Lambeth Diary: 'Pastoral Forum' proposed

A new Pastoral Forum is to be set up to bring rebel provinces into line in the Anglican Communion. The bishops at Lambeth are presently discussing the third 'observations' document of the Windsor Continuation Group that sets out why the forum is needed. It says this is necessary because repeated requests for moratoria on gay consecrations, same-sex blessings and cross-border interventions have not been heeded. I've been given an advance copy of the document. It says: 'The failure to respond presents us with a situation where if the three moratoria are not observed, the Communion is likely to fracture.' The document says the moratoria are to be understood as 'retrospective'. The strong implication of this is that Gene Robinson must resign. How likely is that? A commentator at StandFirm, where Sarah Hey is busily transcribing the entire document, describes it as 'purple-shirted flatulence'.

The document, explained by Bishop Clive Handford this afternoon, pictured here, proposes the forum as a 'key mechanism to achieve reconciliation'.

The plan was drawn up by the WCG bishops at the conference, who say in the document: 'We believe that the Pastoral Forum should be empowered to act in the Anglican Communion in a rapid manner to emerging threats to its life."

It warns that a 'proliferation' of ad hoc episcopal ministries such as those put in place by conservatives cannot be maintained. It calls for all existing ministries already set up to be placed "in trust" in order to be reconciled back into their original provinces.

One of the most significant passages is one of the first: 'There have been differerent interpretations of the sense in which 'moratorium' was used in the Windsor Reprot. Our understanding is that moratorium refers to both future actions and is also retrospective: that it requires the cessation of activity. This necessarily applies to practices that have already been authorised as well as proposed for authorisation in the future.'

Handford explained that this did not mean Bishop Robinson would be asked to step down. He accepted that Bishop Gene had been legally elected under US canons. But he said there could be no more.

We have also had this afternoon the first draft of the 'reflections' document to be published in its final form next Sunday. Based on the reports from the indaba groups, it will be revised as further responses come in from the indaba groups but it is revealing in that it represents the 'liberal' side of the communion while the Windsor Continuation Group document represents more closely the conservative side. On the Windsor group there were no bishops who approve same-sex blessings or gay ordinations of priests or bishops. According to the 'reflections', the over-arching issues in the dispute are 'the authority and interpretation of the Bible.' The groups reported: 'We find biblical scholarship a helpful tool to unpack the scriptures, but cannot avoid a divergence in interpretation, which leads to confusion.'

The indaba groups also reported: 'There is a strong desire to stay in communion with one another. Some of our bishops come from countries or situations where there is strong persecution; here the Communion offers invaluable support and solidarity.' The groups reported a 'lack of confidence' in the instruments of communion as the means of achieving this, in particular the role of the Primates' Meeting.

There was one interesting line, that the Communion should 'support those who are isolated in their dioceses by initiatives such as that by Gafcon.' But Bishop Handford said in the press conference that the indaba group that had reported this was not happy with how its view was reflected in the 'reflections' so this was to be revised.

(pics by George Conger)

Comments

[George Parr]

David Cohen: The belief that Christians are liberated from the observance of moral laws, by God's grace, was first attributed to St. Paul, who declared that his opponents "slanderously" had charged him with saying, "And why not do evil that good may come?" (Rom. 3:8).

Some early Gnostics proposed a type of antinomianism in sexual matters, holding that accountability rests with the spirit. However, during the Reformation, some followers of Martin Luther took his concept of justification by faith alone to mean that the law had no bearing on the life of a Christian. It was in this sense that I associated it. Whilst the concept was early, 'antinomianism' as a term was not used until Luther, as far as I am aware.

[Kate]

Malcolm is correct. What a pernicious 'fool' you are 'Saint'; oblivious to others, offensive, and unhealthily obsessed with a personal fantasy of homosexuality.

Has anybody told the Aborigines that Australia can 'feed the world' and has space to accommodate all the products of the African male's heterosexual decadence?

It is a pity then, that Australian immigration laws are seen as among the most discriminatory in the world - including internment camps and detention centres.

Clearly, Australia has no need to take cognisance of world recession; or African famine, financial speculators, commodity dealers, and corporations stock-piling corn, soy bean, wheat, seed and fertilizer.

In keeping with a personally constructed and reductive absolutism, your observations on Africa and the world in general are risible.

The 'duty' of a free society is, in the words of Solzhenitsyn "not to participate in lies". While so-called 'reformist' Anglicans and African bishops 'fiddle' with exegesis and male genitals, ordinary human beings in the developing world die.

Having children is about accepting responsibility; responsibility for the consequences of one's personal decisions and actions.

How dare you presume, to liken my family to the careless, casual and life-denying demographic explosion in Africa. One can only compare 'like with like'.

Despite a biological predisposition to twin births, we ADOPTED four more. We had enough space, love, and income, to support and educate them.

