Notice the false headline USA Today uses - "2 U.S. bishops defect to Anglican Church"

Bad day in headline writing land.

StandFirm is running a repeat of a live feed of the consecrations. Preacher at the consecration was Drexel Gomez. Given the obvious assumption of conservative bishops that any action they see fit to take has God's blessing, I assume that Gomez sees no impropriety in the chair of the AC Covenant drafting committee doing this. Or maybe, knowing that the Covenant will be DOA, he does not care.

Let's see, 2 bishops for 30 congregations. Why not consecrate 30 or 40 more? Then we'll have a whole set of these clowns running around. There have to be at least that many conservative priests with a "call" to the episcopacy. Then we can take care of the pressing pastoral needs of all those long suffering souls who have been cast into the outer darkness by the evil liberal pagan Episcopalians. BTW, have all these bogus bishops been middle aged white males?

I note that several of the media items identify Presiding Bishop Venables of the Southern Cone of America as an American Archbishop.

It isn't just the headline writers having a hard time with facts.

'Williams has no direct authority to force a compromise because each Anglican province is self-governing.'

BECAUSE EACH ANGLICAN PROVINCE IS SELF-GOVERNING

(WHEN IT SUITS THEM)

TEC as we know IS NOT self-governing--it must submit

It becomes clearer and clearer that Gay Rights is set to sweep the world.

It is a lot nearer than people realise. Nothing can stop it.

The Churches WILL be overtaken by it quite soon.

The LesGay pleroma is unstoppable.

I can only rejoice and thank God for this wonderful gift.

Homophobia will suddenly collapse in Africa as has only just happened in the UK. People will rub their eyes in Africa too, and wonder at the strange sleep of delusion and cruelty from which they have now emerged....

.................."What were we thinking of?!"

Watch the Wolfenden play on tv next week.

WoW !

Signatures of 'over 30 General Synod members, including A bishop' ! John Richardson must be right---things ARE getting serious ! ..........

Slight change of subject here but whilst there is a surplus of episcopal testosterone for these Kenyan consecrations, the Anglican Episcopal Church is planning rather more useful activities in the enar future:

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/79901_89558_ENG_HTM.htm

...While some will join weekend work projects of "mucking and gutting" damaged structures, others will join in prayer and pastoral visits with congregations and individuals.

Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, visiting at the bishops' invitation, will participate in a September 20 evening interfaith gathering to rededicate the Morial Convention Center in New Orleans.

Williams will join in dialogue with the bishops on subjects including the recently proposed Anglican covenant and the Primates Meeting communiqué issued in February 2007 in Tanzania urging support for the communiqué's requests by September 30.

"The planning committee of the House of Bishops and I believe this meeting will be a wonderful opportunity to show further support to the Dioceses of Louisiana and Mississippi," Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori wrote in a June letter to bishops, urging them to be in consultation with their dioceses about contributing to a purse for hurricane relief...

Graham Kings writes his opposition to these consecrations:

http://www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/forum/thread.cfm?thread=4329

I have yet to find an Anglican realignment con-evo leader, and maybe this stretches to include believers in my neck of the woods - who has the capacity to actually care, for real, about anybody who doesn't already pledge their closed con-evo realignment views and frameworks, along with trash talking everybody who isn't inside the fold and properly sad and hang-dog about not being already inside the fold.

I wouldn't count on Duncan, Akinola, Gomez, and the whole lot of them to help me change a flat tire on the side of the freeway, once they had slowed down enough to see that two daddies are schlepping some thrivingly different kids in a number of different daily directions, the best they know how, imperfectly.

Just my hunch, given .... so realignment has nothing, nothing, nothing, nothing at all to offer me as a believer, let alone as an Anglican progressive believer - except the occasional wordy promise that the church police might have the courtesy to issue various church life warnings before they start slamming all the different folks who do not fit in order to deny resources and opportunities to unconformed, unchurched citizens.

Just my hunch, given ....

he following appeared today on the Anglican Church of Kenya website:

"The Anglican Church of Kenya has consecrated the Rev. Canon Dr. Bill At wood and Rev. Bill Murdoch as Suffragan Bishops of All Saints Cathedral Diocese,  Nairobi to serve her international interest in USA where the Church has more than 30 congregations. 
The two Bishops will collaborate with others in the  common cause network chaired by the Rt. Rev. Duncan (Pittsburg) to provide Episcopal care and oversight strategically uniting a broad conservative coalition that share historic Anglican faith and practices
The consecration of the two Bishops was presided over by the ACK Archbishop Benjamin Nzimbi and attended by among others 10 Anglican Primates from around the Anglican Communion, a clear testimony that the consecrations are an appropriate response to the challenges of mission in the complex environment in the world today.
Addressing a Pre-Consecration International Conference, Archbishop Nzimbi said the fabric of the Anglican Communion has been torn by the actions of the Episcopal Church over the issue of same sex unions."

