homepage
  roll on christmas  
click here to find out more about ship of fools click here to sign up for the ship of fools newsletter click here to support ship of fools
community the mystery worshipper gadgets for god caption competition foolishness features ship stuff
discussion boards live chat cafe avatars frequently-asked questions the ten commandments gallery private boards register for the boards
 
Ship of Fools


Post new thread  Post a reply
My profile login | | Directory | Search | FAQs | Board home
   - Printer-friendly view Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
» Ship of Fools   » Ship's Locker   » Limbo   » Purgatory: Second openly gay bishop in ECUSA (very likely) (Page 17)

 - Email this page to a friend or enemy.  
Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  14  15  16  17  18  19 
 
Source: (consider it) Thread: Purgatory: Second openly gay bishop in ECUSA (very likely)
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208

 - Posted      Profile for Zach82     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Whereas you - being so much more humble that I am - would happily admit that your interpretation is wrong and that it didn't come from the Holy Spirit?
Not at all. Of course I believe I am right and you are wrong. I also believe that it is possible for us both to have the Holy Spirit. I just don't believe certainty is one of the fruits of that Spirit. You, on the other hand, are on very shaky ground if you admit the possibility of people having the Holy Spirit but not your interpretation of Scriptures. If people can have the Holy Spirit, and still be wrong in their interpretation, then surely you must admit the possibility that you have the incorrect interpretation.

Jumping back on your Bible soap box once again to defend your cause just won't work. Go to Dead Horses and see-- the liberals believe in he Bible just as much as you. Just because the Bible is clear doesn't mean understanding it is easy.

Zach

--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice

Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Whilst many suggest there are many more important issues for the church such as witnessing the gospel. It should be pointed out that with this issue its possibily no longer the gospel. The gospel, the good news of who Jesus Christ is who He is and what He has done includes forgiveness of sin through faith and repentance and eternal life. If the church cant agree what sins are to be forgiven, how can it be sure of the rest of the gospel.
Its another disaster for the church.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Jolly Jape
Shipmate
# 3296

 - Posted      Profile for Jolly Jape   Email Jolly Jape   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
Whilst many suggest there are many more important issues for the church such as witnessing the gospel. It should be pointed out that with this issue its possibily no longer the gospel. The gospel, the good news of who Jesus Christ is who He is and what He has done includes forgiveness of sin through faith and repentance and eternal life. If the church cant agree what sins are to be forgiven, how can it be sure of the rest of the gospel.
Its another disaster for the church.

Welcome onboard, Brightmorningstar. I'm sure that a host will be along presently to welcome you more formally, but I hope you enjoy a pleasant voyage.

To your more substantive points, of course there have been many things throughout the history of Christianity that have moved from being regarded as a sin to not being regarded as a sin, and vice versa, and the Gospel doesn't seem to have suffered as a result.

The Gospel is that we are forgiven all our sins, not just those that we can bring to mind, so I don't really think that your concerns hold up. Repentance is not crossing things off an eternal account ledger, but a change of disposition towards God.

--------------------
To those who have never seen the flow and ebb of God's grace in their lives, it means nothing. To those who have seen it, even fleetingly, even only once - it is life itself. (Adeodatus)

Posts: 3011 | From: A village of gardens | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It is the government in Uganda that has proposed this bill and the government who will enforce it. The problem with the position of the church in Uganda is the death penalty is the sort of punishment Jesus teaches not to condemn people by, so it shouldnt be supporting it.
Jesus came to save from sin, including the sin of same sex relations, which is the problem with the TEC position.
As to communion I would rather be in communion with a church that is in error supporting a government issue than with a church actually practiing and teaching error. Afterall at the end of the day this is about life eternal.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi Jolly Jape,
Thank you for your welcome and I look forward to good debate. You say there have been many things which throughout the course of history of Christianity which have been moved from being regarded as a sin to not being regarded as a sin, but whilst I would agree with you, you didn’t name any. I suggest the error of supporting slavery which isn’t countenanced in the NT would be similar to the error of supporting same sex relations which is condemned throughout the Bible. Indeed, one is a slave to whatever has mastered one, righteousness or sin ie Romans 6:18 a disposition towards God as you say.
As the gospel is forgiveness of all our sins, then to suggest one isn’t suggests it couldn’t be forgiveness for all sin, so I don’t see your point there. The sins forgiven must be the ones Jesus Christ has shed His blood for and not the ones we decide.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248

 - Posted      Profile for Grammatica   Email Grammatica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
The sins forgiven must be the ones Jesus Christ has shed His blood for and not the ones we decide.