What we did NOT do, is breed promiscuously and demand the world feed and care for our children.

So Saint, I am the proud mother of six sons and three daughters. The latter would be of no interest to you except perhaps, their bra size.

The boys on the other hand - two medics, one forensic psychologist, an academic (philosophy), a lawyer and a civil engineer.

Given your assiduous research, you will have no problem identifying the homosexual!

'Private reasons great or small
are seen in the eyes of those that call,
"make all that should be killed to crawl";
While others say don't hate nothing at all
Except hatred.' (Bob Dylan)

I'll go with those lines.

[David Cohen]

George, antinomianism is a rather older notion than the German renaissance, although it has some interesting parallels in the ideology of New Labour in recent times.

It is quite clear that the entryists who have captured the institution formerly known as the Episcopal Church have bought into it quite enthusiastically, along with their acolytes in Canada and increasingly the UK.

It is still utterly wrong as it was when first challenged in apostolic times, and extremely destructive when permitted to flourish.

Thankfully the leaders of the world's major churches have stated on the record at the Lambeth Conference that the consensus of the great majority of the world's Christians is unchanged concerning homosexual practice. It is also the view of the great majority of the world's Anglicans.

Anglicanism (as represented by the unelected bodies controlling it) is still at the crossroads, with no help provided by the Lambeth Conference. It must now choose between the advice given it by Orthodox and Catholic alike, and the abyss which opens up for those who abandon the faith and order of the church of the ages. If it needs any test studies it need only consider the precipitate decline of Anglicanism in Wales and Scotland under the leadership of latter-day antinomians.

[saint]

Well for all it's faults, mistakes and despite 800,000 Episcopalians who rock up to a TEC church on any given Sunday, I personally thank God for the Americans. America has been an overwhelming force for good in the world.

[Christopher]

Ruth, I am aghast at the hateful rant of that person signing her or himself Saint who talks about "God's eyes". What twaddle....and what a deliberately insulting and objectionable way of writing to a vicar who is supporting parents who may be dealing with reality that their child is gay? Putting something about anal douches in the mouth of the Presiding Bishop is amusing, is it? It is contemptuous certainly, but it is also contemptible. This person seems to think he is entitled to be considered a moral person, a Christian even, yet he scathingly uses invective and hate-filled language that indicates quite the contrary. It seems such a person has venom enough for more than gay and lesbian people, that's clear, but also for parents and others who love and support their children through thick and thin, in the face of such self-righteous bigotry. If this person thinks he speaks as a saint or a Christian he is sorely deluded. He is but another of those people drumming up hatred under the cloak of religion against the very people who may know and love a gay son or daughter - the sort Akinola wants to criminalise. Such love the likes of Saint wouldn't begin to understand; does he even know what love is? It doesn't know the difference between gay and straight.

[Malcolm+]

I've just had a revelation.

All this time, I thought "saint" was being dishonest.

Now I see that every one of his posts immediately decends to either reductio ad absurdum or argumentum ad hominem.

Thus, if Katherine Jefferts Schori does not accept "saint's" position that gays and lesbians should be silenced, therefore she believes that three-year-olds should be taught how to have anal sex.

Turns out "saint" isn't dishonest, but merely foolish.

[George Parr]

"In love and charity, van Windsor, the record of the USA in extending its geographical and cultural empire by military or economic expansion has not resulted in a nation universally loved in the world, nor even respected."

Absolutely right David Cohen: then you go and spoil it all by relating your perceived opponent's concept of human sexuality to some German Renaissance notion, suggesting that he is advancing the view of a faction which is not obliged to conform to (of all things) Christian moral law...

Is there nothing about you that promotes tolerance and addresses the bigger picture? No wonder stentorian moralisers in the Anglican church are all but washed up. They have put unachievable idealism before the needs of fellow human beings.

[Merseymike]

Kate: well said. On this issue we are entirely in agreement.

Saint: well, its up to Malcolm whether he chooses to prepare his gay son for the sort of relationship he is going to have. It would be utterly pointless to prepare him for a heterosexual one!
But, then, at least Malcolm's son would have lines of communication kept open. I would imagine yours might well have requested to be taken into care or fostered with supportive foster carers willing to accept him, which you would clearly be unable to do.

[saint]

Priceless comment Kate -

I'm especially impressed with this bit "the population of Africa has doubled in just twenty years!" (with the exclamation mark! Is that a gasp or a cry of horror?)

And this bit: "a demographic time-bomb which threatens world stability." Coming from a woman - a supposed Christian - also blessed to have had nine children no less.

Are you and your children a threat to world stability? Or are you a safe bet because God granted that you be born in Ireland or something? What are you saying with such comments? That hey, you can get to have nine children but don't anyone else dare have any in case they upset your comfortable life? What next, forced abortions a la China?

