Some Republicans are hesitant to say “No” too often to Obama. He is popular (for now), and they don’t want the Republican Party to be known as the Party of No.
But often “No” is right. And it is certainly right now in light of Obama’s Leftist agenda. Not only that, when a President overreaches – and Obama is certainly doing that – saying “No” long and often is smart politics as Fred Barnes reminds us with a bit of history.
I suspect that goes double now. For Obama’s policies are a recipe for 70’s Stagflation and worse. Thus, in the not so distant future, those who stand strong and say “No” shall be rewarded politically. Those who are Obama’s lapdogs shall be punished.
Sounds kinda biblical, doesn’t it?
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Monday, May 11, 2009
And you thought I was hard on the ACC . . .
It appears my characterization Friday of the Anglican Consultative Council meeting in Jamaica might have been a bit off – the meeting might have been even worse.
But don’t take my word for it. Chris Sugden focuses on the litigation issue and on the highly questionable and confusing parliamentary run around aided and abetted by the Archbishop of Canterbury himself. Here’s another summary of the same and of the delay of Section 4 of the Covenant, a delay which pleases the Episcopal Church as said section contained the proposed disciplinary procedures.
Stephen Noll states that this is more than a delay, that the Covenant is dead. He has further thoughts here and holds Canterbury accountable for the Covenant’s mortal injuries at the hands of the ACC.
Robert Munday also takes Dr. Williams to task for his “perfidy.”
Who else but the Anglican Curmudgeon gives the ACC meeting and its excuse for parliamentary procedure a withering examination and finds both it and ++Rowan wanting.
AND if you still think I’m too hard on the ACC meeting, then you don’t want to see what Christopher Johnson thinks here and here.
You really don’t.
-----
MORE: I have to admit that, after reading the Anglican Communion Institute’s statement on the ACC, my respect for the ACI continues to grow. And their conclusion is a bit of a jaw-dropper:
If lawful and proper action on the covenant is not forthcoming from this meeting of the Council, the only appropriate response is for the Churches of the Communion to begin themselves the process of adopting the Ridley Cambridge Text.
The ACI suggesting going around the Instruments of Communion?? As “Katherine” comments here, pigs may be flying.
But don’t take my word for it. Chris Sugden focuses on the litigation issue and on the highly questionable and confusing parliamentary run around aided and abetted by the Archbishop of Canterbury himself. Here’s another summary of the same and of the delay of Section 4 of the Covenant, a delay which pleases the Episcopal Church as said section contained the proposed disciplinary procedures.
Stephen Noll states that this is more than a delay, that the Covenant is dead. He has further thoughts here and holds Canterbury accountable for the Covenant’s mortal injuries at the hands of the ACC.
Robert Munday also takes Dr. Williams to task for his “perfidy.”
Who else but the Anglican Curmudgeon gives the ACC meeting and its excuse for parliamentary procedure a withering examination and finds both it and ++Rowan wanting.
AND if you still think I’m too hard on the ACC meeting, then you don’t want to see what Christopher Johnson thinks here and here.
You really don’t.
-----
MORE: I have to admit that, after reading the Anglican Communion Institute’s statement on the ACC, my respect for the ACI continues to grow. And their conclusion is a bit of a jaw-dropper:
If lawful and proper action on the covenant is not forthcoming from this meeting of the Council, the only appropriate response is for the Churches of the Communion to begin themselves the process of adopting the Ridley Cambridge Text.
The ACI suggesting going around the Instruments of Communion?? As “Katherine” comments here, pigs may be flying.
Friday, May 08, 2009
Katherine Schori, Shameless Hypocrite, and the ACC, Gutless Wonder
TEC Presiding “Bishop” Katherine Schori indeed knows no shame. In the midst of pushing a litigation blitzkrieg against the orthodox, which includes scuttling an immanent settlement in the Diocese of Virginia, she offers the Anglican Consultative Council a resolution on . . . peacemaking.
