...on Obama's speech to the school children of the US.
Nicked from MadPriest. For heaven's sake don't get the idea that MP was clever enough to MAKE this video. For the record, a reader named Scott sent it to him.
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Read Paul Krugman And Weep
Here's the link to his blog post on the possible backlash if the public option is not included in the bill and the usefulness (or uselessness) of the trigger.
...and this is where I am getting a very bad feeling about the idea of throwing in the towel on the public option — is the politics. Remember, to make reform work we have to have an individual mandate. And everything I see says that there will be a major backlash against the idea of forcing people to buy insurance from the existing companies. That backlash was part of what got Obama the nomination! Having the public option offers a defense against that backlash.
What worries me is not so much that the backlash would stop reform from passing, as that it would store up trouble for the not-too-distant future. Imagine that reform passes, but that premiums shoot up (or even keep rising at the rates of the past decade.) Then you could all too easily have many people blaming Obama et al for forcing them into this increasingly unaffordable system. A trigger might fix this — but the funny thing about such triggers is that they almost never get pulled.
And a great big YES to Krugman's final words:
And sooner or later Democrats have to take a stand against Reaganism — against the presumption that if the government does it, it’s bad. (My emphasis)
And when, pray tell, will Democrats take that stand?
...and this is where I am getting a very bad feeling about the idea of throwing in the towel on the public option — is the politics. Remember, to make reform work we have to have an individual mandate. And everything I see says that there will be a major backlash against the idea of forcing people to buy insurance from the existing companies. That backlash was part of what got Obama the nomination! Having the public option offers a defense against that backlash.
What worries me is not so much that the backlash would stop reform from passing, as that it would store up trouble for the not-too-distant future. Imagine that reform passes, but that premiums shoot up (or even keep rising at the rates of the past decade.) Then you could all too easily have many people blaming Obama et al for forcing them into this increasingly unaffordable system. A trigger might fix this — but the funny thing about such triggers is that they almost never get pulled.
And a great big YES to Krugman's final words:
And sooner or later Democrats have to take a stand against Reaganism — against the presumption that if the government does it, it’s bad. (My emphasis)
And when, pray tell, will Democrats take that stand?
May I Say, "No"?
From Bishop Michael G. Smith of the Episcopal Diocese of North Dakota:
So. Bishop Smith, a member of the "Magnificent Seven" who recently called on Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and subsequently submitted this statement about their visit, is officially a candidate for bishop in the Episcopal Diocese of Louisiana. Upon consultation with his immediate and extended family, Bishop Smith reported, "No one said no". I am not a member of his immediate or extended family, but I am a member of the family of the Diocese of Louisiana, and if anyone asks me, I will say "no" to Bishop Smith as the bishop of my diocese. No one will ask me, and I don't have a vote, but I will express my opinion to the delegates from my area and ask them to vote for another candidate and to vote "no" to the election of Bishop Smith. I'd rather not have a bishop who is teetering on the edge of being part of the Episcopal Church. I'd rather a bishop who is loyal to the Episcopal Church in which he was persuaded that God had called him to the office of bishop, rather than a bishop who may work to undermine the church.
Our retiring bishop, Charles Jenkins, expressed his disagreement with decisions of the national church on more than one occasion, and yet he remained loyal to the church in which he was persuaded that God had called him to the office of bishop.
Thanks to Ormonde for the link to Bishop Smith's letter.
August 31, 2009
Dear Friends:
The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Spirit, be with you.
In last month's post-General Convention letter, I shared with you the Presiding Bishop's challenging words about crisis. She reminded us: "The word crisis has its origins in the Greek krinein, meaning to judge, separate, or distinguish. A crisis is time for decision-making%u2026."
I've been doing some thinking about the word crisis myself. I recalled a teaching from a Marriage Encounter my wife and I attended many years ago. It seems that the Chinese symbol for "crisis" consists of the joining of two other words, "danger" and "opportunity." Therefore, "Crisis = Danger + Opportunity" is the Chinese formula and understanding of this word. I like this. It reminds us that however dangerous or dreadful a crisis might appear, there is also involved the possibility of opportunity and positive outcomes for growth and change.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has a sense of this opportunity as he concludes his post-General Convention reflections with the statement: "We must hope that, in spite of the difficulties, this may yet be the beginning of a new era of mission and spiritual growth for all who value the Anglican name and heritage" (Communion, Covenant and Our Anglican Future, § 26).
