Comments: Frank Griswold on Camp Allen and Kigali

Simon,

Being a novice Episcopalian and anglican and only minimally proficient at reading between the lines of diplomatic doouble speak, what is ++Griswold actually saying?

Posted by Richard III at Thursday, 28 September 2006 at 5:02pm BST

Bravo on including the last paragraph Simon. Katharine will do her best to represent the complexities and perspectives of her charges that chose her. And the Bishop is correct is stating that the Kigali people should be able to represent the wishes of those they would support. Conversely, I am sure Schori would represent the wishes of souls like myself who are not represented by our "own" diocese.

I was having morning tea with a friend yesterday and we joked that mediocre bullies fear competent souls. Are there some who are worried that they can not decisively win the debate (their suppressive agenda, not ours) in a fair fight? Do they fear having biblically informed people at Lambeth because when they quote the bible "authoratively", someone might be able to pull out and quote the passages they choose to overlook, which would discredit their "absolute" solo scripture authority?

It's pretty hard to insist on a hard line because it is the only legitimate biblical interpretation when someone else pulls out one or a plethora of passages that put their limited choices into a bigger context.

Posted by Cheryl Clough at Thursday, 28 September 2006 at 6:54pm BST

Having read through Bishop Griswold's fine letter, I am quite impressed. I have not always agreed with everything he has done or said, but this letter certainly seems quite fair, sane and balanced. I know a lot of people hate him and are going to do so no matter what he tries to do and that makes all of this so much more disturbing.

Posted by Prior Aelred at Thursday, 28 September 2006 at 7:46pm BST

I know that in the last few days I have expressed my opinion that many voices of the Global South have already forsworn the Windsor Process and any meaningful possiblity of reconciliation. However, I have also said, and will reiterate here, that I believe the Episcopal Church should listen to everyone, and should be willing to converse with anyone interested in conversation. Thus, I appreciate the Bishop Griswold's moderate tone and desire to see the Windsor Process through. Reconciliation is worth pursuing, even when it seems hopeless, until it is demonstrated to be actually hopeless.

I fear that those committed to separation will not change, that their only concern is whether we will leave the Communion to them, or they will leave us to form something new. I would not be sorry to be proven wrong.

Posted by Marshall Scott at Thursday, 28 September 2006 at 8:06pm BST

Frank Griswold not only has the measure of them and their politicking --his analysis and stance is spot on. He has been a brick...

One's Stance, of course is as important as one's analysis.

Posted by laurence roberts at Thursday, 28 September 2006 at 8:07pm BST

The Kigali communiqué questions Bishop Jefferts Schori’s ability to represent all of our dioceses. The role of primates is to bear witness as fully as possible to the life and complexities of their own provinces.

No she is rejected by the GS. They will not share in Holy Communion with her just as they refused to do with ++FTG at Dromatine. The broken communion of Dromatine would simply continue.

+KJS has not a prayer of ever being able to represent the complexity ot TEC. She could never represent several of the dioceses nor even more of the congregations as she has by her statements distanced herself completely from Apostolic Christianity as found in the majority of the Anglican Communion.

Posted by Ian Montgomery at Thursday, 28 September 2006 at 9:32pm BST

One of the problems the new PB will have to overcome is that she has rejected the Windsor Report in authorising liturgies for SSB's in her diocese. While the General Convention has not moved on this question, her diocesan standing committee did.

Posted by Obadiahslope at Thursday, 28 September 2006 at 10:19pm BST

Ian,

As problematic as it may seem, +KJS *does* represent the whole of TEC because they elected her.

By your standard, I guess I'm free to say George Bush isn't my President, since I voted for the other guy.... maybe I'll write a letter to Kofi Annan and request Alternative Presidential Oversight. In the meantime, everyone's on notice that my apartment in New York is, from now on, part of France.

Posted by Christopher Calderhead at Thursday, 28 September 2006 at 11:24pm BST

One of the problems the new PB will have to overcome is trying to quietly accept all the obvious, yet behind-the-scenes, disruptiveness, hatefulness and selfrighteous smearing/loathing directed at her by feardriven folks with straightfaces and crooked provincial pals.

Posted by Leonardo Ricardo at Thursday, 28 September 2006 at 11:51pm BST

Ian:

To take a different tack from Christopher, are you suggesting that Bishop Jefferts Schori can't respect those with whom she disagrees and faithfully and accurately report their views? Certainly, she may herself share her opinions with a majority of Episcopalians; but I believe she should be able to acknowledge the minority views.

Posted by Marshall Scott at Friday, 29 September 2006 at 12:01am BST

Spot on, Christopher Calderhead!