What is of particular interest here is that the author of this piece has a clear understanding that these bishops will be collaborating with Common Cause as headed by +Duncan. Would +Duncan's oath and accession to TEC take precedence? Has he made any commitments here, as a "collaborator" of which TEC is unaware? Are the Kenyan's expectations of his collaboration fully warranted and if so, on what basis?

John B - maybe "2 U.S. bishops defect to Anglican Church" is prophetic

We are very likely, sadly, to see emerging from the AC's VGR crisis 2 quite different churches:
The Episcopal Church and The Anglican Church

This is BIG news......9 Primates plus one retired Primate present!

More Primatial support than I dreamed of, to be honest - I expected 3 or 4 to make such a clear stand but I am surprised by 9 doing so, including ++Gomez, and also +Nazir-Ali sending his greeting and support.

I do not think the ABC is going to see the AC lose all these people and bring schism to the CofE in order to support TEC's 2003 actions which he and all the Primates of the AC begged them not to take. He is not going to reward that deliberate breaking of unity in the communion and watch the AC lose so many worldwide and the CofE enter into TEC-style civil war.....this is why I accept the ABC to act in a way consistent with his actions in Dromantine and Tanzania.

Thank God for these Primates in Kenya....and also for the TEC people in Chicago for proving that many in TEC have no intention of keeping to BO33 as they shortlist for a bishopric another who openly disobeys and teaches others to disobey church teaching recently reaffirmed in TWR. Clarity and truth are good - let us all be honest and be in organisations which do not require "don't ask, don't tell" dishonesty but which people can be part of with real integrity.....I know liberals have historically preferred to be a minority in a larger church but the time for fudge and lies in the AC is ending.....thank God

Ms Gledhill's provision of the text of the letter from these General Synod members, including the Bishop of Rochester, is very helpful. They write, "We see in your ministry a wonderful expression of the Gospel promise that there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, but all are one in Christ". Taking this to heart all marriages in the eyes of Christ are same sex as there is neither male nor female. As there is neither male nor female, there can be no issues over headship, ordination, or consecration relating to women. - Somebody should have advised them against using this particular biblical line to sustain their position. Perhaps they should have used the editing services of the Rt Rev'd Martyn Mimms?

I hope that since the Bishop of Rochester has broken ranks, other members of the House of Bishops will feel free to express their views in public. Are there members of the General Synod who might like to write expressing their sorrow at the continuing abuse of Anglican practice represented by these consecrations?

John Richardson, speaking for Anglican Mainstream, says: "Under the table, we are kicking one another's shins raw." Members of Anglican Mainstream are kicking raw the shins of other Anglicans?

John's comment is very revealing. This is how mainstream sees the dynamic of the dispute about homosexuality in the Anglican Communion. There is an aggressive visciousness within some conservatives that is out to attack those with whom they disagree.

This is not the dynamic with which Changing Attitude approaches those Christians with whom we disagree. No-one in Changing Attitude is trying to kick anyone's shins raw. We seek to engage openly and with those who hold differing opinions from us.

Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali supports these irregular ordinations, thereby putting himself at odds with his Archbishop. He publicly supports actions which contravene the Windsor Report. Conservatives posting here will continue to justify their partial adherence to 1.10 and Windsor. The parts that suit them are to be imposed on the Communion, other parts are ignored.

These bishops join the other irregularly ordained bishops in the USA who are not going to be invited to Lambeth. Bishop Michael continues to associate himself with the minority of Primates and bishops who wish to split the Communion and maintain prejudice against LGBT people.

He supports “vibrant and growing Churches in Africa” which “care for those in the United States who are suffering for their commitment to the faith … in the face of a determined capitulation by The Episcopal Church to the forces of contemporary North American culture.”

Bishop Michael has a Changing Attitude group in his own diocese. If he is a man of such integrity with a deep commitment to his particular version of the Gospel, why is he giving support to Archbishop Nzimbi’s ordination of two bishops to serve in the USA, where the Episcopal Church is vibrant and taking considerable risks (as he will know from attending General Convention last year) but failing to take action against those working for the full inclusion of LGBT people at home?

Sorry, CA people in Rochester, I’m not seriously encouraging bishop Michael to start a witch hunt against you, but this shows his lack of integrity. He can support the actions of other Provinces against LGBT inclusion but can’t purify his own diocese of LGBT clergy and supporters.