We are facing a crisis in which the churches of Anglicanism will soon be at a crossroads of decision as to whether to travel the path of an interdependent communion of churches or to go down the road of an independent federation of churches. The Archbishop of Canterbury and so called "Covenant" process are moving with the former, while General Convention clearly seems to be moving in the latter direction. (Please see my essay "Transitioning Towards Two-Tier Anglicanism" elsewhere is this issue).
This summer I read Phyliss Tickle's popular book "The Great Emergence: How Christianity Is Changing and Why" (Baker Books). She makes the observation that massive transitions in the church happen about every 500 years and that we are in the midst of one such upheaval currently. Basically, Tickle tells us not to despair because history teaches that when these changes take place three results typically occur: 1) a new, more vital Christianity emerges; 2) the formerly dominant expression of Christianity is reconstituted and renewed, and; 3) the Christian faith spreads into new geographic and demographic areas (p. 17).
The coming changes will challenge us at every level. These multi-level crises, with both their dangers and opportunities, are being faced at the global level through the Anglican Communion Covenant process; at the national level by cutting the budget by 14% while retaining an emphasis on serving the poor at home and abroad; in the Diocese of North Dakota by reorganizing for mission and ministry after reducing office and field staff; personal responses are left to the discernment of individuals, hopefully in the context of community.
For me personally, I have called upon a discernment committee to assist me in thinking and praying about where God might be calling in light of all these changing circumstances. (I am grateful to Deacon Zanne Ness, Dean Steve Sellers and Canon Kevin Goodrich OP for serving in this capacity and I invite you to visit with them about our process.) Some background:
As you know, I've enjoyed the opportunity of serving as a part-time assisting bishop in Louisiana the past two years. After Bishop Charles Jenkins announced his resignation, a number of laypeople, deacons and priests of that Diocese approached me about the possibility of being nominated. Initially, I thanked them and shared my reservations about whether God was calling me to serve in that capacity. Then other bishops from around the church with ties to Louisiana began to encourage me to accept nomination.
After the shock of the economic downturn and the realization that some drastic decisions needed to be made to ensure the future viability of the Diocese of North Dakota, I began to ask my immediate and extended family members what they thought about the possibility of my serving as the bishop of Louisiana. To a person they were at least open and some very encouraging. No one said no.
It was at this point that I received an invitation from yet another diocese to enter their search process and began to seriously wonder if God was up to something in terms of a change in my call. My experiences at General Convention and even the recently concluded Diocesan Council meeting have only confirmed my sense that "business as usual" is no longer the order of the day and that God is calling us to a new way of being a church in mission.
At this point, I can say with certainty and with the help of the discernment committee, not that I will be the next bishop of Louisiana, but that I am called to be part of their episcopal election process. I have allowed my name to go forward with the understanding, in the words of one of my former bishops, that "sometimes candidates are to be part of search or election processes not to be called to that post, but rather to assist those issuing the call to discern another candidate."
Therefore, if I am discerned to the final slate of candidates, I will trust the Holy Spirit's call extended through the Louisiana Electing Convention this December. If not elected, I will trust that God is continuing to call me to serve for a season as bishop of North Dakota.
We are in need of a fresh outpouring of the Holy Spirit if we are to thrive in the dangers and opportunities ahead of us and to resist the momentum of institutional decline. I request your prayers for all our futures. Pray for renewal. Pray for revival. Pray for the gifts of the Holy Spirit. I am,
Yours in Christ,
+Michael
(My emphases)
So. Bishop Smith, a member of the "Magnificent Seven" who recently called on Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams and subsequently submitted this statement about their visit, is officially a candidate for bishop in the Episcopal Diocese of Louisiana. Upon consultation with his immediate and extended family, Bishop Smith reported, "No one said no". I am not a member of his immediate or extended family, but I am a member of the family of the Diocese of Louisiana, and if anyone asks me, I will say "no" to Bishop Smith as the bishop of my diocese. No one will ask me, and I don't have a vote, but I will express my opinion to the delegates from my area and ask them to vote for another candidate and to vote "no" to the election of Bishop Smith. I'd rather not have a bishop who is teetering on the edge of being part of the Episcopal Church. I'd rather a bishop who is loyal to the Episcopal Church in which he was persuaded that God had called him to the office of bishop, rather than a bishop who may work to undermine the church.
