Friday, 3 November 2006

press reports on the new PB

There has been a lot of press coverage of Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori. Here is a selection:

Christian Science Monitor Jane Lampman In turbulent times, a new Episcopal leader

Church Times Rachel Harden Jefferts Schori prepares for office in a visit to Lambeth

Associated Press Rachel Zoll via the Corvallis Gazette-Times Jefferts Schori: ‘Transparency’ on views vital

Reuters Michael Conlon New Episcopal Church head says dissent limited

Update Saturday
Associated Press Rachel Zoll Episcopalians to Install Female Leader and sidebar A Look at Katharine Jefferts Schori

Chicago Tribune New era in Episcopal Church

San Diego Union-Tribune New U.S. Episcopal leader seeks peace

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Friday, 3 November 2006 at 11:32pm GMT | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: ECUSA
Comments

The new PB's clarity of unwavering vision is very inspiring. It is obvious she will not relent 'her first avowed intent'.

She alo makes it clear by her vision and stance that liberalism is NOT about 'anything goes'.

This is the mistake some liberals have made--and it is always a dilemma for the liberal spirit to face up to the bad behaviour of others. Especially bad behaviour towards vulnerable or marginal groups. Some how folks who have the most tosay about fod and good behaviour often behave worst (in my experience). It is also the mistake that reactionary and abusive forces make-- expecting their bad behaviour to be tolerated. E.g. the appalling behaviour of anti-women forces in the C of E. They started speaking of 2 integrities once they lost the ordination of women vote and requested (and got) 'special arangements'---but offered no special arrangements to those who wanted women ministers each time THEY won the vote.

Posted by: laurence on Saturday, 4 November 2006 at 12:53am GMT

I can't understand what all the fuss is about.

Posted by: Pluralist on Saturday, 4 November 2006 at 1:12am GMT

... dean of Good Samaritan School of Theology in Corvallis, Ore.

I thought this was totally discredited - she ran adult Christian education in the local parish with an inflated title.

She is just not qualified to be a bishop.

Posted by: Ian Montgomery on Saturday, 4 November 2006 at 3:13pm GMT

Laurence is spot on: "Liberalism is NOT about 'anything goes'."

PROCEDURAL liberalism, the sworn oath to abide by the rules (or canons) of the group in which one participates, is the guarantor of safety and security for THEOLOGICAL liberalism, centrism, and conservativism. This is one of the hard truths Western liberals have been forgetting, then relearning, over the past forty or fifty years. As a centrist-liberal Episcopalian, I look forward to the tenure of our new Presiding Bishop, not because she herself is a liberal theologically, but because she seems to understand the essential role procedural liberalism must play in any enduring church polity.

Posted by: Charlotte on Saturday, 4 November 2006 at 8:23pm GMT

Such a sad-faced Pharisee you are, Ian. Run away now: the party, in Christ, is ON! Alleluia! :-D

Posted by: J. C. Fisher on Sunday, 5 November 2006 at 4:24am GMT

"not qualified to be a bishop..."

what, you mean she's not been baptised, confirmed and ordained?

Posted by: David Rowett (=mynsterpreost) on Sunday, 5 November 2006 at 5:38pm GMT

Fortunately, Ian, a significant majority of the Bishops of this Church -- who one supposes are in a good position to know what it takes to be a bishop -- do not share your opinion of Bishop Katharine. They voted for her in large part due to their experience of her ministry over the last few years in the House of Bishops. In the final ballot she had more votes than the other six candidates combined.

Posted by: Tobias Haller BSG on Monday, 6 November 2006 at 5:43pm GMT

JCF - who is throwing the party you talk about where all seem to be welcome eve if they refuse to repent or obey??

If you write out all the statements of JC - I don't think he would look or sound like the all- accepting person you want him to be - there is no value in believing in what you want him to be - please look at what he said and did.

