First, Esther seems to be still with us as I heard nothing overnight. I wasn't expecting any. She didn't seem there yet.
Two news bits grab my attention over my first cup of coffee...
from the NYT on the Archbishop of Canterbury's emission yesterday:
[A]s long as the broader Anglican Church “as a whole does not bless same-sex unions, a person living in such a union cannot without serious incongruity have a representative function in a Church whose public teaching is at odds with their lifestyle.”
Even back in 1988 my ex-doctoral advisor objected to my use of the word, 'lifestyle,' saying it was a useless word. And this was in regards to 11th and 12th-century Old French medieval texts! It was one of the few times I agreed with him. Ever since I have not used this word. For the ABC to persist in using it in regards to covenanted, faithful LGBT relationships, well, it is demeaning.
And the other piece was a simple news report that almost all the senate Republicans will vote no on Judge Sotomayor's nomination to the Supreme Court. There are many words I could use to describe my disgust with their stupidity and bigotry and sexism but I will settle on neanderthals.
However, the divide in the country is reflected in the divide in the church. I read postings on the House of Bishops/Deputies list serve and it is not too hard to figure out who belongs to which party. It's so predictable.
Can we diffuse the polarisation in the country and church? Dunno. I don't think the Archbishop's beloved notion of a covenant will do the trick. Nor will his attempting to mitigate its impact by talking about a 'two-track' church. A covenant such as what is proposed is not Anglican. Period.
So back downstairs for my second cuppa and some good summer fruit and perhaps that will diffuse my grumpies.
3 comments:
I'm fighting the grumpies too and not just because of the ABC's naive emissions and Repuglican obstructionism. Our baby bishop wants more power for the bishops. I'm not surprised. Just wondering how we can remind him that lay and clergy also have valid ministries and opinions. Constantly.
Yes, he and the bishop coadjutor of Virginia were the among ones who wanted to discharge C056, saying that we shouldn't be legislating things like that.
I think that bishops who did not serve as a deputy prior to becoming a bishop should be mandated to spend most of their time in the House of Deputies so they understand that their house is not the only house and that there are 832 people next door who have as much, if not more, wisdom as they. If not that, that they should be quiet for their first GC and observe.
I wonder if a lot of this desire for a power grab comes from having been to Lambeth and seeing how bishops elsewhere don't have the checks and balances that ours do. It doesn't help with an ABC who certainly wants a more hierarchical church.
Possibly but I suspect our bish is that way to start with. He is ambitious and we suspect he hopes to get known so he can get a better diocese asap. The rest of the diocese was impatient to get a bishop, was enamoured of this young dynamic personality they'd known since he was a kid and apparently didn't have someone like me to disagree. I'm not sure how much cooperation he is getting either. After years of pretty much doing their own thing, some of the clergy aren't all that into the collegiality he is trying to promote. Interesting.
Post a Comment