Our retiring bishop, Charles Jenkins, expressed his disagreement with decisions of the national church on more than one occasion, and yet he remained loyal to the church in which he was persuaded that God had called him to the office of bishop.
Thanks to Ormonde for the link to Bishop Smith's letter.
Perfect Time
When I grow up, I want to remember
that I always wanted to be about a
thousand different things & one lifetime
didn't seem nearly enough. When I
grow up, I hope it's at the very end
when it doesn't matter anymore anyway
From StoryPeople.
that I always wanted to be about a
thousand different things & one lifetime
didn't seem nearly enough. When I
grow up, I hope it's at the very end
when it doesn't matter anymore anyway
From StoryPeople.
Obama Tonight - No Public Option?
According to those who speculate about these things, Obama will not speak out tonight in favor of health care reform with a robust public option, but rather in favor of a trigger - whatever that is. Why do we support and vote for Democrats? Right now, the best reason I can think of is that they are not Republicans.
Without the public option to reduce costs, the bill will mean more money for the health insurance industry. At the present time, the industry spends 30% on administrative costs, while Medicare spends around 4%.
I hope that the speculators are wrong, but I fear that they are right.
Read Robert Creamer on the health insurance industry at The Huffington Post - if you have the stomach for it.
Without the public option to reduce costs, the bill will mean more money for the health insurance industry. At the present time, the industry spends 30% on administrative costs, while Medicare spends around 4%.
I hope that the speculators are wrong, but I fear that they are right.
Read Robert Creamer on the health insurance industry at The Huffington Post - if you have the stomach for it.
Please Pray For S.
Mimi -
An update on my friend, S., for whom I asked the prayers last time:
Some time ago I requested prayers for my friend, S., who was experiencing hard times, (thanks to all of you who responded then!) and I wanted to post a quick update. Apparently today she had a conference call with her lawyers, and the only clear path they see is for her to go back on SSI and to enter an assisted living residence where she would have a roof over her head and three meals a day, but where she would indeed have to give up her beloved parakeets, who are now her only family.
This is very hard for her to bear, and very scary (it would be both of those things even without losing the parakeets, as it means giving up so much personal autonomy as well as the only home she has known for fifty years or more, and all the other issues you can guess at.) And she feels that God is mad at her. So good thoughts for S, who needs strength and hope and courage to cope with all these overwhelming changes in her life, and for her friends who need inspiration to help her make the transition - and for the bureaucracy not to screw her over too badly... One hardly knows what to ask for.
And thanks in advance for your prayers, all who read this.
Aichellsee
Ah, so sad. Pray for S., that she will adjust to her new situation, that her caregivers will care, and that she will find a good home for her beloved parakeets.
An update on my friend, S., for whom I asked the prayers last time:
Some time ago I requested prayers for my friend, S., who was experiencing hard times, (thanks to all of you who responded then!) and I wanted to post a quick update. Apparently today she had a conference call with her lawyers, and the only clear path they see is for her to go back on SSI and to enter an assisted living residence where she would have a roof over her head and three meals a day, but where she would indeed have to give up her beloved parakeets, who are now her only family.
This is very hard for her to bear, and very scary (it would be both of those things even without losing the parakeets, as it means giving up so much personal autonomy as well as the only home she has known for fifty years or more, and all the other issues you can guess at.) And she feels that God is mad at her. So good thoughts for S, who needs strength and hope and courage to cope with all these overwhelming changes in her life, and for her friends who need inspiration to help her make the transition - and for the bureaucracy not to screw her over too badly... One hardly knows what to ask for.
And thanks in advance for your prayers, all who read this.
Aichellsee
Ah, so sad. Pray for S., that she will adjust to her new situation, that her caregivers will care, and that she will find a good home for her beloved parakeets.
Tuesday, September 8, 2009
Myron - Good News
Evening all,
The Good News of the day is the lady who did the evaluation for Bryn Marw Rehab told Maryann that they are ready for My when he is ready for them. He is still working on ridding himself of the ventilator.
One more step forward.
Sue
Good news, indeed! Thanks be to God, the medical staff, and Myron's family and friends.
The Good News of the day is the lady who did the evaluation for Bryn Marw Rehab told Maryann that they are ready for My when he is ready for them. He is still working on ridding himself of the ventilator.
