cause of their problems?

I don’t know that any of the MDG funds are going toward those specific causes, but TEC does support an organization (at least through the use of their name and cachet—I am not sure any money currently goes to the organization from TEC) that will, potentially, greatly assist in the cure for the L & G, and possibly also for the B.

Just as soon as the researchers develop a test that shows whether an unborn child will be either L, G or B, the lobbying group RCRC<sup>1</sup>, who claim TEC as a supporting body, will have yet one more reason unlimited access to legal means of killing unborn babies<sup>2</sup> should remain available to all female human beings in the U.S. Thus, if RCRC succeeds politically, once the said test becomes available, curing same sex attraction will be available to any pregnant woman carrying an unborn baby tested positive for the problem, who wishes to cure it. hmmm

Blessings and regards,
Martial Artist

———————-
<sup>1</sup> — RCRC is the acronym for the Religious Coalition for Reproductive Choice.
<sup>2</sup> — “killing unborn babies” is what RCRC refers to euphemistically (for obvious PR reasons) as reproductive choice or abortion.

[34] Posted by H. Potter (aka Martial Artist) on 07-31-2008 at 01:47 PM • top

It is glad I am that FrVan has a wife. He sounds like a whole lotta fun, which could get dangerous. (teeheehee)

“The household is more than the bedroom. Boy, they’re really getting intellectual on this, aren’t they?” Yes, my wife would probably agree, on the other hand I really like the possibilities of considering the whole house as the bedroom.”

[35] Posted by Wren King on 07-31-2008 at 02:29 PM • top

Andrew Carey is the one who has it right with the “navel gazing”. 

I’d also add “let’s keep talking until you agree with me” or the “Brainwash Conference 2008”. 

See you all later, I must run off now and whip my traditional hide…

[36] Posted by Passing By on 07-31-2008 at 02:37 PM • top

Hmmm.  Let’s change the subject fast.  Thanks to Karen B. (#14), TJ (#15), and hanks (#17) for their kind words of strong endorsement and agreement with my #11.  Such affirmation is always welcome.  I agree with you all too.

David Handy+

[37] Posted by New Reformation Advocate on 07-31-2008 at 02:50 PM • top
[38] Posted by Harry Edmon on 07-31-2008 at 02:58 PM • top

#37 David Handy

How about hugs all around?

smile

[39] Posted by hanks on 07-31-2008 at 03:07 PM • top

Thanks, Harry, for posting the link to ++Orombi’s marvelous article.  It’s vintage Henry Orombi, which means it’s superb in every way.  I urge everyone to read this splendid statement about why the Ugandan bishops aren’t attending this Lambeth Conference.

It makes me prouder than ever to have a Ugandan church as my home church: Eternity Anglican in Richmond, VA.

David Handy+

[40] Posted by New Reformation Advocate on 07-31-2008 at 03:09 PM • top

oscewicee #24, I AGREE! Let’s kick their buts!:)

[41] Posted by FrVan on 07-31-2008 at 03:17 PM • top

OR BUTTS AS THE CASE MAY BE….

[42] Posted by FrVan on 07-31-2008 at 03:18 PM • top

It’s a fur piece to kick, Fr. Van. Maybe we could get the Stand Firm folks to raise money to send us to England for the purpose? wink

[43] Posted by oscewicee on 07-31-2008 at 03:25 PM • top

oscewicee: It’s a sacrifice I’d be willing to make! smile

[44] Posted by FrVan on 07-31-2008 at 03:33 PM • top

Martial Artist, While I laud the stated goals that the UN uses to frame their MDG’s, they seem little more than false fronts for political agenda.

