It's been a particularly "quick" summer -- what with Lambeth and all -- but I've enjoyed these couple of weeks of being really OFF and able to concentrate on the business of family life -- the sad task of working with my brother to get my mother's "affairs in order" in Minnesota and the joyful (but exhausting!) task of incorporating a new puppy into our family here at home.
And while I still hope to read a few more novels and see a couple of movies I've got a meeting of the diocesan task force on marriage equality this afternoon and a couple of Integrity Board business conference calls this week, so the end of the "lazy, hazy, crazy days of summer" -- such as they have been this year -- is definitely in sight.
So here's what caught my eye this morning as I'm starting to wade back into what's up where:
+Rowan Williams has published his "reflections on Lambeth" via a Pastoral Letter to the Bishops of the Anglican Communion posted today by ACNS.
I found it disturbing that the ABoC seems determined to continue pander to the schismatics whose determined actions over the last decade have polarized the differences between our Anglican provinces into the divisions that now threaten to reinvent Anglicanism into something neither Hooker nor Cranmer would recognize. +Williams writes:
We were conscious of the absence of many of our colleagues, and wanted to express our sadness that they felt unable to be with us and our desire to build bridges and restore our fellowship. We were aware also of the recent meeting in Jerusalem and its statements; many of us expressed a clear sense of affinity with much that was said there and were grateful that many had attended both meetings, but we know that there is work to do to bring us closer together and are determined to do that work.
Where's the determination to do the work of fully including the LGBT baptized into the Body of Christ? Where's the expression of "sadness" that the Bishop of New Hampshire continues to be punished for the new Anglican Cardinal Sin of Honesty? And where's the recognition that nothing short of capitulation to their narrow, exclusivist agenda will be enough to bridge the chasm between the Gafconistas and rest of the Anglican Communion. To say the least, this latest missive out of Canterbury is ... disappointing.
Decidedly NOT disappointing is Marilyn McCord Adams' comprehensive "Unfit for Purpose" -- a reflective overview of what-brought-us-to-where-we-are-and-what-our-options-are-now for the Anglican Communion. Consider it a "must read."
A plethora of Lambeth Reviews are now dotting the Cyber Landscape. Here's an assortment from "the other side of the aisle":
Chris Sugden pretty much gave it a "thumbs down."
+John Howe wonders if it was "the last Lambeth Conference."
The AAC had more thumbs down than Carter has pills.
Andrew Carey used his post-Lambeth review to slam TEC ... one more time.
George Conger ... well, George is George.
And now back to my regularly scheduled vacation ... what's left of it!
"I found it disturbing that the ABoC seems determined to continue pander to the schismatics whose determined actions over the last decade have polarized the differences between our Anglican provinces into the divisions that now threaten to reinvent Anglicanism into something neither Hooker nor Cranmer would recognize."
But considering what his track record has been from day one, were you even remotely surprised?
Left a message on the dog blog, but anyhow, congrats on Juno! Chuck is just teriffic (I am in rescue also, and know her--she has helped with several huskies on my end) and I am absolutely thrilled to see you have a new rescue doggie!
Almost everything at Lambeth (except perhaps the relationships and general good will) is off track. Given Duncan's treatise (and the compounding explanation), CCP/Gafcon (more coming), who knows what will happen at the HOB re duncan, and at this point, who knows about Convention 09.
No matter WHAT happens at 09 conference, I finally made a commitment to stay in TEC. I had to work through that. By the time 09 rolls around though, the CA case should be done with per the state Supreme Court (which will say much about San Joaquin), two other Bishops will likely be gone (perhaps with their dioceses, meaning more litigation), there will no doubt be a No. American So. Cone presence with Duncan leading, and the world will look different, but remain the same.
For TEC, it just means less internal dissent... more opportunity to work outside of the church on mission.
No matter how it goes, I have concluded it will be good.
And, John and Susan, he really sees it as his "job" to hold the WWAC together at all costs - and that cost, of course, are LGBT people. We are, after all, as one of the conservative blogs pointed out with chilling calm, a "greater minority" than the conservatives.
I was unable to get into the "Unfit" link. Is it possible to post it???
Thanks and enjoy what's left of your vacation.
a propos ++Canterbury, to repeat the old axiom,
"necessitous men make bad contracts"
I've tried to get to Marilyn's "unfit" but don't seem to have the needed password, is there another link?
I couldn't get to the "Unfit" article either. Would love to read it.
"...pander to the schismatics ...now threaten to reinvent Anglicanism into something neither Hooker nor Cranmer would recognize..."
In all fairness Susan, I wonder if Hooker or Crammer would recognize our brand of Anglicanism? Their experience of the faith was probably a lot closer to that of the "schismatics" than to what we have evolved in the good ol USA's TEC.
To many of them our unprecedented actions...even if well intended and in the end proven right, are a novelty they perceive as scandalous and schismatic.
In a family all are important, I guess that includes people who do not agree with us or accept what we do! Maybe the ABoC is just taking his job of keeping the family together seriously and getting it from both sides...!
Just a thought!
THE MARILYN McCORD ADAMS LINK IS FIXED!!!
Try again, those who had a problem ... it's well worth the work!! (And my apologies for the errata.)
seraph ... My comments about Cranmer and Hooker are reflected in this quote by Jean Mayland from a couple of days ago:
"We are threatened with a Communion based on fundamentalist interpretations of scripture to please the Africans, and a hierarchical system of control to please the Roman Catholics. We want neither, for neither are Anglican."
I continue to contend that the genius of an Anglican ethos which could hold in tension the "novelty" of Protestantism with historic Catholicity can also hold tension any of the differences that currently challenge it.
That's my story and I'm sticking to it.
Post a Comment