I think I'll email your comment to one of Australia's most popular bloggers who was wondering where the 1970s overpopulation doomsayers were hiding and when they were going to emerge again (obviously one is hiding in Ireland).

In the meantime, consider these unfortunate facts: the entire population of the world can comfortably fit in Queensland, and Queensland isn't our largest state.
There is more than enough food and also resources to support our current population and its present growth rates. There is no over-population crisis. Never has been.

[George Parr]

And so, your answer in 'dealing with' the spectrum of human sexuality is what, exactly, Saint?

It CANNOT BE to enshrine human beings within a religious-based system of guilt and fear, in which, sin and repentance are utilised or constantly re-gurgitated as PRINCIPLES surely? That would make absolutely no sense in a pluralist society...

Are ALL gradations or variations of 'normal' sexuality 'inherently sexist'? Where do YOU appear on the scale Saint - red-blooded, gusset-ripping heterosexual - 10 on the scale of primeval normality? Is it from this exalted position you speak? Or do you acknowledge that veering exists; a lessening of red corpuscular male dominance within the scheme of things; a whitest of white to a blackest of black, with bisexual grey a median. What are your innermost thoughts? What might you be hiding? Do you worry about HOW you present sexually, in an unlikely world peopled by absolutes?

Do rhetorically salacious 'glorious details' only apply to your own definition of forms of sexuality - those which differ from your own cultural 'norm'?

Your apparent reliance on polarised controversial argument is likely to result in sad disappointemnet isn't it - when faced with social reality?

The stubborn intolerance within the Anglican Church has obliterated ways of seeing over homosexuality, and in the doing of it has awarded more publicity to the post-colonial bungling fools that claim to drive Africa morally than they ever deserve. WHAT is their problem? They have received world-aid on a grand scale. Where is the evidence that suggests that they haved moved in any direction whatsoever to practice what they preach in an urgently-needed maelstrom of active reparation to their broken communities?

Rhetorical analogies relying on extremist themes of cannibalised fertility and a denigration of farmyard ethics is another massive and biased obfuscation of a problem the Anglican Church hasn't a hope of solving; neither, as a paradigm of moral virtue has Akinola.

[David Cohen]

In love and charity, van Windsor, the record of the USA in extending its geographical and cultural empire by military or economic expansion has not resulted in a nation universally loved in the world, nor even respected.

How many Koreas, Vietnams or Iraqs does it take for the USA to get the message?

TEC appears to share the same superiority complex, with its own little empire of satellite churches, and a determination to export its antinomian (some might say farmyard) view of sexuality throughout the Anglican Communion.

American colonialism is resented not only in Africa but in England. One can only hope that the failure of the TEC (sorry, Lambeth) Conference might soon result in the removal of its pernicious influence from the Communion at large.

[saint]

Malcolm, in case English isn't your first language, you are on the internet, no excuse for not even checking a dictionary:

like·ly (līk'lē) pronunciation
adj., -li·er, -li·est.

1. Possessing or displaying the qualities or characteristics that make something probable: They are likely to become angry with him.
2. Within the realm of credibility; plausible: not a very likely excuse.
3. Apparently appropriate or suitable: There were several likely candidates for the job.
4. Apt to achieve success or yield a desired outcome; promising: a likely topic for investigation.
5. Attractive; pleasant: found a likely spot under a shady tree for the picnic.

In any case, what you and others like you avoid, is taking your own views to their natural conclusions. Every GLBT relationship is different, but what exactly do you think goes on in those "committed" relationships?

If you want to equate two ontologically different relationships - that of a man-woman marriage and say a gay or lesbian relationship, not to mention call them morally equivalent, or even make the case that such relationships are morally right and right-ordered in God's eyes (not that anyone has ever been able to make that case), then what do you think you should be teaching your children?

If your teenage son tells you he's gay and you think it is perfectly acceptable, normal, right-ordered in God's eyes, wouldn't you be preparing him for a gay relationship in all it's glorious details. How will you do that? Hey what do you do if he thinks he's bi? Gender queer? Are you going to teach him serial monogamy? Bathroom fidelity? Are you going to tell him that God created him gay and if in future he finds himself wanting to marry a woman he should get therapy and absolution? What?

Will you tell him, well hey, if you shack up with a man, then you can't have kids but if you ever want any, sure, it's perfectly acceptable to cannibalise someone else - turn women into egg factories and wombs for hire - so you and boyfriend can self actualize.

Hey, no probs if you go designer kid, and shop around for sperm and egg to order; too bad how many lives you create and destroy in the process...and how much you stuff around with your kid's identity. It's not like we don't have a generation of IVF kids who have grown up now to know the impacts of IVF, what's the difference if one woman provides the egg, another man the sperm, another woman incubates, and you and boyfriend pretend to be dad and dad or mum and dad or hec knows.