[Tangent] I am curious as to where you stand on the "prosperity gospel," brightmorningstar? Do you believe that sin is the cause of poverty, and that riches are a proof of God's favor? [/tangent]
Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi Grammatica,
I stand by the word of God. If by the prosperity gospel you mean prosperity for personal gratification, no!, I see Jesus NT teaches by faith God provides, whe we seek His Kingdom, for needs to be met rather than desires. God will provide with what we need rather than what we want. Sin and lack of faith could be a cause of material poverty but not necessarily.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
It is the government in Uganda that has proposed this bill and the government who will enforce it. The problem with the position of the church in Uganda is the death penalty is the sort of punishment Jesus teaches not to condemn people by, so it shouldnt be supporting it.
Jesus came to save from sin, including the sin of same sex relations, which is the problem with the TEC position.
As to communion I would rather be in communion with a church that is in error supporting a government issue than with a church actually practiing and teaching error. Afterall at the end of the day this is about life eternal.

Yes, and surely it would be better to be a church supporting the Nazi regime or Augusto Pinochet than to be a church advocating the full inclusion of gay persons within its corporate life and communion. Your argument stinks! And lines you up behind every murderous regime of the past two millenia.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513

 - Posted      Profile for Alogon   Email Alogon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
You say there have been many things which throughout the course of history of Christianity which have been moved from being regarded as a sin to not being regarded as a sin, but whilst I would agree with you, you didn’t name any.

Usury? What did that word mean in the Old Testament? What did it mean in the New Testament? What did it mean in tradition all the way up to the Renaissance? And what, if anything, does it mean today? We've narrowly averted a worldwide depression because of ridiculous extremes of money-lending and I have yet to hear a peep out of the church about it.

The vociferousness with which it used to be condemned for centuries constitutes a remarkable parallel to the present issue, and the church's silence when bankers have done so much more damage than Lesbians have ever done is trenchantly ironic. But it does demonstrate how completely the church can do an about-face when she wants to.

--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.

Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I would like to comment on an earlier remark. The particular issues cannot be interpretation. There are passages which countenance man and woman only in faithful marriage or celibacy, and passages which condemn same sex relations. As there is no countenace of same sex relations it cant be interpretation or there would never be any disbelief as everything could be put down to interpretation.
Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Of course the pre-modern Church's hypocritical condemnation of an interest-bearing credit system was quite convenient since the Jews were banned from most occupations and all professions, and were relegated to lending at interest as one of the few profitable occupations in which they could engage. This was then used by the Church to the condemnation of the Jews and to the reinforcement of the whole European disease of anti-semitism. We know the historical results of this.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
I would like to comment on an earlier remark. The particular issues cannot be interpretation. There are passages which countenance man and woman only in faithful marriage or celibacy, and passages which condemn same sex relations. As there is no countenace of same sex relations it cant be interpretation or there would never be any disbelief as everything could be put down to interpretation.

There is something breath-taking about this assertion. You interpret some unspecified passages as being an unqualified condemnation of what you disapprove, and say that it is not a matter of interpretation. Other people have interpreted scripture differently. How is it not a matter of interpretation? It may be that your interpretation is correct, or it may be that a variety of interpretations are possible (or even that your interpretation is incorrect, however unlikely that may seem), but baldly asserting that your interpretation is the only possible one in the face of other interpretations is stunningly disingenuous.

--Tom Clune

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
I would like to comment on an earlier remark. The particular issues cannot be interpretation. There are passages which countenance man and woman only in faithful marriage or celibacy, and passages which condemn same sex relations. As there is no countenace of same sex relations it cant be interpretation or there would never be any disbelief as everything could be put down to interpretation.

