Total visitors right now: 96

Click here to check your private inbox.

Welcome to Stand Firm!

The Presiding Bishop’s Webcast and Press Conference…on the topic of Lambeth

Tuesday, May 20, 2008 • 3:22 pm


Watch it here


78 Comments • Print-friendlyPrint-friendly w/commentsShare on Facebook
Comments:

FYI, video won’t load in Firefox, and so far, after 5 minutes of nothing, IE just sits, waiting.

[1] Posted by Athanasius Returns on 05-20-2008 at 03:36 PM • top

Same problem…..nothing.

[2] Posted by Creighton+ on 05-20-2008 at 03:46 PM • top

Could it be that the internet decided to censor itself?

[3] Posted by Thomistic on 05-20-2008 at 03:57 PM • top

Won’t load for me either…. but oddly enough that is substantially less annoying than listening to Kate…go figure. smile

[4] Posted by Gordy on 05-20-2008 at 04:04 PM • top

I got nothing too, but didn’t wait around long.
And when I clicked the little window closed, IE did something I’ve never seen before.  I clicked the magic X to turn off TEC and a little window popped up that simply said “thank you.”  I guess it really didn’t want to broadcast that after all.  You’re welcome, little computer.

[5] Posted by Free Range Anglican on 05-20-2008 at 04:05 PM • top

This seems to be a problem with the TEC site, not something fixable from SF.

[6] Posted by Matt Kennedy on 05-20-2008 at 04:08 PM • top

Firefox definitely does not work (unless you are using an IE tab plugin)—you need to use Internet <strike>Exploder</strike> Explorer.

I can get the player to come up in the IE browser, and it says that content is “buffering”, but nothing plays back so far ...

[7] Posted by Charles Maggs on 05-20-2008 at 04:09 PM • top

I got nothing, so I went to episcopalchurch.com to see what they had, and they have nothing either, not even a link to the podcast. I did find this though:

<bold> May 20 webcast: Presiding Bishop addresses media on Lambeth Conference </bold>
May 20, 2008

[Episcopal News Service] Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori addressed members of the media about the Lambeth Conference on Tuesday, May 20 in a live webcast at the Episcopal Church Center, 815 Second Ave., New York City. The webcast began at 2 p.m. Eastern time (1 p.m. Central, noon Mountain, 11 a.m. Pacific). The webcast will be available for on-demand viewing shortly.
Joining the Presiding Bishop was the Rev. Dr. Ian Douglas of Episcopal Divinity School, who is a member of the Lambeth Conference Design Group.

Questions were accepted only from credentialed media. The Lambeth Conference was the only topic discussed at this event.

Yours in Christ,
jacob

[8] Posted by Jacobsladder on 05-20-2008 at 04:10 PM • top

This seems to be a problem with the TEC site, not something fixable from SF.

Just one of many, Matt, just one of many.

[9] Posted by Thomistic on 05-20-2008 at 04:18 PM • top

Matt,
I couldn’t get it either. In any event we pretty much know what she’ll say anyway.

[10] Posted by RMBruton on 05-20-2008 at 04:18 PM • top

If you don’t want to waste your time with it, Living Church has a summary up.

[11] Posted by Christopher Johnson on 05-20-2008 at 04:37 PM • top

I don’t believe this was for the common riff raff.  It was for the media elites. Asta la vista.

bb

[12] Posted by BabyBlue on 05-20-2008 at 04:49 PM • top

I am watching it now on Firefox.  How long is this thing?

[13] Posted by Saint Dumb Ox on 05-20-2008 at 04:55 PM • top

Ian Douglas:

“Is a process that creates winners and losers the best way to meet a problem head on?”

So does that mean we won’t have parliamentary resolutions at GC2009 as well?  ROTFL

[14] Posted by Jill Woodliff on 05-20-2008 at 04:59 PM • top

Is a process that is nothing more than a desperate attempt to avoid meeting a problem head on the best way to meet a problem head on?

[15] Posted by Christopher Johnson on 05-20-2008 at 05:06 PM • top

So if KJS is not for our democratic way of “voting” and all that, just what does she propose?  How does a person like that even get dressed in the morning.  A life with no decisions at all is not really a life is it?

The word tyranny really comes to mind watching this.