The goals are the reduction of what is framed as “extreme poverty and hunger”, but those they label as “extreme” are those who live on less than a dollar a day. While there are many, many poor people worldwide, and they desperately need help, there are also many, many poor people who suffer extreme hunger in the developing, as well as the developed world who would fall between the cracks, as they are in situations where they are obliged to pay first and second world prices, and while their limited wages might seem high compared to those living in the third world, the costs of living are dramatically higher, and so they are still ignored and condemned to extreme poverty. The resources being used to fund these MDG’s come directly at the expense of funding to help the poor in the countries being asked to give the most. From what we’ve seen with the UN’s claims of aid to help the poor in the past, very little actually ends up actually reaching the poor, the majority of the aid has been funneled into the pockets of UN officials, their relatives pockets, the many NGO’s who are staffed with corporate and other profiteers. There’s also a claim to “achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all, including women and young people. Do you actually see any attempts to actually achieve this? We do see the corporate and foreign interests attempting to exploit markets to drag down wages, and exploit human and environmental protections in countries that do not respect such laudable goals.

The second is achieving universal access to primary education, a laudable goal, but given the fact that there isn’t really much emphasis on this in what has been available to read about it, I have to wonder about the commitment to it. The Davos contingent seem more interested in treating the peoples of the world as being secondary to the apportionment of power to the unelected and unanswerable, under their brave new world of the new world order.

Third is the promotion of gender equality and empowering “women”, the stated claim is improving the representation of women in primary and secondary education. After the joke that was that global conference on women’s issues in China, I believe, during the Clinton administration, they claimed to be working to improve things for women around the world, but what has come about since has been exclusively in the interest of “activism” for the few pet issues of women who live above the glass ceiling. I cancelled my membership in NOW in the mid ‘90s, because to them, the only issues that mattered were sexuality, and glass ceiling issues, for example, that there just aren’t enough female CEO’s. The rest of us were supposed to be satisfied with “take your daughter to work day”. As a woman, a traditional feminist, and mother of a daughter, I would be much happier with increased opportunity and empowerment of the poor and lower middle classes, around the world.

Fourth, the reduction of the child mortality rate. Considering their narrow POV on goal one, and what we’ve seen in the developed world (more diagnosis’ of malnutrition and anemia than we had during the great depression, and discoveries that poor children in the US are suffering from vitamin deficiences, ie.. vitamin D deficiency, and diagnosis’ of poor children with the rickets (not talking about immigrant children, but poor citizen children)), what has been the upshot of the funding of MDG’s thus far has not aleviated those problems in the third world, but they have lead to the reintroduction of the same kinds of dire poverty and suffering to the desperately poor in the US. To me MDG’s have been shown to be a tool for the corrupt to exploit, like shuffling the deck chairs on the Titanic, foolhardy and negligent, they don’t achieve their stated aims, and are only loopholes for the diversion of assets into the pockets of the wealthy and powerful, so as to more easily weaken and exploit the ever increasing number of poor in what was once the developed world.

Fifth, improve maternal health, again, laudable, but how? Poverty and genocide, increased by distribution of MDG funding thus far..

Sixth, the fight against HIV/AIDS, malaria, etc.. reversing the spread of HIV/AIDS is important, but they aren’t actually working to do this. The PC police disrespect the intelligence and values of people in the third world, by claiming that prostitution and licentiousness are part of their culture, and that it’s offensive to instruct them that such behaviors lead to the spread of HIV/AIDS, of course the same PC police were offended here in the ‘80s when the people were told the same thing. Regarding what has been done with MDG funding thus far on HIV/AIDS, the IAVI (International AIDS Vaccine Initiative) has promoted the usage of aid to be used as bribes to convince African governments to allow drug trials to be conducted. If you like, google for yourself about the actions of the IAVI, Bill Gates, the Majengo Clinic, KAVI and you’ll find just the tip of the iceberg about the atrocity that is the REASON why the rates of AIDS has dramatically increased in Africa. Bill Gates was instrumental, along with hypocrites like Bono, in cutting backdoor deals for pharamceutical giants to use the poor in Africa as lab rats, basically because they were hoping to make a killing off their investments if the vaccine proved successful, even marginally. It was a failure, and more lives have been lost.. but has the UN even deigned to consider this? NO. Expect more of this to come down the pipeline if they get their way. Regarding malaria, so many advances had been achieved, but destabilization has caused a regression in policy, and incidences of malaria have risen. Some corporate interests are trying to rationalize the reintroduction of DDT, despite the serious threats that could come from this.