Ah yes, the "you either believe all of it or you don't believe any of it" position. We're quite familiar with that from American fundies this side of the pond. Many of us simply don't subscribe to that view of scripture.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras ,
On the contrary the political regimes you refereed to were opposed to the teachings of Jesus Christ and so are same sex relations. Jesus NT teaching affirms man and woman in union as God’s creation purpose, or celibacy, ie. Gen 2, Matt 19, Mark 10, Eph 5, 1 Cor 7 and condemns same sex relations ie. 1 Cor 6 and Romans 1 as error. So my argument is that Jesus Christ’s teaching is the truth, if you are saying His teaching stinks then so be it.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
No brightmorningstar, I'm saying your assertions stink and that there isn't any functional difference between the historical leadership of Uganda, the Pinochet regime, the Nazis, Franco and the legislative programme being advocated under the present Ugandan pseudo-democracy. Pinochet and Franco were both REALLY BIG CHRISTIANS if you will recall. And brightmorningstar, since when did you become Christ's Vicar on Earth?
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi tclune,
You have made reference to some unspecified passages as being an unqualified condemnation of what you disapprove, and say that it is not a matter of interpretation. Two NT passages I cite are 1 Corinthians 6 and Romans 1.
Take Romans 1. It deals with unrighteousness and describes what is done when people turn from God. It includes idolatry, same sex relations, adultery theft lying greed etc. Men with men instead of the natural described as error cant be interpreted as correct
Because of this, God gave them over to shameful lusts. Even their women exchanged natural relations for unnatural ones. 27In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed indecent acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their perversion. - NIV

[quote] Other people have interpreted scripture differently. [quote] No it cant be interpretation otherwise there couldn’t be such a thing as disbelief.

As there is no scripture to countenance same sex relations, I dont see what the argument can be.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras

My assertions are that Jesus Christ’s Biblical teachings are correct and the truth, if you see them as mine and stink so be it. Who claims to be a Christian is not something I want to judge, what is Christ’s teaching I can see and so can anyone who opens their Bible.
I don’t agree with either the proposed punishment under Uganda law or same sex relations they are both contrary to the NT teaching.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
ianjmatt
Shipmate
# 5683

 - Posted      Profile for ianjmatt   Author's homepage   Email ianjmatt   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
This is just getting into Dead Horse territory really. As I see it, issue is about the actions of TEC - with the different assumptions of the rights and wrongs of the sexuality issue taken for granted..

--------------------
You might want to visit my blog:
http://lostintheheartofsomewhere.blogspot.com

But maybe not

Posts: 676 | From: Shropshire | Registered: Mar 2004  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I agree. The debate does indicate there is a complete opposite of views, standpoints and benchmarks of truth.
So I suggest the apointment of the woman bishop if she supports and teaches for same sex relations must be a church splitting event, one cant be in fellowship with others one simply has a completely different faith and belief position to. Unity is in the Holy Spirit which guides in truth and reminds of what Jesus taught.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ianjmatt:
This is just getting into Dead Horse territory really. As I see it, issue is about the actions of TEC - with the different assumptions of the rights and wrongs of the sexuality issue taken for granted..

This seems to be just about right. Brightmorningstar, if you are interested in understanding how people can interpret scripture differently than you do, I suggest you take a look at the voluminous postings in DH on the topic of scripture and homosexuality. If you have no interest in learning such things, that's fine too. What you cannot do is continue to push this particular hobby horse in Purgatory.

--Tom Clune, Purgatory Host

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Pancho
Shipmate
# 13533

 - Posted      Profile for Pancho   Author's homepage   Email Pancho   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras:
for the RCC's crimes against humanity in their superstitious prohibition of artificial contraception and prophylaxis against STD transmission, and for their attempts to quash the civil rights of others through their wholesale blackmail and bullying of both their own flocks and civil politicians.

I think this is engaging in some old-fashioned negative stereotyping of Catholics. Throwing in "superstitious" , "quash the civil rights of others", and "blackmail and bullying", it's like something written by the Know Nothings .


quote:
It is that version of Christianity that needs radical change, just like the fundamentalisms of Islam, Orthodox Judaism, and nationalistic Hinduism. All of them are completely fucked, mate.

So you're grouping the RCC and Orthodox Jews with radical Islam and Hindu Nationalists, and telling us we're f****d? How nice that you feel that way about some of your fellow shipmates and their church ( while as an Anglo-Catholic adopting many of our practices, I might add).

Why do this? The OP had nothing to do directly with the Catholic Church. Is it easier to insult Catholics on post hidden in an thread about the ECUSA rather than start a hell thread?

[ 17. December 2009, 15:19: Message edited by: Pancho ]

--------------------
“But to what shall I compare this generation? It is like children sitting in the market places and calling to their playmates, ‘We piped to you, and you did not dance;
we wailed, and you did not mourn.’"

