DRIVEN BY FEAR

Malcolm+ posted at the No Anglican Covenant blog on the information coming from The Anglican Communion Office, Lambeth Palace, and Church House in Westminster:

So much of what has been driving the machinations of international Anglicanism over the past 15 years or so has been rooted in fear—fear of women, fear of LGBTQTS, fear of modernity, fear of post-modernity, fear of the loss of privilege, fear of the loss of power and influence.
....

Sadly, that is the point we’ve now reached in international Anglicanism, and in the deliberations on the proposed Anglican Covenant. Full and fair debate is no longer on the table—at least at the Anglican Communion Office, Lambeth Palace, or Church House in Westminster.

Read the rest at the NAC site.

Malcolm+ blogs at Simple Massing Priest.

SUBTLETY AWARD FOR AN AD

And the winner is.......DODGE!

ABOUT WHAT I EXPECTED

My Political Views
I am a left moderate social libertarian
Left: 6.02, Libertarian: 2.32

Political Spectrum Quiz

H/T to Tobias, who is a true free spirit.

UPDATE: I left out some of my results.

My Culture War Stance
Score: -6.91

Political Spectrum Quiz


My Foreign Policy Views
Score: -8.63

Political Spectrum Quiz

PLEASE PRAY FOR IRMA

From my daughter Alison:

[Her friend] Frankie's mom is having surgery Wednesday morning, and his family is very concerned she might not make it thru. She has diverticulitis I think. Can u put her in the prayer call list?

Almighty God our heavenly Father, graciously comfort your servant Irma in her suffering, and bless the means made use of for her cure. Fill her heart with confidence that, though at times she may be afraid, she yet may put her trust in you; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen.

Pray for all who love Irma as they watch and wait, that God may give them comfort, consolation, and the peace that passes understanding to keep their minds and hearts in Christ Jesus.

Alison appreciates your prayers for her after her fall.

UNHAPPY RC PRIESTS TOLD TO STUFF IT

From the The West Australian:

Perth Archbishop Barry Hickey has dismissed a survey of Australian Catholic priests, which reveals many are deeply unhappy with the Church, suggesting they need to "get over it" and accept the Church as it is.

The survey of 542 priests from across Australia by NSW academics Chris McGillion and John O'Carroll found many priests felt bishops were inadequate managers and they held serious concerns for the Church's future.

The survey, plus in-depth interviews with 50 Australian priests, has been compiled into a book, Our Fathers, which claims the priesthood is a "world rich in commitment but also in complaint, disillusionment and dissent".

Our Fathers reveals a deep distrust of Australian priests towards the Vatican, with 65 per cent of those surveyed saying they do not believe Rome understands the challenges they face.

One WA priest said he had "no time" for the Catholic Church except as a means to an end.

Archbishop Hickey said he had not come across the attitudes reflected in the survey in his diocese, but he was aware many priests throughout Australia felt "unhappy and disaffected".

Archbishop Hickey is very likely not the first person to pop into the mind of an unhappy priest as a confidant, but, even so, if he didn't know about the attitudes, then he was quite seriously out of touch. He wasn't really though, becuase he knew that priests were "unhappy and disaffected". Did he ever wonder what made them unhappy? Of course, and he has the answer. The problem was their unrealistic expectations. The problem cannot ever be with the church, therefore it's the fault of the unhappy priests.

More than 70 per cent of priests surveyed thought clerical celibacy should be optional and several revealed they were in long-term relationships with women.

And nothing at all about the reality of priests who may be relationships with men.

Emphases mine.

Thanks to Ann V. for the link.

STILL SHOCKING

You women are not ministers of God. Your father is the devil. Your feminist filth will lead you all the way to hell. And sometimes that can be a short ride; to wit, we cannot assume the true God to be longsuffering forever toward women who preach that God is a weak, sexist, lecherous feminist like you both are. Repent, women; the only way you can be saved is if you confess your Jezebel sins and fall at the feet of the only Man who can save you: the historical God-Man, Jesus Christ.

The words above were left in the comments to a post at Dirty Sexy Ministry, the blog of two Episcopal women priests. The comment came to me because, unlike the man who left the comment, I thought the words referenced were lovely, and I said so at the blog. The post, which is titled "The F-Word", IS lovely. The F-word that is the topic of the post is not the word that instantly pops into your mind. I have to wonder if the person quoted above read even one word before he left his nasty comment. And can you tell instantly from the words that the commenter completely misses the message that God is love? I confess that it still shocks me when persons who claim the name Christian respond in such a way to fellow Christians, or to anyone, for that matter. Why, I can't say, because I've seen that sort of response often enough that I should be immune to shock.

Read the post, and see what you think.

I checked out the website of the person who left the comment, and I will not link, nor will I even give the man's nom de blog. You can find the information at Dirty Sexy Ministry.

A STUNNING SENIOR MOMENT

Sorry, but you must click on the image to read the message.

Thanks to Wade.

STORY OF THE DAY - PSYCHOLOGY

Of course I'm not happy, she said to me,
but I've got a degree in psychology so at
least I can explain why.

From StoryPeople.