So no doubt Messrs Atwood and Murdoch will now have a rush of vocations from their US parishes - including no doubt women, since Kenya approves the ordination of women. Will they be happy to ordain them - since there doesn't appear to be a Kenyan mechanism for them to 'opt out'? If they do not approve of the ordination of women then surely they have been dishonest in their vows to the Kenyan Church (faithful to the doctrine & discpline, etc). But if they are happy to ordain women, then why were +Duncan and +Iker happy to consecrate them? Just wondering.

Ford - you will see why so many of us feel the actions we see in Kenya, Uganda and Nigeria are essential if you listen to VGR
http://www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/newswatch.cfm?menuopt=2

He is willing to see the AC split because he is sure God has called him to be a bishop ..... even though his discernment coincides with his self-confessed alcoholism and is questionable in that regard and regardless of the calls of ALL the Primates of the AC for him not to be made a bishop and without any care for the teaching of the AC and 2000 years of tradition upheld by most Christians in the US as well as the GS today.

Ford - the man is planning his civil partnership to be just before Lambeth 08......when asked if this was provocative, again, the AC is not considered but he chose a 3 day weekend. Sorry, but I see a selfish agenda being pursued which is damaging the AC and does not care.....and just ignores the fact that most in the AC and the church worldwide do not accept the agenda despite decades of listening to people like Rowan Williams who have tried and failed to persuade many.....so, some now just push through their selfish agenda and the AC is challenged to accept it or face schism....or even more bizarre, the majority who disagree are told they can leave the AC!

Very revealing interview....the AC's unity matters a lot to Rowan Williams.....but clearly not to VGR

Np is against "don't ask, don't tell" -- this logically means that he will ask gay members of his approved communities to speak up honestly about their sexual orientation and relationships. I think NOT!

_I do not think the ABC is going to see the AC lose all these people and bring schism to the CofE in order to support TEC's 2003 actions_ says NP yet again in his ability to predict the Archbishop.

So the Archbishop is going at the TEC bishops' invitation and will participate in a September 20 evening interfaith gathering. The meeting will be in New Orleans, showing some of the work and efforts of the Episcopalians.

And then what, he is going to remove their invitations to Lambeth 2008? It doesn't exactly look like it does it? At an interfaith gathering, involved in the social gospel, and then says oh by the way you can't come to my party to discuss matters because you have been naughty?

As I read all this stuff about who is taking the WR seriously, I am reminded of the parable of Jesus' parable of the two sons. When asked to go work in the fields the first says he will, but then fails to go. The second says he won't, and then goes. Which one did the will of the father?

In terms of the Windsor Report who has taken the recommendations seriously in practice, and who has contrvened the recommendations in practice.

Who is doing the will of the Report?

Thomas

NP said: "[Rowan Williams] is not going to reward that deliberate breaking of unity in the communion . . . "

No. I suspect he won't.

Thus he will not accede to the demands of the bullies and the poachers.

"Thank God for these Primates in Kenya....and also for the TEC people in Chicago for proving that many in TEC have no intention of keeping to BO33 as they shortlist for a bishopric another who openly disobeys and teaches others to disobey church teaching recently reaffirmed in TWR. Clarity and truth are good - let us all be honest and be in organisations which do not require "don't ask, don't tell" dishonesty but which people can be part of with real integrity.....I know liberals have historically preferred to be a minority in a larger church but the time for fudge and lies in the AC is ending.....thank God"

-------------------------------------

Thank God is right. Time to cast off the unbelievable bigotry, irrationality, and hatred of present-day Anglicanism. I don't want to be part of a group that thinks it can "vote" on how the lives of its members are to be lived; this is baby stuff, and shows the Anglican Communion to be an extremely poor excuse for a "church." At least the Catholics came up with a real theological argument - absurd though it is.

Anglicans, though, have got nothin' except the Tyranny of the Majority. And they can't even be bothered to put up a pretense about this; no, they're proud of the fact that they can't theologize their way out of a paper bag.

The Victorian era is over and Christ is in the midst of freeing more captives. If the jailers want the Anglican Communion, let 'em have it; it's worthless at this point anyway. Let them have their little male-only-straight-only club; we will have the better part.

'...When human beings ‘exchange’ these created roses for homosexual intercourse, they embody the spiritual condition....’" from Sermon

Full sermon given on T19

How felicitous is this introduction of roses into the sermon. The roses express the true beauty of gay love --- which he consciously tries to denounce --- perhaps the Lord intervened as with Balaam, bestowing roses in this case ? ...

Thanks for the picture and names --I see Minns flew all the way back there....

Very glad to see a woman at the heart of the picture

Are they becoming inclusive already?

"Time to cast off the unbelievable bigotry, irrationality, and hatred of present-day Anglicanism. "

... hatred of historical Anglicanism...