Posts: 1988 | From: Alta California | Registered: Mar 2008  |  IP: Logged
leo
Shipmate
# 1458

 - Posted      Profile for leo   Author's homepage   Email leo   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
Hi Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras

My assertions are that Jesus Christ’s Biblical teachings are correct and the truth, if you see them as mine and stink so be it. Who claims to be a Christian is not something I want to judge, what is Christ’s teaching I can see and so can anyone who opens their Bible.
I don’t agree with either the proposed punishment under Uganda law or same sex relations they are both contrary to the NT teaching.

Jesus's 'biblical teachings don't mention lesbaisn.

--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com

Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hi leo,
I see your point as completly useless to the debate, one could argue Jesus never mentioned paedophilia but would that justify it. However I see Jesus NT must have mentioned what you call lesbianism in Romans 1, women with women instead of men.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Pancho, I'm afraid you're failing to take in the overall context. This is an indictment of illiberal Christianity generally, whether practised by the current crop of Catholic bishops, institutionalised by the Roman Catholic Magisterium, fomented by protestant fundamentalists or by members of the Anglican Communion.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
RuthW

liberal "peace first" hankie squeezer
# 13

 - Posted      Profile for RuthW     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
So, what do people here think of Mary Glasspool's chances of actually becoming a bishop? Will enough dioceses consent?
Posts: 24453 | From: La La Land | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To tclune,
As I don’t see the promotion of same sex relations interpretation, rather disbelief, I am not interested in reading peoples ideas of why they think they know better than what God has inspired and said.

The problem is the reaction to the appointment is based on the issue, and such is the nature of the issue concerning disbelief that is likely to manifest itself in other issues.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
To RuthW
I think it is highly likely she will be appointed, I also think it will further entrench the division in the church.

Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
So, what do people here think of Mary Glasspool's chances of actually becoming a bishop? Will enough dioceses consent?

Yes. Very few will withhold consent.
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
daronmedway
Shipmate
# 3012

 - Posted      Profile for daronmedway     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
Hi leo,
I see your point as completly useless to the debate, one could argue Jesus never mentioned paedophilia but would that justify it. However I see Jesus NT must have mentioned what you call lesbianism in Romans 1, women with women instead of men.

Actually, I think that text is more likely a reference to women using anal sex as a form of contraception, not lesbianism.
Posts: 6976 | From: Southampton | Registered: Jul 2002  |  IP: Logged
tclune
Shipmate
# 7959

 - Posted      Profile for tclune   Email tclune   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Hostly Hat ON
Brightmorningstar, you are new here. You need to understand that when a host (me) tells you to no longer discuss a topic on this borad, it is not a request. Leo, you already know that. Both of you, feel free to take your discussion of homosexuality and scripture to the Dead Horse board if you like. But it is off-limits here.

--Tom Clune, Purgatory Host
[ETA: Numpty, this includes you.]
Hostly Hat OFF

[ 17. December 2009, 16:11: Message edited by: tclune ]

--------------------
This space left blank intentionally.

Posts: 8013 | From: Western MA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
So, what do people here think of Mary Glasspool's chances of actually becoming a bishop? Will enough dioceses consent?

I can't imagine why they wouldn't. There may be a few which withhold consent; they will make a lot of noise and fuss, and the rest of TEC will ignore them. You might see another bishop or two leaving, with or without the majority of laity in his diocese.

--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."

--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM

Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Well Romans 1 describes women with women instead of with men as error so whatever one assumes the actual acts are, its error. lesbianism is not women with men so similalry however one describes lesbianism its error as well.
Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Tclune my appolgies... I will cease the subject now
Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Comper's Child
Shipmate
# 10580

 - Posted      Profile for Comper's Child     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
So, what do people here think of Mary Glasspool's chances of actually becoming a bishop? Will enough dioceses consent?