[16] Posted by Saint Dumb Ox on 05-20-2008 at 05:09 PM • top

Only Fr. Jake could get it….
Intercessor

[17] Posted by Intercessor on 05-20-2008 at 05:19 PM • top

From Living Church:

The conference, scheduled for July 16-Aug. 3, will be unlike any previous Lambeth gathering. It is not set up for parliamentary-style debate and is not designed to produce legislation or resolutions, the two explained.

I guess it’s official - welcome the new PR folks for the ABC.

“The parliamentary system as it is generally practiced in the West produces legislative winners and losers,” Bishop Jefferts Schori said. She added that she was hopeful for the conference because of its emphasis on a traditional understanding of conversation. “Conversation entered into deeply and fully leads to conversion and hope,” she noted.

There are just so many things wrong with these two statements, it’s difficult to know where to begin.  Winners and losers?  How juvenile is that?

[18] Posted by larswife on 05-20-2008 at 05:37 PM • top

“Conversation entered into deeply and fully leads to conversion and hope,” she noted.

We’ve certainly noticed that within TEC. /sarcasm

[19] Posted by oscewicee on 05-20-2008 at 05:38 PM • top

“opportunity to meet the other in a way that’s flesh”
Yum!

[20] Posted by Pageantmaster ن on 05-20-2008 at 05:43 PM • top

Question for the class…
Don’t you have to be INVITED to GAFCON?


Crusader44

[21] Posted by Crusader44 on 05-20-2008 at 05:45 PM • top

Funny, when I was opposing a liberal resolution on same-sex blessings at our last diocesan convention, I asked

“Is a process that creates winners and losers the best way to meet a problem head on?”

I suggested that it wasn’t.  But the liberals were quick to make blunt use of their majority to overrule both the parliamentarian and force through their position.  I wasn’t surprised.

You can always tell when a liberal thinks they can’t win a majority vote.  Then they oppose the parliamentary procedure and argue that voting creates winners and losers and should be avoided.  However, if a liberal thinks they can win the vote, then they will laud democracy and declare that they have won and tell their opponents “so sad, too bad, sometimes you have to have winners and losers to progress.”

As Sarah has mentioned before - consistency, fair play, honor, and honesty are not core liberal values.  They are there to win and to win at any costs.

[22] Posted by jamesw on 05-20-2008 at 05:48 PM • top

It worked for me. I rather it hadn’t. I was reading the summary over at Living Church while listening and a thought struck me. The new format for Lambeth has institutionalized the filibuster. Prof. Douglas made it quite explicit that nothing is to be accomplished at Lambeth. It is explicitly designed to make any sort of resolution or decision impossible. That non-result is the intention of the Lambeth Design Group.

It is almost dinner time, and thanks to all this, I am a touch queasy.

The Episcopal Church: All the polity, none of the substance.

[23] Posted by Matthew A (formerly mousestalker) on 05-20-2008 at 05:50 PM • top

mousestalker, thanks for putting the name to it. Institutionalized filibuster. Yep. In order to enjoy the parties more they’ve decided to eliminate anything that remotely resembled work. *Everybody* likes parties. :-(

[24] Posted by oscewicee on 05-20-2008 at 05:53 PM • top

Why go then? Just do it all via email and teleconferencing. I feel quite sure the Queen won’t miss it. Rather be playing with the dogs and horses anyway.
Save the unspent money for Legal fees and MDGs, if any is left.

[25] Posted by john1 on 05-20-2008 at 06:01 PM • top

Unspent money, unwasted fuel - I think we should lobby for the cancellation of Lambeth for the betterment of humanity.

[26] Posted by oscewicee on 05-20-2008 at 06:05 PM • top

.  .  .  (the PB) did not think the lack of an invitation would hinder Bishop Robinson’s ability to have his voice be heard.

Might that be a slight understatement?

Is it possible for anybody to keep this blathering fool quiet?

[27] Posted by hanks on 05-20-2008 at 06:10 PM • top

Folks,

This story confirms that Lambeth is 100 percent compromised.

unprecedented format for the once-every-10-year conference, which was first held in 1867, will be difficult for journalists to cover and for the public to follow because there is no “focal point of up-down decision-making.”

There you have it, the Lambeth Conference is dead as a decision making entity.  Dead.  TEC has pwned Cantuar.

Quo vadis, Anglicanum?