The 'reasserters' are geniuses the way they twist things in order to achieve their warped objectives--let's get women out of public life, restore 'patriarchy' as divinely ordered by St. Paul (and the Koran, I might add), and have the gays return into the closet...

Now there is the PB-elect Katharine Jefferts Schori and a woman President of the House of Deputies of General Convention, Bonnie Anderson. No wonder there is outrage on the part of the usual suspects!

Posted by John Henry at Friday, 29 September 2006 at 12:43am BST

"In the meantime, everyone's on notice that my apartment in New York is, from now on, part of France." CCC

"Alons, enfants de la patrie; le jour de gloir est arrive!" (Pardon les errors de spelling. Peut etre "jour" est "feminine", pas "masculine"!)

But seriously, folks, hurray for PB Frank and for Bonnie Anderson (see Episcopal News Service for Bonnie Anderson, President of the House of Deputies for TEC).Cogent, specific, comprehensive, right to the point statements. I've been waiting for them and I have not been let down. Thanks to them both.
Lois Keen

Posted by Lois Keen at Friday, 29 September 2006 at 1:20am BST

"+KJS has not a prayer of ever being able to represent the complexity ot TEC. She could never represent several of the dioceses nor even more of the congregations as she has by her statements distanced herself completely from Apostolic Christianity as found in the majority of the Anglican Communion..."

One hears this sort of thing quite often lately. Personally, I don't believe a word of it, for the very reasons given by Bonnie Anderson, President of the House of Deputies, in the following part of her recent statement, in which she is addressing the latest Global South ultimatum:

"...In their statement they distance themselves from Bishop Jefferts Schori for holding views that are similar to those held by Bishop Griswold, Bishop Browning before and other Primates currently. There is nothing unique in her views. What is unique is her gender in the circle of primates. That seems to be their biggest objection. I note with sadness that the Kigali communiqué does not extend the courtesy of referring to Bishop Jefferts Schori as a bishop, where everyone else is referred to with titles. It adds a low note that is not worthy of the faith espoused in the document."

The rest of her comments can be found at
http://www.episcopalchurch.org/3577_78189_ENG_HTM.htm

Posted by Jake at Friday, 29 September 2006 at 5:25am BST

Marshall Your words of 26 Sept 8.05pm were beautiful because they offered hope and an open hand, even when it seems futile.

One of the things that is striking me in the debate is the level of hatred against certain people. I came across this fantastic article today that religious fundamentalism spans the world. http://www.news-leader.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20060927/OPINIONS/609270313/1006/OPINIONS

What is a fundamentalist they ask? Their words "Their basic premise is that they are right and on God's side and everyone else is wrong and on the side of "sin and evil." Thus, everything becomes a struggle between the true believing people of God and all others."

After reading this article I would suggest that xenophobic fundamentalists come in two forms. The active form that decides to be God's arms and proceed to exterminate and suppress the sinners and pray to God to reward them for their diligence. The passive form seeks to suppress the sinners and prays to God to come and exterminate them on their behalf. Neither form is interested in living in an imperfect world where they are not in control or the absolute truth.

Maybe we should have a new definition of insanity added to the psychiatric texts?

Posted by Cheryl Clough at Friday, 29 September 2006 at 9:47am BST

The Primate of our American Church is a woman; get used to it!

Posted by Kurt at Friday, 29 September 2006 at 2:34pm BST

"No she is rejected by the GS. They will not share in Holy Communion with her just as they refused to do with ++FTG at Dromatine."

I confess, Ian, that I had difficulty in recognizing that your post WASN'T parody. Are you seriously suggesting that (alleged) GS rejection, trumps the democratic (and canonical) will of TEC's General Convention? And are seriously *supporting* a horrifyingly heretical excommunication (past or present) of an Anglican bishop? [And wasn't the ultimate insult of the "Dromantine Incident", that it was the *ABC* who was excommunicated?]

*****

obadiah, while this may be a picked nit, I believe that +KJS has authorized a *process* by which parishes in Nevada ***MAY*** decide to conduct SSBs: not an "authorized liturgy", per se (I may be wrong)

Posted by J. C. Fisher at Friday, 29 September 2006 at 6:45pm BST

Ian ; KJS clearly represents the overwhelming majority of TEC

How could one of your preferred conservatives represent those people?

Posted by Merseymike at Friday, 29 September 2006 at 9:02pm BST

As I understand it, the Nevada process as defined by the standing committe of the diocese (and I agree it is a process) provides for the Bishop to authorise the liturgy for each SSB. Thus if any SSBs have taken place in Nevada under the diocesan provision, the Bishop has authorised the liturgy. I do not know if any ceremonies have taken place.