I expect she will receive the necessary consents, but I do think it's possible that with the existence of the "moratorium" (which some think is still in effect), that there will be fewer consents than with Bp Robinson.
Posts: 2509 | From: Penn's Greene Countrie Towne | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Alogon
Cabin boy emeritus
# 5513

 - Posted      Profile for Alogon   Email Alogon   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Although I support TEC's autonomy in principle and rankle at this renewed challenge from other provinces, I don't know the extent to which I'd actually approve of the nomination. If anyone voted for her because she is a Lesbian, then not only is it reverse discrimination but gratuitously provocative of those in other provinces. I can't imagine the average layman wanting to do this, but unfortunately many representatives to diocesan (and hence general) conventions are not average laymen. The activists among us, and others with various axes to grind, come forward, volunteer for what most regard as an unpleasant chore, and get elected, usually with no inquiry whatsoever into what positions they intend to take on the issues. If asked outright whether they voted for a gay or Lesbian as such, they would probably deny it and affect almost a swoon over the candidate's outstanding qualifications, brilliantly surpassing those of anyone else. To hear them talk, he or she can walk on water. I've heard such performances several times. Sometimes it eventually seems that the one chosen had walked on so much water that some of it splashed into the cranium.

Not having seen the resumes or heard interviews with any of the candidates in this election, neither I nor most other here have a basis for judging, but Ms. Claypool does seem to have been very successful in her previous positions. The normal and proper role of the other dioceses in the church is to give the electee, and those who actually made the decision, the benefit of any doubt. So my prediction is that she will be installed, as with most bishops-elect.

--------------------
Patriarchy (n.): A belief in original sin unaccompanied by a belief in God.

Posts: 7808 | From: West Chester PA | Registered: Feb 2004  |  IP: Logged
ToujoursDan

Ship's prole
# 10578

 - Posted      Profile for ToujoursDan   Email ToujoursDan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
My understanding is that traditionally bishops consented to an election if it was held property. Historically diocesean autonomy was respected. The consent process wasn't (traditionally) a referendum on whether a bishop liked the result. (At least that's how it was explained to me.)

There have been a few exceptions, but when +Robinson was elected my priest in Dallas, who was a delegate to General Convention, used that rationale to vote "yes" and split the Dallas delegation.

But perhaps some of our TEC (or ex-TEC) clergy can correct me on this.

--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan

Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
I'm going to surmise that the factors that went into the election of Canon Glasspool as bishop suffragan were rather different to those attending the election of +Gene Robinson as diocesan of NH. +Robinson was long-established in the Diocese of NH and was serving as canon to the ordinary at the time of his election; he was well known within his small diocese. By contrast Canon Glasspool has been elected to an episcopal role that most people would tend to see as relatively less important (I'm not diminishing bishops suffragan, but large dioceses are often running over with suffragans and appointed assisting bishops) in a large diocese in which she has no background of ministry. +Robinson was a known quantity to his diocese. Canon Glasspool is known in LA only by her CV essentially and is being elected as a pastoral - not an adjudicating - bishop who has no right of succession (I personally can't think of an instance in TEC where a suffragan has subsequently been elected to become Ordinary of the same diocese), so in a sense drawing a comparison between her election and that of +Robinson is really an apples vs. oranges situation.

[ 17. December 2009, 17:02: Message edited by: Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras ]

Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248

 - Posted      Profile for Grammatica   Email Grammatica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by RuthW:
So, what do people here think of Mary Glasspool's chances of actually becoming a bishop? Will enough dioceses consent?

Yes. I agree: by a smaller margin than consented to Gene Robinson. Look for several of those who refuse consent, however, to make statements that call attention to her many gifts and qualifications, noting that TEC is being asked to deprive itself of them solely because a few in overseas churches object to her as a Lesbian.

There will be much in the way of brouhaha and declarations from said overseas churches. However, as we now know, there is no way to boot TEC from the Communion without an in-force Anglican Covenant in something like its Ridley Draft, containing measures for separating a church from the Communion. However, as the Ridley Draft has been declared unacceptable by quite a few of the national churches, there is likely to be a great deal of brouhaha.

Perhaps in the end, the GAFCON churches, with their allied organizations in the US, Canada, the UK, and elsewhere, will form a more or less separate group.

The big change between 2003 and 2009, however, does not lie in the greater acceptance of gay and lesbian clergy in the Communion (though that is true) nor in any theological work done or not done.

The important change is in the world financial system. There is much less money now, everywhere. Sydney and the right-wing American foundations who bankrolled GAFCON in the past will have trouble doing so in the future. For that reason only, the brouhaha will be more muted this time.

Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
ToujoursDan

Ship's prole
# 10578

 - Posted      Profile for ToujoursDan   Email ToujoursDan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Perhaps in the end, the GAFCON churches, with their allied organizations in the US, Canada, the UK, and elsewhere, will form a more or less separate group.
Or groups, since they are also ridden with splits regarding the ordination of women to the priesthood and episcopate and matters Anglo-Catholic/evangelical polity and sacramental theology. Bishop Iker in Fort Worth hinted strongly recently that he'd take his diocese out of the ACNA if they elect/appoint a female bishop.

--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan

Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
brightmorningstar
Shipmate
# 15354

 - Posted      Profile for brightmorningstar     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
GAFCON churches represent abpout 75% of all Anglicans, I cant see how they can form a separate group. I think the TEC will cease to be in the Anglican Communion.
Posts: 243 | From: London area | Registered: Dec 2009  |  IP: Logged
Fr Weber
Shipmate
# 13472

 - Posted      Profile for Fr Weber   Email Fr Weber   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ToujoursDan:
quote:
Perhaps in the end, the GAFCON churches, with their allied organizations in the US, Canada, the UK, and elsewhere, will form a more or less separate group.
Or groups, since they are also ridden with splits regarding the ordination of women to the priesthood and episcopate and matters Anglo-Catholic/evangelical polity and sacramental theology. Bishop Iker in Fort Worth hinted strongly recently that he'd take his diocese out of the ACNA if they elect/appoint a female bishop.
As one who is involved in neither, may I just point out that :

1. ACNA and GAFCON are not the same thing; and
2. GAFCON was an event which included people from a number of different provinces of the AC, among whom some of them went on to join ACNA (which is a North American entity exploring the ways in which a province of the Anglican Communion can be in communion with Canterbury while magically remaining out of communion with TEC).

--------------------
"The Eucharist is not a play, and you're not Jesus."

--Sr Theresa Koernke, IHM

Posts: 2512 | From: Oakland, CA | Registered: Feb 2008  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
Anything forthcoming from the primates will be based on absolute number of provincial primates voting a particular way, not on the population of their provinces.

"Davey, the wind blows, the wind blows all of your dreams away/Your mum says 'where is my boy, I've lost my boy'/But she should know because you've told her before/You're going to the National, to the National - Front Disco..."

Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Dave Marshall

Shipmate
# 7533

 - Posted      Profile for Dave Marshall     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Matt Black:
OK, couldn't disagree more: I believe that the Scriptures (and, to an extent, Tradition) were given by God not 'constructed by human reason'.

By constructed I don't mean invented or made up. Reason is the means by which we make sense of the raw materials that God provides, the intellectual tool that allows us to discover what they reveal about how things are and who God is. Sacred texts condense knowledge accumulated over many generations, making it possible to focus on what our predecessors thought important. But they are still only information-encoded matter until fed through our senses. They can mean nothing to us until decoded and interpreted in our minds.
quote:
There is no way I can trust my own fallible human reason to come up with a valid interpretation of Scripture; to presume otherwise would demonstrate monumental hubris on my part.
No, the other way round. To presume that the work of previous generations or chosen contempories does not require interpretation is monumental folly. Whatever their achievements, look closely at any giant you care to select and you'll find someone just like the rest of us. Whatever marks them out as special will be a trivial fraction of their entire humanity, a glimmer, a spark, that in their particular combination of time and place happened to get noticed and recorded.
quote:
We stand on the shoulders of giants, and we act with folly if we seek to jump off those shoulders, assuming that by so doing we will see more clearly; the results will surely be that our faith and theology will become subjective and relativised, rooted far more in the whims and currents of contemporary mores than divine revelation, and demanding that God be made in our image rather than us in His.
If we mindlessly accept the choices of past generations, how can we not be rooting our faith and theology in the whims and currents of their contemporary mores?
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras
Shipmate
# 11274

 - Posted      Profile for Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Email Lietuvos Sv. Kazimieras   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
ISTM that this tangent on the nature/validity/interpretation of scripture is unsuited to a thread supposedly focussed on what happens if the Revd Mary Glasspool gets confirmed as duly elected bishop suffragan. I pray that a host will give a directive on this tangent; ISTM that it needs a thread of its own (maybe there's one already in DH since it's unresolvable).
Posts: 7328 | From: Delaware | Registered: Apr 2006  |  IP: Logged
Dave Marshall

