Skip to comments.Diane Knippers: Bishop Griswold Should Resign
Posted on 03/22/2005 8:39:15 PM PST by newheart
The good news is that perhaps Griswold is at last getting the message about how serious the Global South is about this crisis. It wont just go away. Its hard to say exactly what nefarious deeds he thought a handful of Americans were up to in Newry, the little town near Dromantine. But, if he thinks these Americans could even pretend to have a major influence on the Primates, he remains clueless. Worse, if he thinks Western whites will call the shots either of his theological ilk or mine he is entrapped in racist assumptions that will blind him to reality.
Im more than happy to explain why I was in Northern Ireland. My husband and I had been in London earlier that week to attend a major art exhibit. Recognizing the historic Primates meeting nearby, we decided to head to Northern Ireland for a day or two. We arrived on Thursday. My primary purpose was to consult with other orthodox leaders from the U.S. and the United Kingdom, to try to understand what the Primates were doing, to discuss how to explain their actions to our friends back home, and to strategize on our own next steps. As always, the most difficult task was to figure out how to offer hope to Episcopalians who believe that the Primates are acting too slowly. I attended the Friday afternoon closing press conference, enjoyed sharing information and observations with reporter friends, and wrote up a brief summary of my reflections for my IRD website, before returning to London on Saturday.
(Excerpt) Read more at beliefnet.com ...
thanks for the post and the ping. :)
Diane Kippers certainly calls it correctly. God bless her in her cancer fight and God bless the Global South Bishops, may they continue to stand firm in the faith.
God's best to you and Ed.
My revisionist bishop thinks everything's hunky-dory, this will all blow over, sit back, relax, the Holy Spirit is at work, don't be distracted from our common mission, and don't forget to keep up your pledge. It's wrong to withhold your treasure because you are inhibiting the work of God. Oh, and by the way, can you send a hundred dollars to the diocese? If enough people do this, we can cover the shortfall caused by the sinfully disobedient parishes protesting our common mission.
I think Ms. Knippers has probably misread Frank Griswold. He knows exactly what he's doing.
They can count our entire Diocese among the so-called "sinfully disobedient."
This of course, begs the question, "Who is more sinfully disobedient? Those who promote the consecration of a practicing homosexual as a spiritual leader, or those who forcefully protest such an abomination?"
Our own priest might tend toward revisionism, but he is fully aware of how our mostly conservative parish would react.
Oh, the consecration of Gene Robinson has been called and continues to be called a "prophetic call to justice" wherein "God is doing a new thing" and those of us who vigorously oppose it and call for a return to faithfulness are standing in the way of the Spirit. (BTW, I've noticed that references to the "Spirit" no longer carry the modifier "Holy.")
I'm glad that you are in a faithful diocese...mine was split down the middle at GC2003 and continues to be split. My parish had the attitude of "well, that's up there in New Hampshire, don't bother me." But local circumstances have forced us to discuss the "elephant in the middle of the room." And most have opted to listen to the Bishop's exhortation that all is well. "What unites us is stronger than what divides us."
Off topic query..has anyone seen any official statement from ECUSA on the Schiavo matter...
Resolution Number: 1991-A093
Title: Establish Principles With Regard to the Prolongation of Life
Legislative Action Taken: Concurred As Amended
Resolved, the House of Bishops concurring, That this 70th General Convention set forth the following principles and guidelines with
regard to the foregoing of life-sustaining treatment in the light of our understanding of the sacredness of human life:
- Although human life is sacred, death is part of the earthly cycle of life. There is a "time to be born and a time to die" (Eccl. 3:2). The resurrection of Jesus Christ transforms death into a transition to eternal life: "For as by a man came death, by a man has come also the resurrection of the dead" (I Cor. 15:21).
- Despite this hope, it is morally wrong and unacceptable to intentionally take a human life in order to relieve the suffering caused by incurable illness. This would include the intentional shortening of another person's life by the use of a lethal dose of medication or poison, the use of lethal weapons, homicidal acts, and other forms of active euthanasia. Palliative treatment to relieve the pain of persons with progressive incurable illnesses, even if done with the knowledge that a hastened death may result, is consistent with
theological tenets regarding the sanctity of life. However, there is no moral obligation to prolong the act of dying by extraordinary means and at all costs if such dying person is ill and has no reasonable expectation of recovery.
- In those cases involving persons who are in a comatose state from which there is no reasonable expectation of recovery, subject to legal restraints, this Church's members are urged to seek the advice and counsel of members of the church community, and where appropriate, its sacramental life, in contemplating the withholding or removing of life-sustaining systems, including hydration and nutrition.
- We acknowledge that the withholding or removing of life-sustaining systems has a tragic dimension. The decision to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining treatment should ultimately rest with the patient, or with the patient's surrogate decision-makers in the case of a mentally incapacitated patient. We therefore express our deep conviction that any proposed legislation on the part of national or state governments regarding the so called "right to die" issues, (a) must take special care to see that the individual's rights are respected and that the responsibility of individuals to reach informed decisions in this matter is acknowledged and honored, and (b) must also provide expressly for the withholding or withdrawing of life-sustaining systems, where the decision to withhold or withdraw life-sustaining systems has been arrived at with proper safeguards against abuse.
- We acknowledge that there are circumstances in which health care providers, in good conscience, may decline to act on request to terminate life-sustaining systems if they object on moral or religious grounds. In such cases we endorse the idea of respecting the patient's right to self-determination by permitting such patient to be transferred to another facility or physician willing to honor the patient's request, provided that the patient can readily, comfortably and safely be transferred. We encourage health care providers who make it a policy to decline involvement in the termination of life-sustaining systems to communicate their policy to patients or their surrogates at the earliest opportunity, preferably before the patients or their surrogates have engaged the services of such a health care provider.
- Advance written directives (so-called "living wills," "declarations concerning medical treatment" and "durable powers of attorney setting forth medical declarations") that make a person's wishes concerning the continuation or withholding or removing of
life-sustaining systems should be encouraged, and this Church's members are encouraged to execute such advance written directives during good health and competence and that the execution of such advance written directives constitute loving and moral acts.
- We urge the Council of Seminary Deans, the Christian Education departments of each diocese, and those in charge of programs of continuing education for clergy and all others responsible for education programs in this Church, to consider seriously the inclusion of basic training in issues of prolongation of life and death with dignity in their curricula and programs.
Citation: General Convention, Journal of the General Convention of...The Episcopal Church, Phoenix, 1991 (New York: General Convention, 1992), p. 383.
I can't wait for 2006 when Griswold is out of there. But I understand that the liberal HOB is probably just going to select another PC Bishop of the ECUSA.
I have to wonder: Would it do any good to write letters of protest to those guys?
It's so good to see you posting. God bless you and yours always.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.