NACC CALLS FOR FAIR PROCESS AND HONEST DEBATE

No Anglican Covenant Coalition
Anglicans for Comprehensive Unity
noanglicancovenant.org

NEWS RELEASE
MONDAY, FEBRUARY 28, 2011
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
NO ANGLICAN COVENANT COALITION CALLS FOR FAIR PROCESS AND HONEST DEBATE

LONDON —The No Anglican Covenant Coalition has criticized church officials for attempting to suppress honest discussion of the proposed Anglican Covenant.

"Instead of fostering a free and open discussion, church officials are trying to ensure that this radical document is endorsed without serious debate," according to Coalition Moderator, Dr Lesley Fellows. "Unfortunately, this is entirely consistent with what has been happening throughout the process."

The idea of an Anglican Covenant was first proposed officially in 2004 as a means of addressing divisions among the member churches of the Anglican Communion on matters ranging from human sexuality to the role of women. The current draft, which has been unilaterally designated as "final", has been referred to the Communion churches for adoption. The proposed Covenant establishes mechanisms that would have the effect of forcing member churches to conform to the demands and expectations of other churches or risk exclusion from the Communion. The draft must be either accepted without amendment or rejected entirely; no other options are allowed.

A series of decisions demonstrate a pattern of bias and manipulation designed to facilitate Covenant adoption:

November 2010 — When the Church of England debated the Anglican Covenant, official materials prepared for General Synod members made no reference to the concerns of critics or to the case against the Covenant. This was in marked contrast to what happened in 2007, when the House of Bishops agreed that an additional briefing document presenting opposing arguments should be circulated to all General Synod members in advance of the debate.

November 2010 — When Modern Church and Inclusive Church placed advertisements critical of the proposed Covenant in the church press, and when the No Anglican Covenant Coalition was launched, Covenant sceptics were criticized by senior church officials for going public and "campaigning" instead of remaining silent.

December 2010 — When the draft Covenant was formally referred to English dioceses, the referral document provided a random list of quotations from the last General Synod debate, with pro
‐ and anti‐Covenant remarks mixed up together, followed by a purely pro‐Covenant presentation.

January 2011 — A request by Covenant opponents to the Business Committee of General Synod to circulate material setting out the case against the Covenant was rejected.

February 2011 — The Anglican Communion Office issued an official study guide and list of questions and answers for international use that neither provide a balanced look at the issues nor fairly represent the views of those critical of the Covenant.
"In the history of General Synod, we know of no instance where such an important matter (designated as Article 8) has been referred to diocesan synods without the case for both sides being clearly set out," according to Jonathan Clatworthy, General Secretary of Modern Church and a member of the No Anglican Covenant Coalition. "Both sides were represented regarding the most recent plans for unity with the Methodists. That was the case at every stage of the debate over the ordination of women as priests, and now, as bishops. The material concerning the Covenant falls far short of the ideals of justice, of the Anglican tradition. Even in the House of Commons, all sides of an issue are allowed to be heard."

The No Anglican Covenant Coalition website, noanglicancovenant.org, provides a wealth of resources for those seeking to understand the proposed Anglican Covenant. Material specifically designed for use by Church of England dioceses is also available from the Modern Church Web site at modernchurch.org.uk/resources/mc/cofe.

"Diocesan synods in the Church of England deserve to hear all sides of the debate," said Dr Fellows. "We are not afraid of an open, fair, and honest debate. If the supporters of the Covenant had a stronger case, perhaps they wouldn’t be either."


Revd Dr Lesley Fellows (England) +44 184 4239 268

Revd Canon Hugh Magee (Scotland) +44 133 4470 446

Dr Lionel Deimel (USA) +1 412 512 9087

Revd Malcolm French (Canada) +1 306 550 2277

Revd Lawrence Kimberley (New Zealand) +64 3 981 7384

THE TEA PARTY (REPUBLICAN) AGENDA

From Frank Rich at the New York Times:

That’s not to say there is no fiscal mission in the right’s agenda, both nationally and locally — only that the mission has nothing to do with deficit reduction. The real goal is to reward the G.O.P.’s wealthiest patrons by crippling what remains of organized labor, by wrecking the government agencies charged with regulating and policing corporations, and, as always, by rewarding the wealthiest with more tax breaks. The bankrupt moral equation codified in the Bush era — that tax cuts tilted to the highest bracket were a higher priority even than paying for two wars — is now a given. The once-bedrock American values of shared sacrifice and equal economic opportunity have been overrun.

Please read the entire splendid opinion piece.

UPDATE: Another excellent opinion column which includes the stories of working people who are struggling and some who have hit rock bottom by Bob Herbert also in the New York Times. Read their stories. Herbert says:

It would be a mistake to think that this fight is solely about the right of public employees to collectively bargain. As important as that issue is, it’s just one skirmish in what’s shaping up as a long, bitter campaign to keep ordinary workers, whether union members or not, from being completely overwhelmed by the forces of unrestrained greed in this society.

The predators at the top, billionaires and millionaires, are pitting ordinary workers against one another. So we’re left with the bizarre situation of unionized workers with a pension being resented by nonunion workers without one. The swells are in the background, having a good laugh.

I asked Lynda Hiller if she felt generally optimistic or pessimistic. She was quiet for a moment, then said: “I don’t think things are going to get any better. I think we’re going to hit rock bottom. The big shots are in charge, and they just don’t give a darn about the little person.”

"...they just don't give a darn about the little person," understates the attitude of the predators. They are contemptuous of the little people.