One more step forward.
Sue
Good news, indeed! Thanks be to God, the medical staff, and Myron's family and friends.
Dangerous, Subversive Indoctrination...Wait!
Here's the text of the speech by President Obama, the dangerous, subversive indoctrination of our innocent school children, which caused such a flurry of warnings, invective, and instructions to keep your children home lest they be besmirched.
Wait! OMG! The speech sounds pretty inspirational to me. The president's words encourage school children to pay attention, work hard in school, and be diligent about study and homework.
But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.
And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.
Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.
....
I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work -- that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you’re not going to be any of those things.
But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won’t love every subject you study. You won’t click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won’t necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.
That’s OK. Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who’ve had the most failures. JK Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, "I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."
These people succeeded because they understand that you can’t let your failures define you – you have to let them teach you. You have to let them show you what to do differently next time. If you get in trouble, that doesn’t mean you’re a troublemaker, it means you need to try harder to behave. If you get a bad grade, that doesn’t mean you’re stupid, it just means you need to spend more time studying.
But I must be missing something. What WAS all the fuss about? Obviously, I'm reading the speech wrong.
You know what? I'm not reading the speech wrong. It's an excellent speech to children and parents alike. There are far too many fearful and ignorant people in this country, who think Obama is Satan or the anti-Christ. I'm not kidding, nor am I exaggerating. Others see Obama as perhaps something less than Satan or the anti-Christ, but nevertheless as evil. I've heard and seen these lesser-evil views expressed by people of education and apparent intelligence. Any influence by Obama on their children or grandchildren would be seen as nothing less than contamination.
What are we becoming in this country? Have we always been like this? Are we better, worse, or same? Was I not paying attention?
H/T to Oyster at Your Right Hand Thief.
Wait! OMG! The speech sounds pretty inspirational to me. The president's words encourage school children to pay attention, work hard in school, and be diligent about study and homework.
But at the end of the day, we can have the most dedicated teachers, the most supportive parents, and the best schools in the world – and none of it will matter unless all of you fulfill your responsibilities. Unless you show up to those schools; pay attention to those teachers; listen to your parents, grandparents and other adults; and put in the hard work it takes to succeed.
And that’s what I want to focus on today: the responsibility each of you has for your education. I want to start with the responsibility you have to yourself.
Every single one of you has something you’re good at. Every single one of you has something to offer. And you have a responsibility to yourself to discover what that is. That’s the opportunity an education can provide.
....
I know that sometimes, you get the sense from TV that you can be rich and successful without any hard work -- that your ticket to success is through rapping or basketball or being a reality TV star, when chances are, you’re not going to be any of those things.
But the truth is, being successful is hard. You won’t love every subject you study. You won’t click with every teacher. Not every homework assignment will seem completely relevant to your life right this minute. And you won’t necessarily succeed at everything the first time you try.
That’s OK. Some of the most successful people in the world are the ones who’ve had the most failures. JK Rowling’s first Harry Potter book was rejected twelve times before it was finally published. Michael Jordan was cut from his high school basketball team, and he lost hundreds of games and missed thousands of shots during his career. But he once said, "I have failed over and over and over again in my life. And that is why I succeed."
These people succeeded because they understand that you can’t let your failures define you – you have to let them teach you. You have to let them show you what to do differently next time. If you get in trouble, that doesn’t mean you’re a troublemaker, it means you need to try harder to behave. If you get a bad grade, that doesn’t mean you’re stupid, it just means you need to spend more time studying.
But I must be missing something. What WAS all the fuss about? Obviously, I'm reading the speech wrong.
You know what? I'm not reading the speech wrong. It's an excellent speech to children and parents alike. There are far too many fearful and ignorant people in this country, who think Obama is Satan or the anti-Christ. I'm not kidding, nor am I exaggerating. Others see Obama as perhaps something less than Satan or the anti-Christ, but nevertheless as evil. I've heard and seen these lesser-evil views expressed by people of education and apparent intelligence. Any influence by Obama on their children or grandchildren would be seen as nothing less than contamination.
What are we becoming in this country? Have we always been like this? Are we better, worse, or same? Was I not paying attention?
H/T to Oyster at Your Right Hand Thief.