[28] Posted by Athanasius Returns on 05-20-2008 at 06:25 PM • top

The tiny bit of good news there, Athanasius Returns, is that Lambeth 1.10 will still be the teaching of the Anglican Communion.

Now what that’s worth is certainly debatable, if ignoring it has no consequences.  But I still like the idea that it is on the books.

[29] Posted by hanks on 05-20-2008 at 06:29 PM • top

Well there we have it from the horses mouth.  The Bishop will be at Lambeth.  Though on the outside, really on the inside, per the PB….......I’M Glad Iker and Duncan are going.  They are going to have the time of their lives…..I know now why Jesus talked to simple fishermen.  He didn’t want to hear the big words telling him what he just said…....

[30] Posted by Dee in Iowa on 05-20-2008 at 06:42 PM • top

The conference, scheduled for July 16-Aug. 3, will be unlike any previous Lambeth gathering. It is not set up for parliamentary-style debate and is not designed to produce legislation or resolutions, the two explained.

“The parliamentary system as it is generally practiced in the West produces legislative winners and losers,” Bishop Jefferts Schori said. She added that she was hopeful for the conference because of its emphasis on a traditional understanding of conversation. “Conversation entered into deeply and fully leads to conversion and hope,” she noted.

Prof. Douglas said the unprecedented format for the once-every-10-year conference, which was first held in 1867, will be difficult for journalists to cover and for the public to follow because there is no “focal point of up-down decision-making.” He said the new format will not shy away from discussion of controversial issues, but it is not designed to offer statements implying that various issues have been resolved.

Perfect.  A two-week meeting costing hundreds of thousands of dollars designed not to resolve issues.  I only wish I had been invited just so I could stay away. smile

[31] Posted by Catholic Mom on 05-20-2008 at 06:46 PM • top

Whether you agree with all of his theological statements or not, Al Mohler hits the nail on the head, regarding this issue, in the following two quotes.

“An institution has to decide, and it’s not just an option, it’s a responsibility, how much diversity can be tolerated.”

“When a denomination begins to consider doctrine divisive, theology troublesome, and convictions inconvenient, consider that denomination on its way to a well-deserved death.” (Southern Baptist Convention meeting, July 1995)

[32] Posted by Think Again on 05-20-2008 at 06:58 PM • top

Maybe Lambeth should be just an awards show. Call it the Pulpit’s Choice awards.
Working Catagories/Nominees:

Revisionist of the Year:
Jon Bruno
Lizzie Kaeton
Sister Sledge

The Peoples Mitre:
Rowan Willams
Jack Spong
Charlie Bennison

Delphi Personified:
Frank Griswold (5 time champion)
Canon Kearon
Stacy Sauls

Our Favorite Ovenmitt:
KJS
Desmond Tutu
Betty Crocker (posthumously)

Top Country Bishop:
The Gene
John Howe
Brooks and Dunn
Intercessor

[33] Posted by Intercessor on 05-20-2008 at 07:00 PM • top

Ian Douglas refers more than once to the AC’s “becoming” as opposed to disintegrating.  Yeah, right.  Black is white, down is up, yada yada yada.

[34] Posted by LBStringer on 05-20-2008 at 07:00 PM • top

No wonder she didn’t want any questions coming her way on this!!! She wouldn’t be able to answer any questions regarding any of her ridiculous statements! In her twisted mind she thinks: “Hear me, don’t ask me!”

[35] Posted by TLDillon on 05-20-2008 at 07:51 PM • top

What is this “know others as Incarnate Images of God”? I’m not so sure this isa godd statement….someone please am I hearing something wrong here?

[36] Posted by TLDillon on 05-20-2008 at 07:55 PM • top

Rob O’neill at GAFCON per the Presiding Ovenmitt. Boy..that takes some Cajones…Comments please Father Don Armstrong.
Intercessor

[37] Posted by Intercessor on 05-20-2008 at 08:04 PM • top

Who invited +O’Neill?  He’s a heretic!

[38] Posted by Cennydd on 05-20-2008 at 08:29 PM • top

As I heard the PB, difficult as it is to listen to her clap-trap, what she said is that she has asked O’Neill to go to Jerusalem to support the Bishop of Jerusalem.  I did not take it that he was going to GAFCON, as I doubt he has been invited.  She was trying to make the point that the Bishop of Jerusalem did not want GAFCON to be held there and so TEC would come to the rescue.