Have you EVER thought through the implications of what you preach Malcolm? Or do you just mouth empty platitudes for the sake of it? Do you actually understand even, how gay and lesbian relationships are inherently sexist? How they canabalize and commodify people, especially children? Do you even know what your activist friends want to shove down our children's throats in schools? Down here we now have state schools pushing the GLBT agenda in year 6; activists vying for our kids under the guise of "anti-bullying" programs etc. etc. GLBT uni students preying on high school kids.

What exactly do you think you are "affirming" Malcolm? A cup of tea and some companionship?

[Kate]

Saint, you are obsessed with stark oppositions.

Who will 'teach' self-discipline to individuals steeped in a culture of male supremacy and sexual aggression? NOT, if you are an example, that part of the Australian communion currently worshipping Akinola!

Professed devotion to authentic biblical 'authority', has no credibility when articulated in terms of women as sexual objects, and gay men as 'Untermensch'.

For those, less driven by fundamentalist religiosity and more by humane concern, Africa presents a 'moral' and intellectual quandary.

In the face of famine, genocide, HIV/Aids, high criminal homicide, huge infant mortality rates, emigration, and a life expectancy of less than 50, the population of Africa has doubled in just twenty years! How can that be?

Simple: a culture of multiple wives (not just for Muslims); rampant and casual promiscuity, and violent rape. "In the middle of starvation and death, men spent their time drinking the local hooch ... [they] would casually repair to the shanty brothels in order to relieve themselves.." (Kevin Myers - Belfast Telegraph 25.7.08).

For those who would question 'cultural' facticity, post-colonial Asian societies are disciplined, economic successes. Africa, despite billions in Aid, is a failed enterprise and a demographic time-bomb which threatens world stability.

Why are African leaders, religious and political, more concerned with a post-colonial ideology of victim-hood and reparation than utilising the billions they have received to build functioning infrastructures?

Where is the evidence that African bishops are actively working to counteract violence and moral turpitude in their own society? Why are American conservatives enabling corruption?

Simple logic and historical evidence would suggest that, the 'religious' in Africa are 'approved' by their governments otherwise they would be efficiently eliminated. Compare and contrast - the language of the 'religious' and the politicians - posturing and rhetoric are identical.

The anthropology of the 'big man' is a useful tool in assessing African political culture.

Further, TEC or Anglicanism per se, has NO responsibility for the burning of Christian homes in Nigeria. This vacuous libel, contrived by an intellectually challenged group devoid of 'honest' argument to support persecution, is just that.

It requires we accept Nigerian Muslims be, not only proficient in the English language, but, able to chart the divisions fomented by Global South.

It is risible too, that predatory and uncouth behaviour by Davis Mac-Iyalla, has been pounced on as validation of 'righteous' homophobia.

The man is a PRODUCT OF HIS CULTURE. All his behaviours - corruption, sexual incontinence, ingratitude - are despicable; but, identical to reported cultural attitudes of male heterosexuals across Africa.

For all these reasons, an African version of Anglicanism, as exemplified by the 'holiness' and exegesis of Akinola et al, is anathema to western culture of which the Church of England is one foundation stone.

African 'disorder' thrives on the absurd 'guilt' visited by a small group of academics, upon succeeding generations of western citizens.
This, ignoring 50 years of independence, demands that 60 years of colonisation behoves infinite reparations and amends - for all eternity and, preferably, in cash or wealthy Anglican dioceses.

[Malcolm+]

"Schori teaching a sex ed class on 'Preparing for anal sex: enema or no?"

Is there no limit to how dishonest you are prepared to be, Saint? Is your hatred so overwhelming that you can't help but [snip]?

You have NOTHING to suggest there is even the remotest validity to this scandalous charghe.

You are truly a [snip] man.

If you really believed in God, you would repsnt of such [snip].

[Kate]

"Psychobabble, Kate"

Actually NO Mr Cohen: Shakespeare and the NT. Thanks for confirming all I have gleaned from your posts... clearly a 'learned' man!

[saint]

The sexual incontinence of African men is commonly recorded (in anger) by aid workers. African male culpability (including that of the next S. African president) is glossed over by Christian conservatives, black and white, in favour of a homosexual witch hunt. WHY?

Well, Kate, that's because as Anis pointed out, it's all the liberals who keep shoving the gay activist agenda in people's faces and then complaining that the conservatives keep talking about it. Hec, how many gay lobby groups were at Lambeth? Who organised them?

Do you think a Nigerian Christian who's just had their family burnt to death because of a Mohammed cartoon really cares about VGR's hyperventilating?

Anyway, given you seem to be so well informed, how's about helping me out here.

Which Christians in the Anglican communion are more likely to teach
Christian sexual "continence" as you put it? The Ugandan Anglicans? Or the American TEC?