Good News From Göran In Sweden
Ms Eva Brunne was confirmed today as the 8th Bishop of Stock-holm after some legal wrangling (unjustified). Bishop Brunne who was elected by a majority of delegates on the 21st of April is partnered with another woman, who is also a Priest. Bishop Brunne will be consecrated on the 8th of November at Upsala Cathedral together with Finnish born Ms Tuulikki Koivunen Bylund, the new Bishop of Härnösand.
Excellent news!
Leave your good wishes with Göran Koch-Swahne.
Excellent news!
Leave your good wishes with Göran Koch-Swahne.
Statement From The Seven Bishops...
...of the Episcopal Church who met with the Archbishop of Canterbury recently, all members of the "Communion Partners", from Thinking Anglicans:
As seven representatives of the Communion Partner Bishops, we are grateful to have met with the Archbishop of Canterbury to discuss our concern in light of the recent actions of the General Convention and the subsequent nomination of candidates “whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on Communion” (General Convention 2006, B033).
At this meeting we expressed our appreciation for his post-convention reflections, “Communion, Covenant, and our Anglican Future,” and were especially interested in his statement about whether “elements” in Provinces not favorably disposed to adopt the Anglican Covenant “will be free … to adopt the Covenant as a sign of their wish to act in a certain level of mutuality with parts of the communion.”
Given our commitment to remain constituent members of both the Anglican Communion and The Episcopal Church, we are encouraged by our meeting with the Archbishop. We agree with him that our present situation is “an opportunity for clarity, renewal and deeper relation with one another - and also Our Lord and his Father in the power of the Spirit.” We, too, share a desire to “intensify existing relationships” by becoming part of a “Covenanted” global Anglican body in communion with the See of Canterbury. We also pray and hope that “in spite of the difficulties this may yet be the beginning of a new era of mission and spiritual growth for all who value the Anglican name and heritage.”
We understand the divisions before us, not merely differences of opinion on human sexuality, but also about differing understandings of ecclesiology and questions regarding the independence or interdependence of a global communion of churches in discerning the mind of Christ together. However, we also shared our concern that the actions of General Convention have essentially rejected the teaching of 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 as the mind of the Communion, and raise a serious question whether a Covenant will be adopted by both Houses at General Convention 2012.
At the same time we are mindful that General Convention Resolution D020 “commended the Anglican Covenant proposed in the most recent text of the Covenant Design Group (the “Ridley Cambridge Draft”) and any successive draft to dioceses for study during the coming triennium” and invited dioceses and congregations to “consider the Anglican Covenant proposed draft as a document to inform their understanding of and commitment to our common life in the Anglican Communion.”
Therefore, at this time we make the following requests of Communion minded members of the The Episcopal Church and the wider Anglican Communion:
1. We encourage dioceses, congregations and individuals of The Episcopal Church to pray and work for the adoption of an Anglican Communion Covenant.
2. We encourage dioceses and congregations to study and endorse the Anglican Communion Covenant when it is finally released and to urge its adoption by General Convention, or to endorse the first three sections of the Ridley Cambridge Draft and the Anaheim Statement, and to record such endorsements on the Communion Partners website (www.communionpartners.org).
3. We encourage bishops, priests, deacons and laypersons of The Episcopal Church who support the adoption of the Anglican Communion Covenant to record such endorsement on the Communion Partners website.
4. We encourage dioceses and congregations, in the spirit of GC2009 Resolution D030, to engage in “companion domestic mission relationships among dioceses and congregations within The Episcopal Church.”
5. We encourage Bishops exercising jurisdiction in The Episcopal Church to call upon us for service in needed cases of Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight.
6. We encourage relationships between Communion Partners and primates, bishops, provinces and dioceses in other parts of the Communion, in order the enhance the ministry we share in the life of the Communion.
7. We invite primates and bishops of the Communion to offer their public support to these efforts.
+Mark J. Lawrence, South Carolina
+Gary R. Lillibridge, West Texas
+Edward S. Little, II, Northern Indiana
+William H. Love, Albany
+D. Bruce MacPherson, Western Louisiana
+Michael G. Smith, North Dakota
+James M. Stanton, Dallas
There you have it. Why was it necessary for the seven bishops to visit with the ABC before making this statement? Why did the ABC choose to meet with them? Did the bishops tell tales along the journey?