Yeah. Stalin and Mao were all for peace, too, after they killed their opponents, of course.
As for the ACC, it once again reveals what a useless, gutless wonder it is by passing her resolution without opposition. If any delegate called out Schori for her hypocrisy, I certainly haven’t heard of it. And, remember, the ACC has ignored Schori’s persecution of the faithful via litigation.
The ACC met in Jamaica, and a UN Human Rights Commission broke out.
-----
UPDATE: It looks like some in the ACC may not be completely without intestines after all. According to this live blog, the ACC just came one vote short (Remember the Church of Uganda delegate who was unseated?) of restoring the missing fourth moratorium on litigation.
And from the debate, it appears there’s not a little unhappiness on the floor. I may have more comment after the smoke clears.
Yeah. Stalin and Mao were all for peace, too, after they killed their opponents, of course.
As for the ACC, it once again reveals what a useless, gutless wonder it is by passing her resolution without opposition. If any delegate called out Schori for her hypocrisy, I certainly haven’t heard of it. And, remember, the ACC has ignored Schori’s persecution of the faithful via litigation.
The ACC met in Jamaica, and a UN Human Rights Commission broke out.
-----
UPDATE: It looks like some in the ACC may not be completely without intestines after all. According to this live blog, the ACC just came one vote short (Remember the Church of Uganda delegate who was unseated?) of restoring the missing fourth moratorium on litigation.
And from the debate, it appears there’s not a little unhappiness on the floor. I may have more comment after the smoke clears.
Thursday, May 07, 2009
ACC Ignores Episcopalian Lawsuits
Both BabyBlue and the American Anglican Council have noted that the Anglican Consultative Council is willfully ignoring The Episcopal Church’s litigation against departing orthodox parishes. I could dwell on other actions and inactions of the ACC meeting in Jamaica (as BabyBlue has), but I think that omission just about says it all as to how useless the Anglican Communion has become. As the American Anglican Council sums up well:
This is the state of affairs in the Anglican Communion. Wise, learned, and, capable people abound in the councils of the Church. But when the time comes for them to address critical issues including ones of doctrine, morality, the authority of Scripture, the uniqueness of Christ as Lord and saviour of all, and Christians suing Christians, they call for more conversations and delays, rather than action.
This is the state of affairs in the Anglican Communion. Wise, learned, and, capable people abound in the councils of the Church. But when the time comes for them to address critical issues including ones of doctrine, morality, the authority of Scripture, the uniqueness of Christ as Lord and saviour of all, and Christians suing Christians, they call for more conversations and delays, rather than action.
Tuesday, May 05, 2009
Does the ANCA Really Want to Join the Anglican Communion?
The bad joke that is the Anglican Consultative Council meeting helps bring an issue more into focus, an issue about which not much has been said: do we in the Anglican Church in North America really want to join the Anglican Communion?
Granted, it is unlikely we can join the Anglican Communion in the near future. When it counts, the current Archbishop of Canterbury is in the pocket of the Episcopal Church and will not recognize the ACNA as a province. And several other primates are of a similar mindset. Much more likely is that the GAFCON provinces and a scattering of other orthodox provinces and bishops will recognize the ACNA.
But what if the ACNA can actually be recognized by the Anglican Communion as a whole and can thereby join it. Do we really want to do so?
I think it’s doable. Being in the Anglican Communion does not require one to be in full or even partial communion with everyone in the same. A number of provinces are out of communion with The Episcopal Church for example.
But if one’s communion is impaired even with the Archbishop of Canterbury and cannot conscientiously be full and unimpaired with him (as is the case with me), then joining the Anglican Communion might be just slightly awkward.
And there are more than a few in the ANCA who want little to nothing to do with Canterbury. At the same time, many others have placed their hopes in the ANCA as a way to stay in the Anglican Communion outside the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada. Can both sides be pleased?