Who is more likely to teach Christian marriage as a God ordained life-long relationship between a man and a woman for union, communion, procreation and protection. Bishop Akinola or Changing Attitude Nigeria?

Who is more likely to teach one night stands are OK? Bishop Akinola or Changing Attitude Nigeria?

Who is more likely to teach no divorce, or no remarriage after divorce? Akinola or VGR?

[snip]

Bonus trick question: Which African Anglican Bishop is dicator, president, lawmaker, judge and jailer for their country?

[David Cohen]

Psychobabble, Kate. It seems to be the current coinage among liberal Anglicans.

[Kate]

Mr Cohen:

Tyranny and cunning are to be dealt with after their own fashion: otherwise, they will triumph. Those who have held me to my Anglican Faith have done so by example, by living the commandments.

Jesus said: "Thy shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, with all thy soul, and with all thy mind." and "Thy shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."

It is clear from your postings you 'love' ONLY 'thyself'. Such people can never be at ease; can never allow dissent or spontaneity; can never give credence to others; such people are very dangerous.

[Lapinbizarre]

Whatever you say, Mr. Cohen. As John Wesley replied when Beau Nash, blocking his way, proclaimed, "Give way, Mr Wesley. I never give way to fools" .............

[David Cohen]

lapinbizarre, what kind of point is it to suggest that we should for ever be suitably grateful for American help 1942-45?

By that time the UK had weathered the storm of attempted invasion. The war was ended, not by Americans coming to our rescue, but by Allies working together in a common interest.

[David Cohen]

Kate, you give a very good impression of the said Ian Paisley in the way you shout and rant here.

Do spare us your trawlings from Google. If you have something of your own to say, by all means argue the point.

[Kate]

What a nasty, smug (albeit uninformed) little man you are intent on proving yourself David Cohen. Bitter sniping at the American allies will not endear you to the American religious Right.

Nor is violence "endemic in Ulster". Another 'own goal'. Anglicans there are indeed perceived as the Via Media and have an honourable record of peace and reconciliation.

The responsibility for 30 years of violence in Ulster lies squarely on the shoulders of that bigoted, biblical absolutist, Ian Paisley.

He it was that rabble-roused, terrifying his followers with doom-laden prophesies of Rome Rule. He it was that incited hysteria and violence against perfectly valid calls for civil rights.

His rhetoric was responsible for violent reprisals - e.g. the burning of Bombay Street. That event led to the re-formation of the IRA in its Provisional form. The 'old' IRA had transformed into a political party - Republican Clubs - in the early 1960s.

What century do you live in David? What does "not evidence but pastiche plucked from Google" mean? Evidence is evidence if it be from authentic sources e.g. The National Catholic Archive. No?

Snide, cryptic comment on the other hand, is nothing more than personal opinion. You offer only personal opinion - further evidence I suppose of a self-deluding 'moral' superiority.

[Lapinbizarre]

I am English, Mr Cohen, and I know perfectly well when the war started. I also know when it ended and know that without US financial and military involvement, even in an improbable best-case scenario, millions more innocent people would have perished. Not really a topic for scoring points, is it?

[Fr Mark]

David Cohen: do you just hate everyone, or is it only other Christians?

[Fr. Van Windsor]

"Indeed lapinbizarre there was a war here. It started in 1939.
The USA got involved when it was apparent that it too was under threat - a little late in the proceedings.
And after the war it employed the man responsible for the destruction of large parts of London with V1 and V2 missiles - as an honoured rocket scientist.
Posted by: David Cohen"

In love and charity...What a jerk.

[David Cohen]

Indeed lapinbizarre there was a war here. It started in 1939.

The USA got involved when it was apparent that it too was under threat - a little late in the proceedings.

And after the war it employed the man responsible for the destruction of large parts of London with V1 and V2 missiles - as an honoured rocket scientist.

[David Cohen]

As I was saying, Kate. It's always violent diatribes - not evidence but pastiche plucked from Google. Do you have prizes for shouting loudly?

There have always been sinners in the Church (that's who we are, remember?) including, unfortunately, ministers of religion. Some of the worst offenders supported (and some no doubt still support) the violence endemic in Ulster.

No Anglican Church approves of rape, marital or otherwise. Why bring up the question, except to distract attention from the very real issue confronting the Anglican Communion?

Mrs Roskam comes from a country which invaded Iraq. Do we hear the assembled bishops condemning George Bush?

We don't, because the issue which is controversial is the drift of liberal Anglicanism into syncretism - modelling itself on the prevailing godless culture, and abusing scripture and doctrine to justify it.

[Robert Ian Williams]

THE MISSING BISHOPS?

