tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post7032669000123543069..comments2024-03-27T08:46:54.369-04:00Comments on BabyBlueOnline: Bishop Barnum and Bishop Glenn offer a letter of clarity to the churches affiliated with the Anglican Mission in AmericaAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-46513341464353134842011-12-18T13:19:50.149-05:002011-12-18T13:19:50.149-05:00BB,
You are correct. In many ways I think +Minns...BB, <br /><br />You are correct. In many ways I think +Minns set up CANA off of what he did not like in AMiA. The conical ambiguity seeming to be the most striking, the money situation being another. I think the AMiA mess has proven +Minns to be wise on both accounts.Kevinhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00261766465382455822noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-54087990272540799502011-12-18T03:16:29.525-05:002011-12-18T03:16:29.525-05:00It appears that unfortunately the local parishes w...It appears that unfortunately the local parishes were not a part of the Church of Rwanda, only the ordained clergy. We are all members of one Holy catholic and apostolic church, but to be actually counted on the rolls is a separate issue - and it appears that the congregations are not counted on the rolls of the Church of Rwanda. It appears that in order to do this, Chuck Murphy should have been madea diocesan bishop and then the AMiA could have been a diocese in the Church of Rwanda, but that is not the direction they took. From what is gathered at this point, Rwanda took in the clergy and bishops for oversight, the congregations only have the civil corporation that binds them together at this point. The congregations do not appear to be officially Anglican - there are no provinces that count the congregations in their rolls.<br /><br />bbAnonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17490745238430648958noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-48393600412264409062011-12-17T21:27:43.520-05:002011-12-17T21:27:43.520-05:00The good ship Episcopal gained a new Captain. He d...The good ship Episcopal gained a new Captain. He decided to follow the northern route. Others warned him that was not a safe route, there were many icebergs up there. Some decided to take to lifeboats.<br /><br />In time the captain was replaced by a new captain. She agreed with the route chosen by her predescessor but decided it was too slow. Full speed ahead she ordered.<br /><br />Alarmed more lifeboats were lowered and more passengers abandoned ship. Others said it was too dangerous to leave the ship, they should try and replace the captain and they remained on board.<br /><br />The lifeboats initially tried to all travel in a group, it was thought to be safer that way. But some of the lifeboat captains thought they found a better route. They left the safety of the group and headed out alone.<br /><br />That captain then hit a small piece of ice. So small it would have never damaged a ship, but in a lifeboat the damage was catastrophic. <br /><br />Those in the ship stayed put - tut tut - see we were right, it is far too dangerous to take to these waters in a lifeboat!<br /><br />Those in the other group of lifeboats were now far away. Some left that group to try and rescue those who were now drowning, even though it would mean danger for them and slow their progress. Others just tut tutted...see they should never have left the group.<br /><br />Some attempted to repair the lifeboat. Someone else brought a smaller lifeboat alongside to try and save as many as possible.<br /><br />The lesson?<br />- Don't watch your friends drown, help them in their hour of need.<br />- Tut Tutting about how bad the captain was is not going to rescue anyone.<br />- Lifeboats are far more fragile than a ship and many captains can lead people into peril. Choose one captain, find some land and build a new ship together.<br /><br />United you are strong, divided you are weak, and a lifeboat cannot survive the coming storms any better than a ship headed towards heavy ice.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-23327221.post-19448757941542122622011-12-17T18:27:33.579-05:002011-12-17T18:27:33.579-05:00BabyBlue, love your blog think it is great. But I...BabyBlue, love your blog think it is great. But I must disagree on one point where the in paragraph two of the BB note where it is stated that church members are only members of the civil corp. Depending how the corp is set up they may be members of the corp, but certainly members of a local body called a church which would also be part of the Church of Rwanda in the case of the AMiA. At baptism a person becomes a member of the church according to the 39 Articles, Art. 19, 25 and 27. and the Catechism.<br /><br />Yours,<br />Fr. Patrick Malonemacpathttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03272147788280147332noreply@blogger.com