Posted by: NP on Tuesday, 7 November 2006 at 2:56pm GMT

NP,
I read the Gospel too, and, while I am well aware that Christ's return will be to judge the Earth, I'm sorry, I can't see the cold "be good or roast" kind of judge you seem to find so clear and, for some reason, comforting, in the Scriptures. The only ones He ever addressed with threats of fire and brimstone were those who insisted on a rigid interpretation of the Law, not unlike yours. He talks of forgiveness, 70 times 7, and associates with sinners, not to bash them over the head with the Law but so that God's pure love can draw them away from sin into obedience, and, more importantly, the service to the Kingdom which is the evidence of that obedience. It is conversion by love, not conversion by threat.

Posted by: Ford Elms on Tuesday, 7 November 2006 at 6:33pm GMT

Ford - The new TEC leader does not even believe that people need to follow Jesus to get forgiveness of sins - do you think the forgiveness she talks about is that same found in Jesus' teaching?

We have to take all that JC said and the Bible says in order to give a TRUE, consistent, honest view of his message. He tallks about forgiveness for those who believe in him, of course, but does he not also say "go and sin no more" rather than, "I understand, go ahead and sin, I have paid for it" ....
and he says "be perfect as your Father in heaven is perfect" and many other things which call for a very high standard of holy living in response to his love shown on the cross ? (a la Romans 6)

As I have said before, some "bishops" would even deny very clear verses eg John 3:36 / John 14:6 / Acts 4:12 mean what they say- these bishops are telling lies about the real JC but we have his words so we are not fooled by their subversion of the truth

Posted by: NP on Wednesday, 8 November 2006 at 3:01pm GMT

NP please would you look at the article on TA above that is titled Jefferts Schori and theology and you will see that many other people disagree with you. These would appear to include Karl Rahner...

Posted by: Simon Sarmiento on Wednesday, 8 November 2006 at 3:16pm GMT

NP,
You speak of forgiveness as some sort of prize we can win if we're good little girls and boys. Of course the Saviour said "go and sin no more". No-one is saying it is OK to sin. We just have different ideas as to what sin is. (Actually, I have heard a fair number of Evangelicals claim usury is no sin, and that killing in wartime is no sin, so maybe some people ARE trying to justify sin after all). You have no difficulty identifying sexual sin, but you seem quite blind to economic sin, the sin that craves wealth and treads on the poor to get it. Jesus said an awful lot about that too, yet when I asked you about failings in Evangelicalism, all you could come up with was that Evangelicals are too easy on greedy people! I know some are involved in social justice issues, all the same. Jesus's words to the woman taken in adultery came after "neither do I condemn you". When you evangelicals talk about sexual sin you reverse that order: "I condemn you till you give up sinning. What's more, God hates you till you obey." This life is not some kind of testing ground where we obey the rules to prove ourselves worthy of getting into Heaven when we die. If we truly accept the promises made to us, then by our baptism we are already in Heaven, we are already in the Kingdom, we're just too frail to see it. Death then becomes just another step on the path to theosis, and means nothing. Christianity is not some badge of superiority, it is God's illuminating of the world with the power of His love. If others don't believe as we do, that's between them and God, and I trust that He will judge their inmost hearts like he will judge mine. Why do you need to see yourself as being inside some club that shuts out the very neighbours Christ calls you to love? Look to your own salvation, and let others look to theirs. Show God's love in the way you love your fellow man. You don't do that by insisting you have some sort of inside track. You are called to be a servant to mankind, not a judge. And yes, I am well aware that I have failed to practice this, on this very board. You exhort me when I fall, and I'll do the same for you, how's that?

Posted by: Ford Elms on Wednesday, 8 November 2006 at 5:11pm GMT

Jesus, of course, was never a Christian and his message is very different from the Creeds. ---far easier to worship him and ignore his message.

Why is bludgeoning still carried out in the anme of Jesus --well, Christ ? Ironic (mis-)apprppriation of a Jewish teacher.

AS I said above using God talk is no justification for bad behaviour !
As Jesus' own message and his creative use of the great Hillel makes clear.....

Posted by: laurence on Wednesday, 8 November 2006 at 5:34pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.