tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post695507676635065426..comments2024-03-23T18:50:32.902-04:00Comments on Telling Secrets: The Sturm und Drang of the Consent ProcesssElizabeth Kaetonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/06787552280232329081noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-64097571613225721642009-12-08T22:06:58.573-05:002009-12-08T22:06:58.573-05:00I think the effect of any proposed consecration on...I think the effect of any proposed consecration on the Anglican Communion is a legitimate concern, but if I were on a standing committee, it would be just one factor, and not necessarily the determining one.Paul Powershttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04833212693999583069noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-4477166797254622102009-12-08T18:00:30.180-05:002009-12-08T18:00:30.180-05:00I'm not on the Standing Committee and if I wer...I'm not on the Standing Committee and if I were I would not be on the fence. I would give consent because she is qualified. Period.motherameliahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11381575553733390018noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-54694698071017973982009-12-08T14:13:23.965-05:002009-12-08T14:13:23.965-05:00Pay back is Hell.
I am in no mood to play nice. T...Pay back is Hell.<br /><br />I am in no mood to play nice. This is Donatism. The Covenant is condoning Donatism.<br /><br />On a fundamental level, on it's own merits, their argument is wrong. This "restraint" argument is wrong, again as a matter of unvarnished orthodoxy. Tha ACC communique is a testement to casuistry and sophestry in it's attempts to not sound Donatistic. Harmon+ and the rest are arguing from a weak position. If they were more likely to turn to a hyper moralistic bigot like Pelagius it might make more sence. But they lay claim to Agustin of Hippo, the theologian who defined the doctrine of grace and expanded it to denounce the loathsome theology of Donatus and the rest.<br /><br />The "inclusiveness" argument is the other half of this equation, or at least a continuation of the expansive ideas of Grace, but it doesn't directly push back, and that is why they continue to play word games claim some specious doctrinal high ground.<br /><br />I say we call them out for what they are.Frair Johnhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03855036304956508405noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-55419287548755989672009-12-08T13:24:32.331-05:002009-12-08T13:24:32.331-05:00Lauren, that's exactly the point I made in my ...Lauren, that's exactly the point I made in my blog last night. If they have integrity, they won't vote either way ... which will have the same effect as a "no" vote.Lisa Foxhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00881671380217888810noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-15241780760604712652009-12-08T10:51:10.002-05:002009-12-08T10:51:10.002-05:00New Doctrine of Selective Inclusivity. Are you kid...New Doctrine of Selective Inclusivity. Are you kidding me? I know you're not. Maybe I'm glad I missed that.Jane Priesthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03538010409948644265noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29373297.post-71775052071220028562009-12-08T10:09:49.155-05:002009-12-08T10:09:49.155-05:00Good questions, Elizabeth. Now I have one in retur...Good questions, Elizabeth. Now I have one in return: How can South Carolina even participate in this decision? Didn't the leadership there convince the people there to withdraw from the business of the national church? And doesn't that mean that they can neither consent nor withhold consent, because they aren't participating in the life of the church? At least, that's how I'm reading their decision. Since they don't want to be part of us, they can't be part of us for this.Laurenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00460287468878342508noreply@blogger.com