Posted on 01/14/2007 4:52:22 PM PST by sionnsar
And to think this is only a small helping.
4 Comments •
Posted January 14, 2007 - 3:55 pm
Read the first comment:
it was a communion formed through rape
Do words have any meaning anymore?
The recent flurry of announcements from Lambeth and elsewhere concerning the Covenant Design Group, the Panel of Reference re Fort Worth, and the question of who will or won’t sit down with whom in Dar es Salaam, have led to a flurry of opinions by several American Episcopalians, collectively questioning the desirability of continuing membership of the Anglican Communion. I have listed a selection of these below.
Lionel Deimel
9 Jan Do We Need the Anglican Communion?
11 Jan Advice to the PB for the Primates’ Meeting
11 Jan Just to Be Clear …
Jim Naughton
9 Jan Revisiting “The Question”
10 Jan Revisiting “The Question”: Stewardship
Mark Harris
9 Jan Drip, Drip, Drip: Are we dealing with water torture or fresh springs?
11 Jan The Vocation of the Episcopal Church. (scroll down).
Marshall Scott
11 Jan Patience Through the Pain of Waiting
Posted by Simon Sarmiento on
Sunday, 14 January 2007 at 5:15pm GMT
| TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: ECUSA
Lionel Deimel probably has the key phrase "The Episcopal Church has become the co-dependent enabler of this behavior." Jim Naughton's paper is lucid and clear and very succinctly explains how the Episcopal church has been that co-dependent enabler.
Marshall Scott comments that "If, as Archbishop Tutu has said, what holds the Communion together is that “we meet,” when folks stop coming to meetings the Communion will change." But Naughton's paper rightly points out that certain folks had already been restrained from coming and participating. In that sense the Communion had already excluded parties.
If they wish to formulate a puritanical misogynistic negligent communion, let them do it. But we don't have to be silent or enablers of what they have done. Silence infers consent. If we are silent, let the public record show that it was an imposed silence so that history records that it was a communion formed through rape.
And that if another communion needs to be formed, let history show that it was a communion formed with full knowledge and consent of those who chose to participate. That the parties chose to break with repression, slavery, negligence and corruption, and to not be codependent enablers. God does not intimidate, demand or rape. Men do that, not God. Sunday, 14 January 2007 at 8:29pm GMT
Posted by: Cheryl Clough on
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. "If they wish to formulate a puritanical misogynistic negligent communion, let them do it. But we don't have to be silent or enablers of what they have done. Silence infers consent. If we are silent, let the public record show that it was an imposed silence so that history records that it was a communion formed through rape.
And that if another communion needs to be formed, let history show that it was a communion formed with full knowledge and consent of those who chose to participate. That the parties chose to break with repression, slavery, negligence and corruption, and to not be codependent enablers. God does not intimidate, demand or rape. Men do that, not God.
Posted by: Cheryl Clough on
Sunday, 14 January 2007 at 8:29pm GMT "
I am so pleased to see the joy her faith brings to this woman! :(
It is sad, isn't it? Please put in a prayer for her deliverance.
Is she talking about Anne Boleyn? I think she was a consenting adult...
I shouldn't, but, LOL!!!!!
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.