tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post116259919181995706..comments2024-03-27T08:46:54.369-04:00Comments on BabyBlueOnline: BabyBlueCafe Reader offers 12 Examples of "Broken Protocol" in Jeffort-Schori Letter to Anglican ArchbishopsAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-1162747953781301652006-11-05T12:32:00.000-05:002006-11-05T12:32:00.000-05:00Dear Baby Blue:Your concern for the minutiae of pr...Dear Baby Blue:<BR/><BR/>Your concern for the minutiae of protocol here is grotesquely misplaced. You seem to forget, or wish not to remember, that this letter is not the first contact between these Primates and Bishop Katharine. The first contacts came from the other side. Your side. And they showed very little concern for protocol -- indeed, they represented a declaration of war.<BR/><BR/>Your side declared that they could not recognize Bishop Katharine as a Primate or even a Bishop for the whole Communion. Your side demanded APO. Your side called her a heretic and a pagan. Your side called the Episcopal Church -- Bishop Katharine's church -- a cancer on the whole Communion. Your side demanded that the cancer be cut off. <BR/><BR/>But why rehash all the foul names your side has called her church over the years? Let's talk actions. <BR/><BR/>Your side plans to join up Dioceses demanding APO with one of these four Primates at the Falls Church meeting. And these Primates have not even deigned officially to inform Bishop Katharine, the Primate of the Episcopal Church, that they are entering her territory, much less that they are planning to seize a half-dozen of her Dioceses and sundry assorted parishes. Yet all the news media have been fully informed of their plans.<BR/><BR/>Given that situation, her letter is quite remarkably calm and coolheaded.<BR/><BR/>I think, however, that the letter was sent primarily to clarify the canonicity and legality of the Falls Church APO meet-up. Since the four Primates entering her territory have not yet deigned to acknowledge recepit of her letter, may we presume that they will not? And if they do not, will their episcopal acts (if any) in her territory have any validity? No. And then ...<BR/><BR/>Now before a dozen flamers fasten on me, please read the following recent decision in a very similar situation. The parish of All Saints, Almancil, (Diocese of Europe, C of E)attempted to affiliate with the ultraconservative breakaway Diocese of Recife. The official statement of findings released by the C of E Diocese in Europe (14 October 2006) said: <BR/><BR/>“All Saints Anglican Church headed by the Revd Eric Britt is not part of the Church of England Diocese in Europe and therefore it is not part of the Anglican Communion.”<BR/><BR/>See: http://www.europe.anglican.org/news/newsItems/2006/06_oct_01.html<BR/><BR/>Can we say that parishes affiliating with CANA under the Nigerian Bishop Martyn Minns will therefore not be in the Anglican Communion? Clearly we can. Can we say that Dioceses affiliating at Falls Church with ++Peter Akinola or another one of these Primates will not be part of the Anglican Communion? The Presiding Bishop's letter, and the four Primates' utter disregard of it, are helping us to say that we can.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-1162673050385662322006-11-04T15:44:00.000-05:002006-11-04T15:44:00.000-05:00This is a very stately exposition of the situation...This is a very stately exposition of the situation, "kind and wise old owl."<BR/><BR/>The Bruce Cockburn reference connect this back to the vernacular, truly a nice touch.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com