Archive for June, 2008
+clumber translates the ABC and KJS press releases for all
Published 30 June 2008 Episcopal 8 CommentsFrom Preludium’s comment section:
(somebody get klady on the phone for me… it feels like they just voted themselves out of existence at the same time they voted themselves into existence….)
On the question of GAFCON’s adoption of the first 4 ecumenical councils. As it states: 3. We uphold the four Ecumenical Councils and the three historic Creeds as expressing the rule of faith of the one holy catholic and apostolic Church. Although the Council of Antioch in 341 was not ecumenical, The 4th Ecumenical Synod specifically adopted its canons: “The Ecclesiastical Rules of the Holy Apostles, set forth by Clement, Pontiff of the Roman Church” They contain the following.
Canon XXXII. (XXXIII.)
If any presbyter or deacon has been excommunicated by a bishop, he may not be received into communion again by any other than by him who excommunicated him, unless it happen that the bishop who excommunicated him be dead.
Canon XXXIII. (XXXIV.)
No foreign bishop, presbyter, or deacon, may be received without commendatory letters; and when they are produced let the persons be examined; and if they be preachers of godliness, let them be received. Otherwise, although you supply them with what they need, you must not receive them into communion, for many things are done surreptitiouslyCanon XXXIV. (XXXV.)
The bishops of every nation must acknowledge him who is first among them and account him as their head, and do nothing of consequence without his consent; but each may do those things only which concern his own parish, and the country places which belong to it. But neither let him (who is the first) do anything without the consent of all; for so there will be unanimity, and God will be glorified through the Lord in the Holy Spirit. (Re: “Holy Spirit” vs. Father as well as Spirit…There are some variations in the manuscripts of the last few words of this canon)
Canon XXXV. (XXXVI.)
Let not a bishop dare to ordain beyond his own limits, in cities and places not subject to him. But if he be convicted of doing so, without the consent of those persons who have authority over such cities and places, let him be deposed, and those also whom he has ordained.
One would assume then that GAFCON decries its own decisions to cross borders or do its decisions on “orthodoxy” override the canons of the synod it allegedly adopts? EPfizH
FOCA indeed. (These people need to set up an Acronym Council before they put this stuff out there…)
So this guy is gonna be responsible for order and discipline when he can’t even tame those 2 hedgerows on his face?
Jordan River, Sea of Galilee, Capurnum, Wailing Wall…. you saw it all. Oh wait. You missed the obvious one.
Masada
It would have been such grand symbolism. You could have had the GAFCON 8 (or 12, depending on how you count) all below you, marching around the fortress where the True Faith was being protected. Photo ops, statements from your leaders about how persecuted you are, how you’ve been driven out of TEC, how your very existence is at stake. I’m thinking a full passion play starring Big Pete (or little Pete, if Big Pete isn’t talking today).
You could even re-annotate this chart: TEC Siege Ramp, Apostate Base Camp. GAFCON Stronghold, where you standfirm.
Oh, and of course a photo op of the whole convention on the snake path!
Nota bene: Again, this press is only because we find your posturing hilarious, not because we are obsessed with what you think you are doing.
Hostilium writes
Another logistical miracle has been the organizing of the Statement and the Work Groups. TEC has blathered unhelpfully for years and years about ‘lay leadership’ (in our own diocese there were meetings, grumbling, complaining, desperate attempts to get the laity to ‘be involved’ and ‘do more’ etc.) without actually making it a substantial part of ecclesiastical life.
+clumber says: Wow, that’s rich. But I was in meetings with you and Mattine early on when you first came to the district, and you were a part of the problem, not a part of the solution. You didn’t want to work with the rest of the churches (you weren’t the only one, I should point out). You wanted to wage spiritual warfare. Credit goes out to Tony S.’s people in that they were at least interested in trying new things, although the clergy found reasons why we couldn’t do much together, but Mrs. K, you need to recognize that when you first came here, you made it pretty clear that you didn’t want much to do with the other churches in the area. So the fact that at GAFFE-con you now see the light just means that you have people around you who pass your little purity code. Don’t lecture us on how the diocese doesn’t know how to work together!
From this morning’s sad SF postings, Father Progeny speaks about what he wants:
A growing, united, disciplined entity, led by men and comprised of ecclesial bodies willing to act together independently of Lambeth Palace; willing, for example, to recognize provincial entities not in Communion with Canterbury that meet given confessional standards and unwilling to recognize provinces that are in Communion with Canterbury but that don’t, would make manifest a system of ecclesial order and discipline far more effective than that which presently under-girds the Communion itself.
Note the emphasis on order and especially discipline… I think I’ve finally figured the Mattine element out, and it’s shocking! Manly discipline! Didn’t Jesus or Paul or somebody say that that’s a no-no? Leviticus something?
Recent Comments