Meanwhile back at GAFCON..why still no list of signatories. Is it because it will reveal anearly a third are no actually Anglivcan communion and your figure of 230 boycotters is exaggerated.
A Lambeth aside .........GAFCON numbers of bishops

Church of Nigeria ...104
Church of Rwanda......9
Church of Kenya.......29
Southern Cone............7
Church of Uganda.....30
Australia ....................8
Church of England......4
TEC.............................3 ( inc of Bishop Schofield)
Misc...........................10* west africa, se Asia, North india etc
Total.........................204
( not inclusive of American bishops under African provinces)

*Were all the Tanzanian bishops there ?

Leaving 81 as not Anglican communion bishops. Of which 5 were CESA and 7 were Reformed Episcopal? free Church of England.

The REC has gone in a high church direction,since the influx of TEC refugees and many evangelicals have left. In the Free Church of England several parishes are in dispute over continued liks with REC.

Of the Anglican communion bishops 71 have ordained women as priests

CESA..the Church of England in South Africa has approved lay presidency..imagine the row if they had been at Lambeth.

Can any one correct or add to this analysis

[Malcolm+]

Perhaps, David, you might try telling the truth for a change.

Bishop Rocksam made the perfectly legitimate point that, in a group of approaching 700 men, it was entirely probable that there were some who had committed domestic violence.

And, despite your histrionics, she did not single out Africans.

One could take you pretendy "conservatives" more seriously if you weren't constantly fabricating.

[Lapinbizarre]

PS There is a reason, Mr. Cohen, why the Americans were "overpaid, oversexed and over here". There was, to refresh your memory, a fairly serious situation in Europe in the early to mid 1940's. I believe, in fact, that not a few folk were grateful at the time that the Yanks were "over here".

[Kate]

"Yet more rabid diatribe from Kate!"

Indeed David Cohen; as opposed to your own measured, and courteous erudition? Perchance to dream! As a fully paid-up member of the 'club' of bigoted misogynists, you are, of course, infallible.

Clearly I do not 'know my place' in the great tapestry of 'conservative' patriarchy eh? I am, after all, a woman, on a par, in your lexicon, with that other inferior species - homosexuals.

Re. " demonisation .... Jack Spong's slur about Africans being bribed with chicken dinners."

Wonderful how so many 'conservatives' are quite suddenly 'oh-so' pc, vanguard anti-racism warriors! In contrast to the unverifiable assertions regarding the 'holiness' of Akinola, my statements are ALWAYS (in the age of Google) easily verified.

It is neither racist nor bigoted, but mere common sense, to highlight ingrained and ongoing discrepancies between African and Western cultural values. It is not only 'unwise' but insulting - to both cultures to deny the existence of such.

The sexual incontinence of African men is commonly recorded (in anger) by aid workers. African male culpability (including that of the next S. African president) is glossed over by Christian conservatives, black and white, in favour of a homosexual witch hunt. WHY?

Medical Missionary of Mary Sr. Maura O’Donohue, a physician wrote: 'a vicar general in one African diocese [said] that “celibacy in the African context means a priest does not get married but does not mean he does not have children.”

African priests who would have used village prostitutes are now requesting sexual services from the religious. Young nuns are regarded as preferable to prostitutes because they do not pose the risk of Aids infection.
http://www.natcath.com/NCR_Online/archives
/031601/031601a.htm

[In Nigeria] Child Sexual Abuse, a silent epidemic ... is one of the missing gaps to effective HIV/AIDS prevention, treatment, care and support".
(http://gateway.nlm.nih.gov/MeetingAbstracts/
ma?f=102280518.html)

"Surveys ... reveal that 46 percent of Ugandan women, 60 percent of Tanzanian women, 42 percent of Kenyan women, and 40 percent of Zambian women report regular physical abuse. In a Nigerian survey, 81 percent of married women report being verbally and/or physically abused by their husbands."
(http://www.advocatesforyouth.org/
publications/factsheet/fssxabus.htm)

"The harsh reality is that if you ... suffered the terrible experience of being raped, your suffering is likely to be met with intimidation by the police, indifference from the state and the knowledge that the perpetrator is unlikely to ever face justice," said Amnesty's Africa Director Kolawole Olaniyan. (Amnesty urges Nigeria to curb sexual abuse).

What sort of Christian hypocrisy scapegoats homosexuals in the West whilst ignoring a culture of intrinsic sexual rapacity in African males?

[Lapinbizarre]

"Yet more rabid diatribe". Got a mirror. Mr Cohen?

[David Cohen]

Yet more rabid diatribe from Kate!

The demonisation is well known and comes from TEC. Last Lambeth Conference it was Jack Spong's slur about Africans being bribed with chicken dinners.

This time, Mrs Roskam ("Bishop" Roskam) claims that Africans bishops beat their wives:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/religion/2474383/Woman-bishop-claims-church-leaders-from-ethnic-minorities-beat-their-wives.html

What next? Some American bishop solemnly assuring us that cannibalism is still commonplace in the churches of the Global South?

"Overpaid, oversexed and over here" was the wartime lament. The Americans haven't changed, just the uniforms.