Sounded to me that this is her not-so-subtle attempt to have someone in Jerusalem to hold press conferences and spread the gospel of The New Thing.

[39] Posted by hanks on 05-20-2008 at 08:40 PM • top

Do you think the introduction of live-blogging at GC2006, courtesy of Matt, Greg, and Sarah, might be a factor in this strategy?  We common riff raff have pointed out the inconsistencies of various GC legislative maneuvers time and again.

[40] Posted by Jill Woodliff on 05-20-2008 at 08:56 PM • top

Total wastes of time—this video and Lambeth. Do these two wait for the camera to go dark before they collapse on one another in giggles?

[41] Posted by stevenanderson on 05-20-2008 at 09:24 PM • top

Am I reading this wrong, or does TEC now control the agenda at Lambeth, as well? If this is not about decision making, and primates who have continually defied the expressed will of the greater communion can continue of without even a hint of accountability, then what exactly is the point of spending all that money on a Lambeth Conference…or continuing to call this mess a communion? If the communion has no discipline, then it also has no meaning. My heart is through aching, and has turned to stone.

[42] Posted by Shumanbean on 05-20-2008 at 09:32 PM • top

My problem with the revisionists, as I’m sure it is with many of you, is not what they believe or don’t believe, but that they have hijacked a vehicle of a religion they don’t care about, don’t understand and don’t believe in to make political hay. I’d be much more respectful of them if they’d simply started an organization and named it “the high-church neo-anglican unitarian universalist church of absolute relativism.” Not that they are to be trusted with any religion, as they apparently believe any of them teach anything unique or distinct. I can’t help thinking of the wonderfully envisioned corporate dinner in “That Hideous Strength.” “Tidies and bemelmen…” Seems like Lambeth this year may resemble that dinner! And a certain cigar-smoking security person is well represented there by a person who shall go unnamed…

[43] Posted by ears2hear on 05-20-2008 at 09:50 PM • top

er, “believe any of them” should be “don’t believe any of them”

[44] Posted by ears2hear on 05-20-2008 at 09:51 PM • top

It will work with any browser IF you have Adobe Flash Player installed

[45] Posted by CradleEpisc on 05-20-2008 at 10:23 PM • top

Okay, so I watched the whole bloody thing.  I have a few observations:
1.  There was so much conversatin’ it left my head a achin’
2.  I heard indaba so much I started thinking about Fred Flintstone:  yabba dabba doo!!!!
3.  I have a finely tuned “alcometer”.  Methinks KJS may tippleth the sherryeth (that is what piskies drinketh, isn’t it?) too mucheth. 
4.  Instead of watching this, I wish I had watched paint dry.  It would have made more sense and been more productive.

[46] Posted by no longer NH Episcopalian on 05-20-2008 at 10:29 PM • top

——
unprecedented format for the once-every-10-year conference, which was first held in 1867, will be difficult for journalists to cover and for the public to follow because there is no “focal point of up-down decision-making.”
—-

Ah, but it sounds like an up/down decision was already made—to prevent conservatives from disciplining TEC at Lambeth. 

“You can choose a ready guide in some celestial voice.  If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice.”  (with apologies to Rush)

—John Clay

[47] Posted by John Clay on 05-20-2008 at 11:08 PM • top

“The conference, scheduled for July 16-Aug. 3, will be unlike any previous Lambeth gathering. It is not set up for parliamentary-style debate and is not designed to produce legislation or resolutions, the two explained”.

And Williams has designed it just the way he likes it—out of the hot seat, where he doesn’t have to participate in any discipline, decision-making, or exercise real leadership.  Instead, it’s to look like the usual pseudoacademic “conversation”...how pathetic, a real spineless dodge-and-weave. 

Obviously, the real leadership and clarity demonstration will take place at the GAFCON meeting.  God save us all…

BTW, will Williams ever be held accountable for allowing/engineering the DeS Communique’s melting(unexecuted) into the woodwork? 