Seventh is ensuring environmental sustainability, a worthy aim, but if you consider what they are advocating at the UN, the resulting rise in overpopulation, the alliances with serious polluters, how China has been allowed to strip Africa of it’s resources, including it’s fishing stocks, dumping toxic waste, into the air, soil and water, I could go on ad nauseum, it just doesn’t ring true. Their claims about access to drinking water, are sneaky and need to be watched. They are working towards finding a way to steal public drinking water supplies from nations, claiming they do not have the right to control their own water supplies. At the same time, while some people in the Middle East and Africa have little access to clean drinking water, Arab royalty use their own to create lakes, on which they build little islands so they can play on boats, jet skis and what have you. The inconsistency and hypocrisies are amazing. We aren’t going to achieve a safer environment by saying the west has to cut back, and the so called “developing world” in China and India can continue to pump out extremely high levels of pollution. What’s more, China and India have had the resources to develop along the lines that would help their own populations but have refused to do so. No where is there any discussion of the fact that, India for example is now a global super power, yet they expect us to give them 9 billion dollars in aid per year, to help their poor. Little to none of that goes to their poor, it goes to susidize the government there.

Eighth, most telling and last of all, develop a global partnership for development. It’s about unchecked, unfair, unregulated, unprotected control by unelected, unanswerable powers, so called “free trade”, no borders, so rights and freedoms can be swept aside by the importation or exportation of jobs/workers, no restrictions or protections against unsafe food or products, you name it. Everything even life is marketable. Perhaps you think I’m exagerating or deluding myself.. tell me, what hasn’t the UN been willing to ignore most recently, tell me how the deck is stacked in that body that reflects the UN’s original stated mission. They do not care about or respect human rights.

Frankly, the MDG’s have been going on, with funding since the ‘90s, and they have resolved nothing. They are a misdirection of funding, that serve another agenda, one that means to bring western nations, with their historical rights and freedoms to their knees, and under the thumb of those who hold all the wealth and power.

Sorry it took me a while to respond, I’ve been writing this and dealing with work, as well as trying to reach a repairman to make an appointment this afternoon.

[45] Posted by mari on 07-31-2008 at 03:34 PM • top

Me, Fr. Van. I need to read that “what I like about England” thread again. grin

[46] Posted by oscewicee on 07-31-2008 at 03:40 PM • top

Ina-da-ba-da-veeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee-da, Baby.  This is really groooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooovy.  I mean just feeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeel the luvvvvvv!!!
Are we sure that Ian isn’t Austin in disguise???

[47] Posted by dwstroudmd on 07-31-2008 at 04:25 PM • top

Clearly we have no choice but to break communion with these people.
Thankyou Lord Jesus for GAFCON and the great wisdom you gave those who attended.
THIS is the Holy Spirit at work.

[48] Posted by OHOWY on 07-31-2008 at 06:18 PM • top

I was struck by the utter silence on SF re: Cardinal Kaspar’s address yesterday. It was very significant. Perhaps it was just an oversight.

[49] Posted by JPC on 07-31-2008 at 06:48 PM • top

I read it, JPC, and also the commentary linked on Titus One Nine. Bishop Howe’s comment about the church becoming Protestants in funny clothes seems to be true of the Lambeth party in the eyes of the Catholic church. It is sad and depressing to me.

[50] Posted by oscewicee on 07-31-2008 at 07:13 PM • top

mari,

Thank you for elucidating your points further. I generally agree with your analysis of the results, and even some of the causes. However, I think you are at least somewhat confused as to who the culprits are, not only in the developing world but in the developed world as well. But this thread is about neither politics nor economics.

I would agree that your fundamental answer, that the goals themselves are laudable, but the mechanisms towards which the UN (not to mention progressives in the West) lean are the problem rather than the solution, is quite correct.

Blessings and regards,
Martial Artist

[51] Posted by H. Potter (aka Martial Artist) on 07-31-2008 at 08:43 PM • top

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.


Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere about the crisis in our church. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments that you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm, its board of directors, or its site administrators.