Gosh, it seems some people still take what Ruth writes seriously.

Nothing like it! What a lovely and healing tonic.

Reading "balanced thinking" from New Zealand makes me feel all refreshed, renewed and Christian loving wholesome again...they seem to be a very emotionally/spiritually healthy "lot" down there. I remember reasonable and steadfast/ sensible which is far preferable to bitter puritancial Press Releases that keep calling for segregation, exclusion, discrimination and the demeaning of LGBT fellow Anglican human beings.

Just more liberal arguement that ECUSA should be "in" because they were prepared to compromise on 'Windsor'... Neatly omitting to mention that, as Windsor was devised by liberals and conservatives, it was already a compromise..

A compromise on a compromise does not respect the people who have, effectively, been sliced up twice!

Again, my heart goes out to the moderates (and cheers to the New Zealanders for trying to pour calming oil on the turbulent waters).

The moderates are trying to say that they do not intend to exclude anyone (and I would agree that they don’t). The liberals are saying that suppressed silence is not genuine dialogue and if they are to be repressed then it is better to be independent. The archconservatives are saying that if the GLBTs are not “repentant” and silent, women suitably submissive, and hospitable liberals denounced; then they do not want to be associated.

The archconservative puritans don’t mind a silent, "respectful" co-existence (where the liberals are silent and respectful to the puritans), because then the liberals can not make any theological inroads. After several years of “dialogue” (where the alternative is not communicated because it is not “biblical”) the puritans can denounce the experiment as a failure as the liberals failed to prove they had a robust theological model to justify their existence. The puritans can then put forward one of their scathing brilliant decrees of how the opposition had “no answer” to their overwhelming biblical correctness and were therefore obviously in error, and therefore the experiment should cease. (It is easy to be a genius when you have an audience with no means to question your thinking or put up an alternative).

My apologies to the moderates, none of this applies to you. But then you have the challenge the Germans had as Hitler rose to ascendancy, at what point do you move to protect the "unworthy". Your challenge is if things go really badly, at what point was it "too late" to have made a stand against bigotry, bullying and the pursuit of economic power at all costs?

And on a comment from an earlier thread about the success of the churches in some dioceses. I read an excellent paper from Nigeria in the Southern summer which included the commment that churches can be "getting alarming popular which is a sign that all is not well. The church is not meant to be loved and popular for the sole reason that it is not of this world." http://www.thetidenews.com/article.aspx?qrDate=01/07/2006&qrTitle=Some%20churches%20are%20compromising%20standards%20-%20Apostle%20Numbere&qrColumn=RELIGION

"...does not respect the people who have, effectively, been sliced up twice!" MDB Dave

My Dear Brother Dave,

Let's not start comparing the superficial "wounds" of extreme thinking puritans to the actual victims of brutal hatecrimes..the tragic outcomes of "preaching" fear and hate/exclusion against LGBT people (in Nigeria/Uganda and elsewhere) are bloody, tragic and demoralizing agonies beyond comprehension.

Lord Have Mercy

Of course, we can all see now how seriously the conservatives like +Akinola take Windor's calls to the listen to the experiences of gays and lesbians (throw them in jail) and respect the boundaries of other provinces. At least ECUSA has responded to the extent that it felt it could as opposed to blantantl ignoring Windsor except as a club to beat people with.

Rowan Williams has a vision of Hegelian complexity and comprehensiveness that draws shrieks from both the left and the right. The positive responses to his most recent statement give heartening confirmation that he is on the right track. His statement is strongly condemnatory of what Abp Akinola stands for and rather supportive of what ECUSA has stood for -- even suggesting that the ordination of Gene Robinson could be a prophetic risk -- but one for which they themselves must take responsibility. And Covenant inspired by the Gospel is more likely to exclude bigotry than the ECUSA-style liberal daring.

"...Covenant inspired by the Gospel is more likely to exclude bigotry than the ECUSA-style liberal daring."

There is an underlying premise that the liberals have not been inspired by the gospel. In fact, they have been inspired by the gospel, but everytime they try to quote the myriad of verses that have given their inspiration, the ultrapuritans deny their gospel interpretation.