“Leadership” by subterfuge and sabotage…he makes me sick…

[48] Posted by Passing By on 05-20-2008 at 11:12 PM • top

Could any more useless and irrelevant format for Lambeth have been devised ?  So they shall fiddle while Anglican Rome burns ?  Did anyone hear a straight answer to any question ?  This is Anglican “rope-a-dope,” intended to get by Lambeth one more time without any decision having to be made.  Perhaps Bishop Jack, Bishop Bob, and Archbishop Greg, God bless em, might just forget fooling with these totally useless planned sessions and call appropriate press conferences, etc to get accurate information out to the news media, bypassing all this deliberate obfuscating blather.

[49] Posted by Anglican Observer on 05-21-2008 at 12:45 AM • top

Who killed the Anglican Communion in its present form?  Rowan Williams, with the design of this conference.  Note also that the concern about what will happen to The Covenant if conservatives aren’t at Lambeth is pointless, because Lambeth itself is designed to be pointless.

[50] Posted by Katherine on 05-21-2008 at 01:22 AM • top

Why the expressions of surprise? This was telegraphed long ago by the ABC. The only signficance of this Lambeth will be to give further legitimacy, through the ABC’s preemptory invitation, to the heretical and disobedient Episcopal Bishops. The invitation was the check and checkmate. For that reason, an effective response of the orthodox Bishops was to reject the same invitation.

[51] Posted by Going Home on 05-21-2008 at 01:30 AM • top

It was pointed out elsewhere that the inblahblah format will mean that Lambeth 1.10 will stand unchanged for another ten years. This was apparently the purpose of Rowan’s ‘private conversations’ with select bishops who might try to ‘subvert Windsor’. And here KJS is calling off her ravenous dogs who were slavering about overturning 1.10. They’ll have to shelve that plan for another ten years.

The Rabbit.

[52] Posted by Br_er Rabbit on 05-21-2008 at 03:33 AM • top

Some thoughts…

I am coming to hate the word “conversation.”

I am not an Anglican historian, but it seems to me that Lambeth has never been either the Communion’s court or its legislature.  Everyone who is deriding it as a waste of time is doing so because they want it to act as one of those two things.  I think the ABC refuses to let Lambeth be changed into such. 

One measure of Lambeth will be whether the covenant advances at all.

There is some value in having bishops gather and discuss, including in the apparently chosen Lambeth format.  Whether that’s worth the money, time, and/or carbon emissions is another question.

[53] Posted by DavidH on 05-21-2008 at 04:37 AM • top

At his own press conference earlier in the year, ++Rowan Williams said that there will be some resolutions at the Lambeth Conference - much less than before. This is in direct contradiction to Ian Douglas and ++Jefferts Schori. I guess these will mainly relate to matters like the Anglican Covenant on which there’ll be two days work.

If you look at the programme for the conference you’ll see it’s a pretty tightly-controlled event. On the so-called ‘ordinary days’ the agenda is dominated by themes in the Indaba groups, self-selecting meetings and in evening fringe groups or plenaries. There are going to be evening plenaries during the 10 ‘ordinary’ days, but a number of these will be given over to keynote speakers like Brian McClaren. I suspect the pressure will build on the organisers to have more ‘business’ sessions around the hot button issues.

[54] Posted by Andrew S Carey on 05-21-2008 at 05:01 AM • top

Am I reading this wrong, or does TEC now control the agenda at Lambeth, as well?

#42,

No, you are reading this situation exactly correctly.  The 815 steamroller, with Jefferts Schori at the controls, now almost completely owns the Lambeth Conference and has crafted a willing pawn in Dr. Williams.

[55] Posted by Athanasius Returns on 05-21-2008 at 05:51 AM • top

#55 That is clearly what TEC would have us believe.
What comes across is how engaged TEC now feel in Lambeth, Indaba groups included.

All very interesting.

[56] Posted by Pageantmaster ن on 05-21-2008 at 07:39 AM • top

#52 Brer
I like the inblahblah groups - very droll!

[57] Posted by Pageantmaster ن on 05-21-2008 at 07:44 AM • top

Kinda interesting also, that KJS as PB of a renegade province, was embraced and glad-handed around the Primates meeting by the ABC as though she and TEC, et al, were repentant…not still-prodigal and most vociferously, brazenly unrepentant.

Thank God for the blogs and instant communication where we can read KJS lettert to Holy men, read Iker’s and Orombi’s replies, where we can pool our thoughts, call a spade a spade and the Emperor’s clothes what they are, naked bald-faced, out in the open sinfulness, and call an oven mitt… an oven mitt!

