The Primate of Brazil, The Most Revd Maurício Andrade has written about the boycott by five Anglican Primates of the 2008 Lambeth Conference.
Read Message from the Anglican Primate of Brazil – The Most Revd Mauricio de Andrade at ACNS.
He concludes:
… I believe The Episcopal Church of the United States has been showing all of us an example of the path to unity and reconciliation, because they have met all the requests for visits that were made and answered all the questions that were posed. They have spent time, money, and energy to meet the primates’ requests, always with generosity and openness. I think we need to keep in mind that we are Anglican. We are seeing a disregard of our richness and our ethos, that is, autonomy of the Provinces.
The Anglican Province of Brazil has already spoken out against the creation of a new pact, because our way of being Anglican has already been defined in the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral. We are not nor do we want to be a mere federation of churches. We wish to continue in communion with Canterbury, a symbol of our unity, as full members of the Anglican Communion.
We intend to go to Lambeth open to dialogue, and to feel the presence of God guiding us as His people, breaking the bread that unites us in the Body of Christ, and expressing solidarity with the world in need of the Word of transformation and salvation. We therefore reaffirm our reply to the invitation of Archbishop Rowan Williams and deeply regret the boycott by five archbishops.
Viva Brasil!
Somebody finally recognizes that TEC has done everything asked of it!
Back atcha, PB de Andrade! {smooch}
Guess who’s NOT getting invited to GAFCON…
Thank you, Bishop Andrade — more primates like this, please!
The voice of a moribund NGO bought and paid for by TEC, I fear.
“I believe The Episcopal Church of the United States has been showing all of us an example of the path to unity and reconciliation” Err, shome mishtake shurely! I thought that the whole disuity was *caused* by TEC? Wasn’t it TEC who went ahead with actions despite their own Presiding Bishop agreeing that it would be devisive, and even +Williams urguing them not to? Obviously I was mistaken – presumably they think that the disunity was caused by the unanimous vote to ask them to refrain! These americans have a very peculiar view of the path to unity… Defying the… Read more »
Bishop Andrade’s remarks are a timely reminder that this uprising and attempt at theft is done so on the part of a very small number of clergy and their misguided followers. History will ultimately judge Akinola, Duncan, Iker, Schofield, etc. as evil, or at best a tragic-comical “Keystone Cops” sort of undertaking.
TEC and the mainstream just need to stay the course, keep the pressure on this rebellion, and ultimately they will implode and eat their own.
“against the creation of a new pact”
Does this mean the Covenant? So they’ll go to Lambeth to affirm bonds, and what else?
TEC has been a “whipping boy” for far too long. But , then again, it often seems the fate of strong organizations to suffer wounds from jealous and backward groups – somewhat analagous to the old British feeling of being vilified despite the advances the Brits provided to their colonies- I believe it used to be called the “white man’s Burden”-(totally non PC , of course)
The voice of a moribund NGO bought and paid for by TEC, I fear.
Posted by: Austin on Tuesday, 19 February 2008 at 8:55pm GMT
Now, is that any way for our Anglican happy clappy exclusionist/sour cult department/section to spread “Good News” throughout el mundo?
You’ll get us all a reputation for promoting untruth if you don’t acknowledge that the Province of The Southern Cone Alone is THE ANGLICAN Province in Latin America with the most “empty” pews…but, why bother with REALITY when clever works so good? I ought know.
“These americans have a very peculiar view of the path to unity… Defying the other provinces, sacking non-liberal clergy, sueing churches for their buildings and assets, and loosing a few dioceses — obviously a good example to follow (if you don’t think about it)!” ——————– The so-called “orthodox” have a peculiar view of “unity” also. Apparently it’s absolutely and perfectly all right with them for Archbishops of national Anglican churches (i.e., Big Pete A.) to use the weight of the office (and the good name of the church) to push for laws whose sole aim is to put innocent people… Read more »
To Austin and David Wh:
So, it is only the con-evo who can speak from heart, faith and conscience? Anything else must be “bought and paid for?”
Can you point to a specific instance of non-liberal clergy being fired? First of all, of course, no parish rector in TEC can BE fired…not even by his own vestry. A priest-in-charge can be fired, but I’m not aware of any such instance…except, of course, for the actions of the wayward bishop of Sam Joaquin–but you weren’t talking about that, were you?
