tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post6585156208091751672..comments2024-03-23T18:50:32.902-04:00Comments on Telling Secrets: Who was at Lambeth?Elizabeth Kaetonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06787552280232329081noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-82130206990455873012008-08-05T21:34:00.000-04:002008-08-05T21:34:00.000-04:00Elizabeth, this post and your preceding post are e...Elizabeth, this post and your preceding post are extraordinary. You've given me hope that good will flow from Lambeth 2008. Thanks be to God.<BR/><BR/>Prayers for you and your family continue.June Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01723016934182800437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-25147163931709970512008-08-05T14:53:00.000-04:002008-08-05T14:53:00.000-04:00"The speculation of the Bishop Suffragan of NY abo..."The speculation of the Bishop Suffragan of NY about how many bishops at Lambeth are involved in domestic violence . . ."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Part of the problem with the whole media storm was that it assumed this is what she had done. By framing it this way, you unwittingly play into their distortion.<BR/><BR/>What Bishop Catherine DID do was comment on the likelihood that such bishops existed - which may seem a small distnction, but it is important.<BR/><BR/>By referring to likelihood, she held open the hypothetical possibility that the number was, in fact, zero. Lord knows, we all hope it would be zero.<BR/><BR/>She also used the number 700, which indicates she was speaking in a general way about all the adult males present, not merely the 650ish male bishops.<BR/><BR/>She did not say that there "ARE" bishops at Lambeth who beat their wives. I know you didn't mean to say she did, but that is precisely the way that most of the secular media and virtually all of the "conservative" commentators played it.<BR/><BR/>And it was based on the distorted questions of secular media and "conservative" spinners that people like John Setamu, reasonably enough, asked if Bishop Catherine had proof for charges she never made.<BR/><BR/>Riazatt Butt was better than most of the secular media in that she agreed it was fatuous to argue that there were no perpetrators of domestic violence present. However she did share in the other distortion, which was the claim that Bishop Catherin had specifically targetted Africans and other Global South bishops as the most likely abusers. She didn't do that either.Malcolm+https://www.blogger.com/profile/08469936715413110334noreply@blogger.com