[58] Posted by Theodora on 05-21-2008 at 07:52 AM • top

Going Home, I don’t think there was an effective response the orthodox bishops could make. Staying away only means their voices don’t get heard, which isn’t very effective. We have to either engage - go and speak up - or disengage, leave. Staying and not participating won’t help anything.

[59] Posted by oscewicee on 05-21-2008 at 07:54 AM • top

This morning we read I Corinthians 4 in the Men’s Bible Study.  In this passage Paul exhibits apostolic leadership when he says:

“Some of you have become arrogant, as if I were not coming to you.  But I will come to you very soon, if the Lord is willing, and then I will find out not only how these arrogant people are talking, but what power they have.  For the kingdom of God is not a matter of talk, but power.  What do you prefer? Shall I come to you with a whip, or in love and with a gentle spirit?”

On the other hand, you’ve got the example of the ABC’s visit to the HOB in NO, and the upcoming Indaba groups.

Compare and contrast. 

Unless you’re a Fulcrum member…then just ignore, and jump ahead to II Corinthians.

[60] Posted by Fr. Andrew Gross on 05-21-2008 at 07:54 AM • top

Not only are these charades just pure drivel KJS(AKA The Ovenmitted) and Rowan have stolen the trademark of my favorite 60’s song by Iron Butterfly “In-A-daba-Da-Vida”.
Intercessor

[61] Posted by Intercessor on 05-21-2008 at 08:04 AM • top

#52 Br_er Rabbit
IMHO - KJS, VGR, and company have already effectively overturned Lambeth 1.10 just by the fact that VGR is first a priest, and now a bishop! The fact that we have other people wearing a collar while living in an openly gay relationships is IMHO an overturn of Lambeth 1.10. PERIOD!!!! The activists are not letting a little ol’ thing like Lambeth 1.10 get in their way….they have already plowed right through it with no moral conscience or remorse for it!
And
Someone up the thread made a very good observation….this program has been laid out in the open by the ABC when he gave his “news conference” a few months back. Why do we orthodox hold on to false hopes of something different to happen when they (liberal activist lefties) have cleary written their agenda on the wall?

[62] Posted by TLDillon on 05-21-2008 at 08:47 AM • top

Typical immature, liberal strategy.  When it looks like you are going to loose the game, you change the rules.

[63] Posted by Nikolaus on 05-21-2008 at 08:59 AM • top

On the ndaba groups, one observation. I have lived in Uganda for 8 years and attended hundreds of meetings and ceremonies. If there is anything that is frustrating, it is how formal these occasions are: written agenda, “all protocol observed.” Even the engagement and wedding ceremonies always have very strict protocol. Maybe the Africans inherited this from the Brits. I guess the Brits have now taken ndaba in exchange. Strange!

[64] Posted by Stephen Noll on 05-21-2008 at 10:23 AM • top

Several observations:  815 felt compelled to “do something”  with the “selected media” subsequent to the recent visits of orthodox prelates from offshore, and in advance of Lambeth.  They see “Gene The Gay” getting all the TEC ink for the past few weeks….  Inept choosing of timing by 815, as yesterday was a Big News Day in Kentucky and Oregon. A really slow news day would be needed for KJS’ vacuous blather to get any play (coverage) at all.  Finally, who were the invited media reps?  This list would tell us who 815 thinks is a house shill.  It also would be interesting to see how wasting one’s attendance of a nothing “event”, which this was, affects their future coverage of 815 “events”.

[65] Posted by Long Gone Anglo Catholic on 05-21-2008 at 10:24 AM • top

ODC, you are correct. Lambeth 1.10 is null and void in TEC, but see this:

“At this point in the Episcopal Church, our prayer book still defines marriage between a man and a woman,” [Susan] Russell said in an interview. “There’s some question about whether we can, within the canons of our church, extend the sacrament to same-gender couples.”

What makes it null and void is the presence of bishops such as Jon “Not in My Diocese” Bruno. We shall see how Bishops such as John Howe are able to justify their presence (or even survive) in TEC after GC2009.

The Rabbit.