[Kate]

"Finally, an African bishop came along, washed the wounds of the poor parish and nursed it back to wonderful new life.

Now, the pointed hatted man told the poor parish to break off with the good African bishop and that he would send a brand new "Forum...". (Robroy)

And here we have the root of the poisonous carbuncle of demented delusion. The idealisation of Akinola v. the demonization (as wizard) of Rowan of Canterbury.

Across Africa - Nigeria, Zimbabwe, Ghana, Uganda, Kenya, and more - politicians conspire with religious leaders to scapegoat gays and incite violence. The cooperation of Anglican Churches with the local 'Big man' is ignored by western 'conservatives' - a shocking indictment of the literalist mentality.

Perhaps some reference to 'false idols' is relevant. What is clear from too many 'conservative' words on the page is a bullying and absolutist self-regard.

The pseudonym RobRoy (Ruadh/Roy) is appropriate:

Protestant and Jacobite; a rebel against William of Orange; cattle thief, seller of 'protection', he changed his politics to please his benefactor the Duke of Argyll; towards the end of his days, he converted to Catholicism!

[Lapinbizarre]

"There was an orthodox parish in America. Robbers named David and Katherine beat up the parish and through [sic] it in the ditch."

An indispensable key to understanding the hatred and delusion towards TEC currently manifesting itself, here and elsewhere, is Richard Hofstadter's great essay "The Paranoid Style in American Politics".

Hofstadter's subject "sees the fate of conspiracy in apocalyptic terms — he traffics in the birth and death of whole worlds, whole political orders, whole systems of human values. He is always manning the barricades of civilization... he does not see social conflict as something to be mediated and compromised, in the manner of the working politician. Since what is at stake is always a conflict between absolute good and absolute evil, what is necessary is not compromise but the will to fight things out to a finish. Since the enemy is thought of as being totally evil and totally unappeasable, he must be totally eliminated — if not from the world, at least from the theatre of operations to which the paranoid directs his attention. This demand for total triumph leads to the formulation of hopelessly unrealistic goals, and since these goals are not even remotely attainable, failure constantly heightens the ..... sense of frustration. Even partial success leaves him with the same feeling of powerlessness with which he began, and this in turn only strengthens his awareness of the vast and terrifying quality of the enemy he opposes."

Wikipedia article - a good introduction:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Paranoid_Style_in_American_Politics

Complete essay:

http://karws.gso.uri.edu/jfk/conspiracy_theory/the_paranoid_mentality/the_paranoid_style.html

[Malcolm+]

'Twould be nice, robroy, pendennis et al, if you had something to offer up rather than just slander after slander and fabrication after fabrication.

[Robert Ian Williams]

And still the consecrators of Bishop Robinson are at the lambeth table, undisciplined and ready to return hom as full members in good standing of the Anglican Communion...with every intention to continue the million dollar fight to maintain their assets, and their ecclesiastical independence.

[Father Ron Smith]

Robert Ian Williams is at it again! I have noticed his postings on other sites, which usually seek to denigrate the Anglican Church.

However, when one realises that he became, firstly, a Penteocostal in N.Z.; then an Anglican theolog at St. John's College Auckland, before rushing back home to mummy and becoming a Roman Catholic.

Just be aware of his agenda, dear readers!

[robroy]

Kevin Kallsen from Anglican TV in a panel discussion (a must see BTW, go to http://tinyurl.com/6d5ztj ) gave the following analogy (somewhat developed upon):

There was an orthodox parish in America. Robbers named David and Katherine beat up the parish and through it in the ditch. A pointed hatted, bushy eyebrow-ed man came along, saw the poor parish in the ditch, muttered something but did not want to criticize David and Katherine too much because he was £2 million in debt and they were very rich. So he hurried along.

Despite the urgency, he dragged his feet but eventually did send back a Panel of Reference who said the poor parish should have turned the other cheek and so was itself to blame. The PoR then scurried off.

Finally, an African bishop came along, washed the wounds of the poor parish and nursed it back to wonderful new life.

Now, the pointed hatted man told the poor parish to break off with the good African bishop and that he would send a brand new "Forum of Reference"! The parish's response?...Well, you can finish the story.

[Stephen Clark]

It begs the question about what 'rebel provinces' might mean. Or what being 'brought into line' might look like.
I often tell my congregation here in South Australia that my contribution to the wit of the 20th century (still working on the 21st) is that "Anglicans like to be told what to do, so they can go ahead and not do it".
Perhaps "many a true word....."

[Fr. Van Windsor]

Dear David Crawford:
My mother once was talking to a woman whose husband had cheated on her --- as a child I had big ears and could hear from a hundred paces. The woman was lamenting that she had ever married the scoundrel (though she herself had "dated" him while he was still married to his, then, second wife). Mom's sterile spoken, but I think truthful, response was, "Do you know what you get when you marry a man that cheats on his wife?" No response from her friend mom continued, "A man that cheats on his wife." It generally takes at leat two to do the deed. I doubt there are many who could throw the first stone.