Austin posts, regarding the support of TEC by the Primate of Brasil, “…paid for by TEC, I fear.” Sure, Austin. And, by your logic, they also bought the Anglican Primates of Canada, Ireland, Wales, and Scotland, and many others. Perhaps they even bought York, right? Just ignore the facts, and try smear tactics, and maybe the Anglican Communion will abandon its integrity and historical approach, and become the New Puritan Church that most of the separatists are trying to create. Sorry, that’s not going to happen, and Brasil is merely one more of the reasons, ever increasing, that the Anglican… Read more »
O, but this is all your interpretation, David Wh – and not a very benevolent one at that!
;=)
The Americans have a good understanding of unity. Unity does not mean uniformity. It means co-operation, respect and respect of niches for both your own kind and others. Tyranny demands one species, one system, one theology. Complex ecosystems have diversity and resilience. Systems dominated by one or two species suffer from wild swings between abundance and death, with many minor species being wiped out in the process. I would rather live in a pluralistic society than a repressive monochrome one. Isaiah 54:14 “In righteousness you will be established: Tyranny will be far from you; you will have nothing to fear.… Read more »
Actually, David Wh, I thought you knew better. Gene Robinson was elected in accordance with the rules of his church. Yes, it was acknowledged that it would be divisive, but so are many other topics in church and no-one expected quite the extent of the hostilities. By the time this became clearer and Rowan Williams asked for the consecration not to go ahead, it was too late for TEC to do anything about it and to reverse the process. People who think the HoB could simply have decided otherwise should study how TEC elects Bishops and how much the process… Read more »
“bought and paid for by TEC, I fear.” Well, the evidence that the Pseudorthodox have been bought and paid for by shady American ultraconservative Republicans is rather more clear to be seen, I should think. “I thought that the whole disuity was *caused* by TEC? Wasn’t it TEC who went ahead with actions despite their own Presiding Bishop agreeing that it would be devisive, and even +Williams urguing them not to? “ No, actually. That’s the official Pseudorthodox line, but it, like much else they say, is spin. Africans were seeking to protect their poor endangered flocks in the US… Read more »
This is incorrect. TEC did not meet the call for repentance, but dishonestly sought to sidestep it by redefining words in a humptydumptyish fashion.
Austin; “bought and paid for by TEC, I fear.”
Ah, so it was BRAZIL who said ‘they give us money. Oy yes, they give us money….’ I must have been dozing at the back, here.
TEC has been a “whipping boy” for far too long. But , then again, it often seems the fate of strong organizations to suffer wounds from jealous and backward groups – somewhat analagous to the old British feeling of being vilified despite the advances the Brits provided to their colonies- I believe it used to be called the “white man’s Burden”-(totally non PC , of course) Posted by: ettu on Wednesday, 20 February 2008 at 1:22am GMT The imposition of the English language, by vicious means, in Wales and Scotland and Ireland is something we could ahve donw without, for… Read more »
The only ones who insisted on that and on increasingly stringent anti gay measures across all parts of church life are the toddlers in the Anglican sandpit who now angrily march away because their attempts at blackmail (If you don’t do what we want then YOU will be responsible for OUR actions) failed. Thank God for Bishop Andrade! Posted by: Erika Baker on Wednesday, 20 February 2008 at 8:04am GMT I think they hope that by shitting in the sand-pit no-one else will want to remain in it — certainly makes joyous leaping about and burrowing into the sand a… Read more »
“sueing churches for their buildings and assets”
In Virginia, the Africa-bound filed identical lawsuits the morning after their curiously simultaneous votes to leave – Diocese of Va is DEFENDING the property it holds in trust for the national church. Had the neo-Africans just left, which they were free to do, and not tried to steal the family jewels, there would be no lawsuits.
Christopher Shell:
Where, when and how was TEC directly asked to “repent”? By whom? By what authority? To what body in TEC? If this did occur, what was the response? Time, places and actual quotes please.
“Where, when and how was TEC directly asked to “repent”? By whom? By what authority? To what body in TEC?”
And of what?
Consecrating an out, partnered, divorced gay bishop, or doing it without sufficient consultation? There is a huge difference!
Erika:
If you read the reasserter propaganda, it’s both. Not to mention the ordination of women, liberal theology, etc.