"Thank God for these Primates in Kenya"

NP, first of all, last week I got too hot under the collar, necessitating a well deserved reprimand from Simon. I had posted some more hotheaded stuff that I asked him to remove. Maybe it made it here and then was removed as soon as Simon was able. My apologies to you, BTW, for the nasty content of those posts. Otherwise, I don't see any other post from me on this thread before now, so I don't know what you are referring to in your above post about Gene Robinson. That said, though, Bishop Attwood is on record quoting Cameron's "work" on gay lifespans. Cameron is discredited, his work is not scientifically valid, and is more of the nature of propaganda than science. That's not some liberal conspiracy to silence the opposition, NP, if you don't do good science, you can't expect the scientific community to take you seriously. So, we have a bishop quoting pseudoscience that resembles propganda. Either he is poorly educated on the subject, or he knows he is lying. Frankly, in his position, he has a responsibility to speak factually, so shame on him for not validating his information before he spoke. If he is deliberately lying, so much the worse, but I have no evidence for this, so will assume the former. Do you still thank God for the Kenyan's consecration of such a man? Honesty isn't as important as sexual purity?

Hello Ford - I agree with you re the longevity comments....

One thing I would like to see is "liberals" doing more for those outside the church in destructive, promiscuous lifestyles.....calling them out of that for their own good as many do get damaged as I am sure you will agree. I do not hear even this message from the pressure groups who would force the AC to accept VGR....they seem more led by the morality of society than anything else.

Ford - what do you think of the VGR interview?

"what do you think of the VGR interview?"

Link, please? If you mean the one I read recently where he forgave those who made it necessary for him to wear a bullet proof vest at his consecration, well, I hope we both think the same about that. Answer the question: which is preferable in a bishop, honesty or sexual purity? Attwood, I hope unintentially, is citing propaganda as though it were truth. Do you think this is appropriate behaviour?

As to "destructive, promiscuous lifestyles", I hope you are not using that phrase to mean "gay". What liberals are telling people to be promiscuous? What liberals support "distructive lifestyles"? What in fact IS a distructive lifestyle?

Dear Ford

I put the link above - here it is again:
http://www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/newswatch.cfm?menuopt=2

Re "destructive, promiscuous lifestyles" - I mean the lives we see in the clubs etc (outside the church)....what message is being carried to these people by liberals? Any call to repentance for the good of the people in that lifestyle? (same applies to heteros in promiscuity, of course)

Ford, may I say I would like bishops to display both a high degree of honesty and purity?

NP, I had read it before, thanks. (the Times Ruth Gledhill from July?) Let's see:
1. Repeated calls for honesty about the number of gay clergy in England and elsewhere: good thing.
2. Expression of surprise that no-one seems to have known or cared about gay priests till recently: I feel the same way.
3. There should be the same standards for priests and bishops: definitely
4. Compliance with the ABofC's wishes not to celebrate in England, hurtful though this may be: sets a good example
5. His comments on punishment: agree
6. His opposition to a Roman type authority structure: agree. This is at the core of Anglicanism.
7. "When I speak to gay and lesbian groups I don’t talk to them about gay rights" So much for your "rights based agenda".

A good interview, and, cynical and sarcastic though I can be with you, I honestly don't see what you find objectionable. Or am I reading the wrong article? If it's the Aug 30 one, then I have to wait till I get access to speakers and will respond later.

"Ford, may I say I would like bishops to display both a high degree of honesty and purity?"

But the point is that you think Gene Robinson is unfit for episcopacy because of his perceived sexual impurity. You do not call for the defrocking of a bishop who is not honest, and you certainly don't seem to want to split the Church over it. Why the difference?

Ford - the difference is that only one of the examples you give would argue that their sin is not a sin.

Attwood is not saying it is fine to be dishonest.....even if you think he is being dishonest in this case.

There's an old joke, NP:

What's the difference between a Lutheran, a Baptist, and an Anglican? (I hope I get the order right here)

A Baptist doesn't care what you believe as long as you do the right thing, a Lutheran doesn't care what you do as long as you believe the right thing, and an Anglican doesn't care what you believe, or what you do, as long as it's tasteful. Which are you?

It's OK to be dishonest as long as you don't tell people it's OK to be dishonest? That's just bizarre. And I don't know he's being dishonest. He is quoting propaganda as though it were fact. Either he is poorly informed or he is dishonest, I don't know which. In the former case, shame on him. He is a very public face for his movement, and making statements like this discredits that movement. He also has a resopnsibility to know that he speaks the truth because he is a bishop. In the latter case, well, 'nuff said.

And, out of curiosity, what is sin?