Do not tell us that we have not read and understood the gospel, nor drawn our inspiration from the gospel. That is deceptive misrepresentation of our inspiration, and the proof of "spin doctors" relying on us not having a voice to demonstrate their lying about who and what we are. (As they already do about GLBTs by inferring that they do not seek monogomous relationships, are pedophiles, eat babies, or any other slanderous mud they hope will besmirch others' characters and/or act as red herrings to divert attention away from their inability to love "the other").

One of my favourite passages comes from Isaiah 56: This is what the LORD says: “Maintain justice and do what is right,for my salvation is close at hand and my righteousness will soon be revealed. Blessed is the man who does this, the man who holds it fast, who keeps the Sabbath without desecrating it, and keeps his hand from doing any evil.” Let no foreigner who has bound himself to the LORD say, “The LORD will surely exclude me from his people.”And let not any eunuch complain, “I am only a dry tree.” For this is what the LORD says: “To the eunuchs who keep my Sabbaths, who choose what pleases me and hold fast to my covenant— to them I will give within my temple and its walls a memorial and a name better than sons and daughters; I will give them an everlasting name that will not be cut off. And foreigners who bind themselves to the LORD to serve him, to love the name of the LORD, and to worship him, all who keep the Sabbath without desecrating it and who hold fast to my covenant— these I will bring to my holy mountain and give them joy in my house of prayer. Their burnt offerings and sacrifices will be accepted on my altar; for my house will be called a house of prayer for all nations.” The Sovereign LORD declares— he who gathers the exiles of Israel: “I will gather still others to them besides those already gathered.” Come, all you beasts of the field, come and devour, all you beasts of the forest! Israel’s watchmen are blind, they all lack knowledge; they are all mute dogs, they cannot bark; they lie around and dream, they love to sleep. They are dogs with mighty appetites; they never have enough. They are shepherds who lack understanding; they all turn to their own way, each seeks his own gain.

Who does this apply to? Those like like Balaam who refuse to turn away from a path towards violence and desecration? Or those like Abraham, who seek to offer hospitality and share the knowledge of God with all who would come to know Him? There are those who would seek to divide and exclude, keeping heaven and its rewards for the chosen pure. Yet, there are those who would surrender all for the sake of "the other", and realise that all they have is nothing if "the other" is not sheltered within God's grace. Better to be Balaam's donkey than a wasteful shepherd.

So far who has expressed commitment to ++Cantaur's Covenant process?

The Episcopal Church—committed itself at General Convention to the Covenant
New Zealand—positive
Canada—positive
Australia—positive
Sydney—rather negative
Nigeria—rather negative but in all fairness they havent read it but in all fairness rather negative

Thanks to New Zealand for trying to add a voice of moderation to our Anglican troubles. I dissent here. In no manner is Windsor some new, fair document. There would have been no Windsor save for the attempt to corral and rein un the US and Canada; and that is why the Right-Wingers constantly allude to Windsor. They know its purpose is to waylay the American church. Does anyone with a political bone think some Covenant or some new structure of authority will in any way allow the American and Canadiens to be where they are now. Of course not. Certainly there were liberal and goodhearted folks on Windsor but with the likes of + Tom from Durham they were manipulated and outfoxed. As for the future just what makes you think the Americans and Canadians will ever be given a Covenant they can in conscience sign. Which is why Williams made his statment. He knew the jig is up and tried to make the best of it with this "consituent" and "associate" status. You all think the old Anglicanism can be saved, what with a compromise here and an accomodation there. Well that is nonsense. The forces who wish to destroy the American church, what we call the African/American evangelical/conservative English bishop alliance has had its way so far and kind -hearted statements from New Zealand are in fact beside the point. The next stage in America is that we are tired of compromise. We now propose to fight.
William R. Coats

Instead of the media release, why don't you give us a link to the actual response. The media release is spin.

It's here if you cannot find it elsewhere.

http://www.duomo.ac.nz/acnz