[66] Posted by Br_er Rabbit on 05-21-2008 at 10:42 AM • top

Here’s an interesting tidbit from episcopal cafe
<blockqute>“Anglican Mainstream reports the Most Rev. Mouneer Anis, Presiding Bishop of Jerusalem and the Middle East has written that he will not be attending GAFCON. This means neither Bishop Duwani of Jerusalem nor the Presiding Bishop of the Province will be attending the meeting. He has concerns about the dominance of “Northern personalities” at the GAFCON meeting.”</blockquote>

[67] Posted by TLDillon on 05-21-2008 at 10:45 AM • top

#54,
Also in his Advent Letter Rowan Williams made it very clear that Lambeth had to determine what the role of a bishop is within Anglicanism - as the peculiar understanding in TEC makes life difficult - and decide who speaks for the Anglican Communion. So three of the days are on the role of Bishops, Authority of Scripture, and Human Sexuality.  Also the ABC has made it clear that the group discussions are decision oriented.  Leaders gather to resolve.  For anyone familiar with Patrick Lencioni’s work, these groups sound like an interesting way to get to level 3 - Buy In.  It is clear that there will be resolutions, albiet fewer, and I am still hopeful that the will be on the big topics before us.  At least these 4: who speaks for Anglicanism, Role of Bishop, Authority of Scripture, and Human Sexuality.  It would also be very nice to see something on interdependance vs. autonomy and membership in the Communion.  We will see.

[68] Posted by Ed McNeill on 05-21-2008 at 12:30 PM • top

By the way, the California Supremes ruling actually improves the chances for passage of the initiative. Rather than fighting a theoretical situation, the initiative will have demonstrable results.
The Rabbit.

[69] Posted by Br_er Rabbit on 05-21-2008 at 01:38 PM • top

Sorry, wrong thread.

[70] Posted by Br_er Rabbit on 05-21-2008 at 01:39 PM • top

It seems the Lambeth Conference Agenda is not yet complete.  From his Apr 23rd broadcast,

We have given these the African name of indaba groups, groups where in traditional African culture, people get together to sort out the problems that affect them all, where everyone has a voice and where there is an attempt to find a common mind or a common story that everyone is able to tell when they go away from it. This is how we approached it. This is what we heard. This is where we arrived as we prayed and thought and talked together

And of course there’ll be the occasions when the whole conference meets together to consider what it wants to say as a whole to the world and to listen to the speakers we have invited from the world of politics and international affairs, from other Churches and so on, what those other people have to say to us.

reading this again and looking at the conference schedule for the last 4 days gives me some hope that the real issues will not be completely ducked.

Wednesday 30 July

Living under scripture: the bishop and the bible in mission

Thursday 31 July

Listening to God and each other: the bishop and human sexuality

Friday 1 August

Fostering our common life: the bishop, the Covenant and the Windsor Process 1

Saturday 2 August

Fostering our common life: the bishop, the Covenant and the Windsor Process 2

[71] Posted by Ed McNeill on 05-21-2008 at 02:49 PM • top

New Ad for TEC just released
http://www.episcopalchurch.org/pyftw.htm
Slice some carrots get closer to God~!

[72] Posted by TLDillon on 05-21-2008 at 09:53 PM • top

I’ve wasted so many years in prayer, Bible study, etc.  I didn’t know all I needed to do was slice carrots.  What a way to start the day!

[73] Posted by no longer NH Episcopalian on 05-22-2008 at 06:31 AM • top

Ehhhh….  What’s up, Doc?
The Rabbit.

[74] Posted by Br_er Rabbit on 05-22-2008 at 07:44 AM • top

Remember the classic “Hi Bob” drinking game, where you watch an episode of The Bob Newhart Show and take a drink every time a character says “Hi, Bob?”

I’m updating it to the TEC “Conversation” game. Same game, but take a drink every time anyone in TEC says “conversation.”

If you did that while watching this video, you’d get smashed.

[75] Posted by PollyPrim on 05-22-2008 at 11:27 AM • top

#75 PollyPrim,
Turning people into alcoholics is not a good Christian thing to do. smile

[76] Posted by TLDillon on 05-22-2008 at 11:32 AM • top

Great idea, Polly, but I think KJS has been playing “conversation” for a while!

[77] Posted by no longer NH Episcopalian on 05-22-2008 at 12:05 PM • top

(77) She may have, but I’ve been a Whiskeypalian longer than she has ... I can out-drink any bishop in the house.

[78] Posted by PollyPrim on 05-23-2008 at 03:09 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.