Posted by obadiahslope at Saturday, 30 September 2006 at 1:01am BST

I'm glad our Presiding Bishop made these comments and think the statements made from Kigali are beyond ridiculous.
Our Presiding Bishop-elect is probably more capable in that position than several of the current archbishops in the Anglican Communion.

Posted by Allen at Saturday, 30 September 2006 at 1:29am BST

"I do not know if any ceremonies have taken place." Obadiahslope

Then wait until you have your facts straight before you start another cold-bloodless smudge campaign against her.

Posted by Leonardo Ricardo at Saturday, 30 September 2006 at 3:26pm BST

Fair point, Leonardo.
But here's the information you requested, gathered by PEP, posted by Father Jake.
"Claim: That Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori has defied the Windsor Report by making her diocese a center for blessings of same-sex unions.

Fact: The Diocese of Nevada did approve a resolution at its December 2003 convention allowing blessings of same-sex unions, subject to approval of each case by the bishop. Bishop Jefferts Schori has required that parishes wishing to do such blessings have a fully developed policy on the matter. In two-and a-half years since the resolution was passed, there have been two such blessings."

http://frjakestopstheworld.blogspot.com/2006/07/setting-record-straight.htm

Posted by obadiahslope at Tuesday, 3 October 2006 at 12:15am BST

We have a piece of empirical dilemma here, since SSB's only make any real positive sense to the different folks who have at least distanced themselves, if not stepped completely outside of, the legacy flat earth theory of sexual orientation variance and/or gender variance.

Queer life simply does not exist, empirically, only or completely according to the received negative legacy flat earth theories of its repugnantly defined essential nature. Pointing vigorously to ancient near eastern or other maps which purport to show clearly, just where two men or two women fall right off the flat earth heterosexual sanctity map rather begs the empirical point - is their care ethical in a common sense, daily way? Is their care and commitment free and mutual?

SSB's are then held up as evidence that awful things are happening by legacy map and by legacy definition, and that our following of Jesus of Nazareth is falling right off the edges of the flat earth so inscribed; when in fact what is happening is that committed adults (often parenting children in USA at least) are having their commitment witnessed by their local faith communities through rather more rigorous and scrutinized local parish discernment processes than currently apply to almost any straight couple who might happen to breeze in off the street, after last having been seen at Easter last year.

Even most local parishes involved, so far, have to go through far more rigorous discernment processes of their own local life and values and motives before they reach the point of scheduling an SSB.

The people celebrating in prayer (and probably feasting if I know anything about the varieties of USA local TEC parish celebrations - hasn't God blessed us , just blessed the gaylights (oops, daylights) out of us with some really fine cooks?) - perdon mis dedes - the local witnesses know the daily goods that have taken root in that same sex couples' lives, embodied, as well as in their parenting, as well as sometimes spilling over into the greater good joy of that local parish congregation.

Oh well, never mind, believers who call themselves definitively biblical did not like underground sex, then they liked above ground dating even less, and now that people are seriously in love with each other, they like it even less if that is possible.

Posted by drdanfee at Tuesday, 3 October 2006 at 3:08am BST

"believers who call themselves definitively biblical did not like underground sex"

presumably because the commuters kept jostling them as they got in and out of the carriages?

Posted by David Rowett (=mynsterpreost) at Tuesday, 3 October 2006 at 11:01pm BST

Continuing SMUDGE ALERT on Presiding Bishop elect Katharine Jefferts Schori by Obadiahslope:

1. "One of the problems the new PB will have to overcome is that she has REJECTED THE WINDSOR REPORT in authorising liturgies for SSB's in her diocese. While the General Convention has not moved on this question, her diocesan standing committee did." Obadiahslope

2. "Fair point, Leonardo.
But here's the information you requested...

"Claim: That Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori has DEFIED THE WINDSOR REPORT by making her diocese a center for blessings of same-sex unions.

Fact: The Diocese of Nevada did approve a resolution at its DECEMBER 2003 convention allowing blessings of same-sex unions, subject to approval of each case by the bishop. Bishop Jefferts Schori has required that parishes wishing to do such blessings have a fully developed policy on the matter. In two-and a-half years since the resolution was passed, there have been two such blessings." more Obadiahslope

Cold and bloodless smudging on Presiding Bishop elect Katharine Jefferts Schori by Obadiahslope:

The Lambeth Commission report was published on Monday, 18 OCTOBER, 2004...12.00 midday in the crypt of St Paul’s Cathedral and the Diocese Convention of Nevada approved their resolution on DECEMBER of 2003.

Katharine Jefferts Schori and the Diocese of Nevada Convention hardly DEFIED the Windsor Report because it hadn't been issued for another YEAR yet.

Which part of "sin of omission don't you understand?"

Posted by Leonardo Ricardo at Wednesday, 4 October 2006 at 1:36am BST
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.