Erika Like +Maurício Andrade I think everyone should go to Lambeth and I really don’t understand why some conservatives are walking away, given that conservatives are in the vast majority. They should turn up at Lambeth, force a vote to extend TEC’s removal from Communion functions until they agree to a Covenant – and repent and make restitution for their approval of sin and abuse of conservative churches, clergy and diocese, eg: http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/1622 I think that part of the problem for some conservatives is that they are still thinking along something like rational Modern lines (not premodern as some suggest),… Read more »
“For Liberal Postmoderns EVERYTHING depends solely on one’s personal volition – all reasons and arguements used are deployed solely because they support what one wants, not because they are really believed…” It’s precisely this sort of slander I deeply object to. You’re talking about me here, and you have absolutely no right to claim that, for me, everything depends only on my personal volition and that all my reason and arguments are deployed SOLELY because I want to and that I do not really believe them. It’s this kind of cheap put down of those one doesn’t agree with that… Read more »
David Wh:
The priests whose situation you reference publicly renounced their affiliation with the diocese of Florida. What else was Bishop Howard supposed to do?
What would Iker or Schofield do if a LIBERAL priest did the same in Fort Worth or San Joaquin? Well, actually, we know what Schofield would do–he’d fire them if he could, as he did the priest in charge at one mission parish…publicly, at the end of a Sunday service.
Cheryl has consistently quoted from and used the Bible in her comments here, over the years. Like no one else I know,David Whhh.
“approval of sin and abuse of conservative churches, clergy and diocese” OK, approval of sin? When are the conservatives going to repent of their approval of usury, remarriage after divorce, and the taking of human life? They’re not. They benefit from usury, many of them are divorced and remarried, and if they came out against war, they’d lose the support of the warmongers who finance them, yet all of these things aare, or were at one time, sin. Do you not see the hypocrisy in condemning one particular sin while ignoring, even benefitting from, other sins? Come on! And abuse?… Read more »
But, Ford, don’t you understand? Faith that is different from theirs is not true faith. Faith only comes in one flavor, like a Baskin-Robbins that only serves vanilla.
Ford Elms wrote: “OK, approval of sin? When are the conservatives going to repent of their approval of usury, remarriage after divorce, and the taking of human life?” Ford, I think we should all try to acknowledge the efforts other have made to try to achieve the unity and reconcilitaion that +Andrade says he wants. It is quite acceptable to review what the Scriptures teaches, and many have genuinely looked again at homosexuality but in the end been unable to justify a change based on any reasonable interpretation of what Scripture teaches us, despite their sympathy for people struggling with… Read more »
Erika, my post was about TEC (I don’t know enough about +Andrande to know whether he is consistent or Postmodern).
If commentators here think that my description of how Postmodern Liberals argue (for effect not truth) is inaccurate, it would be more helpful to offer real examples of where PLs *have* adhered to the general truths they espoused when it went *against* what they wanted, rather than just complain about the accusation!
One shows what one *really* believes when the consequences are personally costly, not when they are expedient.
“like a Baskin-Robbins that only serves vanilla.”
Or perhaps like a Baskin-Robbins that serves only cyanide.
Hi Erika- There is not much difference between repenting of ordaining a practising homosexual & repenting of doing so without consultation. That is because the said consultation would have established the majority view (whether or not correct) to be that the ordination was wrong in and of itself, with or without consultation. Hi Choirboy- Erika correctly alludes to the context, namely in and around the time of the Windsor Report. TEC knew perfectly well that ‘I repent’ and ‘I regret your regret’ are aeons away from one another in meaning, but dishonestly pretended that they thought they meant the same… Read more »
“That is because the said consultation would have established the majority view (whether or not correct) to be that the ordination was wrong in and of itself, with or without consultation.” Let me point out that agreeing to consult with others regarding an action does not presuppose that the actors will follow the advice of those consulted. It merely means they value the opinions of the others. The Diocese of New Hampshire and TEC could have consulted with the entirety of the membership of the Anglican Communion (man, woman, lay, clergy) and still have acted as it did, no matter… Read more »
Christopher
In your rush to claim me as your ally you seem to have forgotten to answer Choirboy from Hell’s specific questions: “Where, when and how was TEC directly asked to “repent”? By whom? By what authority? To what body in TEC? If this did occur, what was the response? Time, places and actual quotes please.”
Just for the sake of clarity and transparency you so rightly value.
Saying that some “revisiting” the New and Old Testaments to justify certain acts, then holding it strict against others is shear hypocrisy, and you know it, david wh.
And Shell, you still haven’t satisfied my questioning on WHEN WAS TEC EVER ASKED TO ACTUALLY REPENT?????? The statement of ‘I regret your regret’ probably isn’t accurate, and was answered in the context of a general statement to those who were flipping out in the furor. Actual quotes, dates, and individuals PLEASE!