I do not presume to have an easy answer to this issue. And – let there be no mistake – I am no poor-mouther of the ANCA and fervently desire for it to work. But whether we in the ANCA really want to be in the Anglican Communion is an issue we will have to address at some point in time. And that time could be difficult to work through indeed.
Granted, it is unlikely we can join the Anglican Communion in the near future. When it counts, the current Archbishop of Canterbury is in the pocket of the Episcopal Church and will not recognize the ACNA as a province. And several other primates are of a similar mindset. Much more likely is that the GAFCON provinces and a scattering of other orthodox provinces and bishops will recognize the ACNA.
But what if the ACNA can actually be recognized by the Anglican Communion as a whole and can thereby join it. Do we really want to do so?
I think it’s doable. Being in the Anglican Communion does not require one to be in full or even partial communion with everyone in the same. A number of provinces are out of communion with The Episcopal Church for example.
But if one’s communion is impaired even with the Archbishop of Canterbury and cannot conscientiously be full and unimpaired with him (as is the case with me), then joining the Anglican Communion might be just slightly awkward.
And there are more than a few in the ANCA who want little to nothing to do with Canterbury. At the same time, many others have placed their hopes in the ANCA as a way to stay in the Anglican Communion outside the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada. Can both sides be pleased?
I do not presume to have an easy answer to this issue. And – let there be no mistake – I am no poor-mouther of the ANCA and fervently desire for it to work. But whether we in the ANCA really want to be in the Anglican Communion is an issue we will have to address at some point in time. And that time could be difficult to work through indeed.
The Episcopal Church of Satan Sues Individual Members for Legal Fees
The Episcopal Diocese of Los Angeles is now suing individual vestry members of St. James Newport for legal fees.
It’s not enough that The Episcopal Church sues to take away parish property from its members. Now it’s suing individual members to pay for the theft.
I’m honestly at a loss for printable words to characterize such evil. Anathema!
It’s not enough that The Episcopal Church sues to take away parish property from its members. Now it’s suing individual members to pay for the theft.
I’m honestly at a loss for printable words to characterize such evil. Anathema!
Monday, May 04, 2009
ACC Snubs Uganda
The Anglican Consultative Council has refused to seat a delegate from the Church of Uganda on the pretext that the delegate’s relationship with Uganda “is as a result of a cross provincial intervention, and note that such interventions are contrary to the Windsor Report and other reports accepted by successive meetings of the Instruments of Communion, including Primates’ Meetings which you have attended.”
The Archbishop of Uganda sizes this up well in a letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury:
At our Primates meeting in Dromantine, Northern Ireland, we asked TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada to voluntarily withdraw from the Councils of the Church until the next Lambeth Conference. In Dar es Salaam, the Primates unanimously agreed that TEC should not be invited to Lambeth until they satisfactorily answered our questions, which most people know they did not do, your judgment notwithstanding. Yet, they have continued to be involved in all the Councils of the Church, and even with undue influence because of their wealth and command of English as their first language. There is a double standard at work here, and it favors the Western world and marginalizes Africa and others in the Global South.
More including relevant documents may be found here.
Thus, the ACC has already succeeded in further alienating the Global South. Way to go!
The Archbishop of Uganda sizes this up well in a letter to the Archbishop of Canterbury:
At our Primates meeting in Dromantine, Northern Ireland, we asked TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada to voluntarily withdraw from the Councils of the Church until the next Lambeth Conference. In Dar es Salaam, the Primates unanimously agreed that TEC should not be invited to Lambeth until they satisfactorily answered our questions, which most people know they did not do, your judgment notwithstanding. Yet, they have continued to be involved in all the Councils of the Church, and even with undue influence because of their wealth and command of English as their first language. There is a double standard at work here, and it favors the Western world and marginalizes Africa and others in the Global South.
More including relevant documents may be found here.
Thus, the ACC has already succeeded in further alienating the Global South. Way to go!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)