[David Crawford]

The first time the husband cheated on his wife he said he was sorry and it would not happen again. The second time it happened he explained that they just had a different opinion of what a marriage should be but promised never to do it again. The third time it happened he told her that marriage was about diversity and a need to listen but promised never to do it again. Finally the well qualified marriage counselor decided that she should move into a seperate house until things could be worked out. What do you think the wife should do ?

[Kate]

"Plundering what, for ****'s sake?"

Money, property, autonomy, and, most unforgivable - 'plundering' and ravaging, the very foundations of Via Media; demanding it become something it has never been.

The 'immoderate' language and crude ill-manners of much 'conservative' discourse is revelatory. At the same time, we are invited to believe that these are 'true' inheritors and 'guardians' of the Anglican communion!

May God in His Mercy be with Canterbury. May He protect us all from uncouth and egotistical totalitarians.

[pendennis88]

Some questions for the WCG:

1. How is this different from the Panel of Reference, which was to be a "matter of urgency", and which the Archbishop of Canterbury declined to implement in an effective form?

2. How is this different from the Primates's Council called for by by the Primates, unanimously, at Dar es Salaam, which the Archbishop declined to implement?

3. If the Archbishop of Canterbury declined to implement those, what makes one think he will implement this?

4. If the Primates could not make the communion implement a Primates Council, how can the bishops gathered at Lambeth do so?

5. If TEC cannot agree to anything without the consent of their House of Bishops and their lay General Convention, and even then claims not to be able to bind themselves, how can they agree to this? And if TEC won't agree to it, why should border crossings to protect the orthodox stop?

6. As one of the problems is that TEC intends to continue its local option and officially unofficial SSBs anyway, regardless of what it agrees to, how does any moratorium on SSBs work?

7. TEC is suing the CANA churches and has deposed their clergy and bishops for abandonment of communion. If there is any serious thought of a trust for those parishes, how will those be undone?

8. How will the "escrow", "trust" or whatever it is, be undone or turned into the North American province if TEC violates the moratorium?

9. How does the group address the very real concern that the forum will not require TEC to make any changes, but would only be a trap for orthodox parishes and diocese to be taken over by the revisionists in TEC? Is it willing to put in any real protections for those orthodox parishes and diocese should people not do what they say they will do?

10. Well before any forum is implemented, there will be a parallel province created by the global south pusuant to the Jerusalem Declaration under global south primates. Why not work with GAFCON, perhaps add some of the orthodox TEC bishops to that council, make it into this escrow/trust, and turn it into a victory for the communion?

11. Isn't the solution what it always was - first implement real, not phony, protections for the orthodox, and then deal with SSB, consecration and other revisionist efforts?

[Fr. Van Windsor]

In my parish folks seem always to be against something that is new. "It'll never work," "That's not the way we do it," "Its been tried before," are some of the angry responses I hear, and I am by no means a change monger. It is just that way in the Delta regions of Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana. We are by nature a very traditional and conservative lot (frankly it gets too hot to have the energy to run around changing too much stuff--which may be the issue with the Africans as well). However, once something new is brought in, and it proves successful (key point), well then, "we've always done it that way." My point is that change should come slowly in the Church, especially where systems of stricture are being put into place. Once in place, they will be there for a long time because we will have "always done it that way." The Archbishop and others are right to have gone slowly to enact such a move. 5 years ago might have been too soon, God's timing, not our second guessing is what is important.

[Geoffrey Smith]

One of the posters on this blog has asserted that the time is now due for order to be restored in the Anglican Communion. Presumably, the WCG and its Pastoral Forum is an attempt to address this shortcoming. Which raises the question: who will be given the authority to define what constitutes 'order', and, equally important, what precisely is 'disorder'? Having managed somehow or other to arrive at a general agreement, who will be given the authority to enforce the majority ruling? Because without such an authority, the Pastoral Forum is just another talking shop.

[Lapinbizarre]

Come off it R I Williams. The one time we have Our Lord on record as cracking a funny ("Tu es petrus") and look at the consequences.

[Keith]

Moratoria? Whats the point? So you can have the same crisis again later?

D'oh!!!

[Stephen Marsden]

'Who . . . will stop the plundering bishops?'

Plundering? Plundering what, for ****'s sake?

[Robert Ian Williams]

This is why the Church of England should never broken away from the authority of the successor of Peter...who was given pastoral authority over the whole flock of Christ and the power to confirm his brethren in an unfailing faith.

Can I ask will those fractured groups opposed to women bishops be allowed to appeal to the Forumn!

If that is so, the women need to send the committtee packing, not to the forumn but to the arena!