Shipmate
# 7533

 - Posted      Profile for Dave Marshall     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
It's certainly a tangent, but not unrelated to whether this choice of bishop is a good one. And I wouldn't want to get into junior hosting territory.
Posts: 4763 | From: Derbyshire Dales | Registered: Jun 2004  |  IP: Logged
ToujoursDan

Ship's prole
# 10578

 - Posted      Profile for ToujoursDan   Email ToujoursDan   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Fr Weber:
quote:
Originally posted by ToujoursDan:
quote:
Perhaps in the end, the GAFCON churches, with their allied organizations in the US, Canada, the UK, and elsewhere, will form a more or less separate group.
Or groups, since they are also ridden with splits regarding the ordination of women to the priesthood and episcopate and matters Anglo-Catholic/evangelical polity and sacramental theology. Bishop Iker in Fort Worth hinted strongly recently that he'd take his diocese out of the ACNA if they elect/appoint a female bishop.
As one who is involved in neither, may I just point out that :

1. ACNA and GAFCON are not the same thing; and
2. GAFCON was an event which included people from a number of different provinces of the AC, among whom some of them went on to join ACNA (which is a North American entity exploring the ways in which a province of the Anglican Communion can be in communion with Canterbury while magically remaining out of communion with TEC).

You're entirely correct. They aren't the same.

But GAFCON has been mentioned as a seed planeted in the establishment of a non-Western and conservative rival to the current Anglican Communion (particularly if other western churches like the Anglican Church of Canada move forward in approving churchwide blessings of same sex unions) and GAFCON is made up with bodies that have different policies regarding women's ordination.

--------------------
"Many people say I embarrass them with my humility" - Archbishop Peter Akinola
Facebook link: http://www.facebook.com/toujoursdan

Posts: 3734 | From: NYC | Registered: Oct 2005  |  IP: Logged
Túathalán
Shipmate
# 14148

 - Posted      Profile for Túathalán   Email Túathalán   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
GAFCON churches represent abpout 75% of all Anglicans, I cant see how they can form a separate group. I think the TEC will cease to be in the Anglican Communion.

Hmm. If you had a source for your figure of 75%, I'd love to see it...
Posts: 129 | From: Here, where else? | Registered: Sep 2008  |  IP: Logged
Grammatica
Shipmate
# 13248

 - Posted      Profile for Grammatica   Email Grammatica   Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Túathalán:
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
GAFCON churches represent abpout 75% of all Anglicans, I cant see how they can form a separate group. I think the TEC will cease to be in the Anglican Communion.

Hmm. If you had a source for your figure of 75%, I'd love to see it...
I would, also. Claims like brightmorningstar's have often been made, but the basis for the membership figures quoted for (e.g.) the Ugandan or Nigerian Anglican churches has never been made clear. How are the statistics gathered? What measures are used? All this is obscure to me.
Posts: 1058 | From: where the lemon trees blosson | Registered: Dec 2007  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by brightmorningstar:
GAFCON churches represent abpout 75% of all Anglicans, I cant see how they can form a separate group. I think the TEC will cease to be in the Anglican Communion.

I think it would more accurate to say that GAFCON members hold senior posts in provinces that together make up about 75% of all Anglicans. That's not quite the same as representing in in any political sense. And they certainly aren't delegates from those provinces. All of which, I would guess, have a mixture of views internally on the issues under dispute.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460

 - Posted      Profile for ken     Send new private message       Edit/delete post   Reply with quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Grammatica:
... the basis for the membership figures quoted for (e.g.) the Ugandan or Nigerian Anglican churches has never been made clear. How are the statistics gathered? What measures are used? All this is obscure to me.

Same as any other church. Why doubt them?

You seem to be imagining that Anglicanism in Africa is some sort of smoke-and-mirrors trick perpetrated by a handful of rich American bigots.

But seriously, it isn't. They were there before these Americans turned up and they will still be there after the Americans have gone home again to fund something else.

--------------------
Ken

L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.

Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged



Pages in this thread: 1  2  3  ...  14  15  16  17  18  19 
 
Post new thread  Post a reply Close thread   Feature thread   Move thread   Delete thread Next oldest thread   Next newest thread
 - Printer-friendly view
Go to:

Contact us | Ship of Fools | Privacy statement

© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0

 
follow ship of fools on twitter
buy your ship of fools postcards
sip of fools mugs from your favourite nautical website
 
 
  ship of fools