And we are to visit THEIR website to express our support for the covenant. Those who express support for the covenant at their website will not actually be signing on to the covenant, but I'll wager that the "Communion Partners" will strive to make it appear that they are doing just that.
Thanks to Lapin for the link.
UPDATE: Ann Fontaine informs us at The Lead:
D030 refers to the Blockade of the Gaza Strip - we believe the bishop intended to refer to B020.
As seven representatives of the Communion Partner Bishops, we are grateful to have met with the Archbishop of Canterbury to discuss our concern in light of the recent actions of the General Convention and the subsequent nomination of candidates “whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on Communion” (General Convention 2006, B033).
At this meeting we expressed our appreciation for his post-convention reflections, “Communion, Covenant, and our Anglican Future,” and were especially interested in his statement about whether “elements” in Provinces not favorably disposed to adopt the Anglican Covenant “will be free … to adopt the Covenant as a sign of their wish to act in a certain level of mutuality with parts of the communion.”
Given our commitment to remain constituent members of both the Anglican Communion and The Episcopal Church, we are encouraged by our meeting with the Archbishop. We agree with him that our present situation is “an opportunity for clarity, renewal and deeper relation with one another - and also Our Lord and his Father in the power of the Spirit.” We, too, share a desire to “intensify existing relationships” by becoming part of a “Covenanted” global Anglican body in communion with the See of Canterbury. We also pray and hope that “in spite of the difficulties this may yet be the beginning of a new era of mission and spiritual growth for all who value the Anglican name and heritage.”
We understand the divisions before us, not merely differences of opinion on human sexuality, but also about differing understandings of ecclesiology and questions regarding the independence or interdependence of a global communion of churches in discerning the mind of Christ together. However, we also shared our concern that the actions of General Convention have essentially rejected the teaching of 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 as the mind of the Communion, and raise a serious question whether a Covenant will be adopted by both Houses at General Convention 2012.
At the same time we are mindful that General Convention Resolution D020 “commended the Anglican Covenant proposed in the most recent text of the Covenant Design Group (the “Ridley Cambridge Draft”) and any successive draft to dioceses for study during the coming triennium” and invited dioceses and congregations to “consider the Anglican Covenant proposed draft as a document to inform their understanding of and commitment to our common life in the Anglican Communion.”
Therefore, at this time we make the following requests of Communion minded members of the The Episcopal Church and the wider Anglican Communion:
1. We encourage dioceses, congregations and individuals of The Episcopal Church to pray and work for the adoption of an Anglican Communion Covenant.
2. We encourage dioceses and congregations to study and endorse the Anglican Communion Covenant when it is finally released and to urge its adoption by General Convention, or to endorse the first three sections of the Ridley Cambridge Draft and the Anaheim Statement, and to record such endorsements on the Communion Partners website (www.communionpartners.org).
3. We encourage bishops, priests, deacons and laypersons of The Episcopal Church who support the adoption of the Anglican Communion Covenant to record such endorsement on the Communion Partners website.
4. We encourage dioceses and congregations, in the spirit of GC2009 Resolution D030, to engage in “companion domestic mission relationships among dioceses and congregations within The Episcopal Church.”
5. We encourage Bishops exercising jurisdiction in The Episcopal Church to call upon us for service in needed cases of Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight.
6. We encourage relationships between Communion Partners and primates, bishops, provinces and dioceses in other parts of the Communion, in order the enhance the ministry we share in the life of the Communion.
7. We invite primates and bishops of the Communion to offer their public support to these efforts.
+Mark J. Lawrence, South Carolina
+Gary R. Lillibridge, West Texas
+Edward S. Little, II, Northern Indiana
+William H. Love, Albany
+D. Bruce MacPherson, Western Louisiana
+Michael G. Smith, North Dakota
+James M. Stanton, Dallas
There you have it. Why was it necessary for the seven bishops to visit with the ABC before making this statement? Why did the ABC choose to meet with them? Did the bishops tell tales along the journey?
And we are to visit THEIR website to express our support for the covenant. Those who express support for the covenant at their website will not actually be signing on to the covenant, but I'll wager that the "Communion Partners" will strive to make it appear that they are doing just that.
Thanks to Lapin for the link.
UPDATE: Ann Fontaine informs us at The Lead:
D030 refers to the Blockade of the Gaza Strip - we believe the bishop intended to refer to B020.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)