| |
|
|
|
Written by Confidential to ACI
|
|
Tuesday, 06 May 2008 |
|
A defense now proffered by the Presiding Bishop and her supporters is that the same procedures were followed in the recent cases of Bishops Davies and Moreno. Past violations of the canon’s clear provisions are said to justify current ones. In considering this defense, it is necessary to distinguish three senses of “precedent” in legal usage. One is the well-known sense of precedent as a formal ruling on a legal issue by a competent juridical body. This is clearly not the case here as no one has suggested that the prior cases were determined to be canonical by any body reviewing the canonical issues. These cases are not offered as reasoned legal rulings, but as a fait accompli.
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by Rev. Dr. Philip Turner
|
|
Thursday, 01 May 2008 |
Three events in the recent past have posed a serious question. Does the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church (TEC) know what she is doing? The possible answers to this question have raised even greater concern than the question itself. For, I have concluded, if, on the one hand, she does not know what she is doing then TEC is without effective leadership at perhaps the most crucial time in its history. If, on the other hand, she does know what she is doing, she is leading TEC in directions for which she has no warrant.
To be specific, her decline of an invitation to greet the Pope on his present visit calls into question her understanding of the office of Presiding Bishop. The canonical irregularities surrounding the specially called convention in the Diocese of San Joaquin and the actions to depose Bishops Cox, Schofield and Duncan raise questions about the way in which she understands and deploys the Constitution and Canons of TEC. Finally, her Easter Message to TEC raises a question about the adequacy of her grasp of the Christian Gospel.
|
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 01 May 2008 )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by Rev. Dr. Philip Turner
|
|
Thursday, 01 May 2008 |
|
A Comment on the St. Andrew’s Draft of the Anglican Covenant
I
A second iteration of a draft covenant for the
Anglican Communion (the St. Andrew’s Draft) is now circulating; and it
is likely that some version thereof will be presented to the Bishops of
the Communion when they meet in Canterbury this summer. At some point
after this gathering, a covenant proposal will be circulated among the
provinces of the Communion for ratification. There is no doubt that
most (though perhaps not all) of the member provinces of the Communion
will ratify a covenant within the next few years. The question is
really not so much ratification of the Covenant, but (1) the sort of
covenant that will be ratified; (2) the way in which the provinces of
the Communion comport themselves during the period leading up to
ratification; and (3) how the Communion might best respond to a
situation in which a province rejects the covenant but there are
dioceses and parishes within that province that do not.
Read it all.....
|
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 01 May 2008 )
|
|
|
Written by Confidential to ACI
|
|
Thursday, 01 May 2008 |
MEMORANDUM TO: Working Group April 21, 2008
FROM: [Redacted]
RE: Canonical Violations
This memorandum evaluates whether the Presiding Bishop has violated the constitution and canons of The Episcopal Church and what procedures would be applicable for charging her with a presentable offense. This memorandum identifies at least eleven violations of TEC's constitution and canons by the Presiding Bishop in her dealings with Bishops Cox, Schofield and Duncan and the Diocese of San Joaquin. Taken together, these actions demonstrate willful violation of the canons, an intention to repeat the violations and a pattern of concealment and lack of candor. In the case of DSJ, the fundamental polity of TEC as a "fellowship of duly constituted dioceses" under the ecclesiastical authority of the diocesan bishop has been subverted. The memorandum then addresses the procedural requirements for filing charges against the Presiding Bishop.
|
|
Last Updated ( Friday, 02 May 2008 )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
|
Written by Rev. Professor Christopher Seitz
|
|
Thursday, 10 April 2008 |
Biblical Theological Reflection and the Rule of Faith: Threshold Considerations
In order both to set limits and for clarity's sake-themes to which I shall return- the present essay will undertake theological reflection on covenant and the appropriateness of using this term for work presently before us in the Anglican Communion. This requires some threshold consideration. By ‘theological reflection' I mean, giving a comprehensive account of Scripture with concern for its total, mutually-informing witness. I take this to be the concern of one of the Articles, with a long prior history, that scripture be read in such a way that its portions be not repugnant, one with another. The same concern also animates what in our present period is called ‘canonical reading.'
It will be a basic contention of the present essay that this hermeneutical caution is traceable to the rule (kanon; regula) of faith (regula fidei) in the early church. Indeed, in the period of the formation and consolidation of New Testament writings and especially relevant because of the character of that ‘work-in-progress,' the rule grounds Christian convictions about the nature of God in Christ in the witness of the stable, inherited scriptures of Israel. The rule of faith is an appeal to the total witness of scripture, especially the Old Testament, as constituting the speech and work of the selfsame Living God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, in Israel and in the Apostolic witness to Jesus Christ.
Read it all. Click here to download the entire document in PDF form.
|
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 10 April 2008 )
|
|
|
Written by Rev. Professor Christopher Seitz
|
|
Saturday, 29 March 2008 |
|
Easter Sermon
Wycliffe College, Toronto
26 March 2008
Because of its reflective character, John's Gospel dwells on details and lets them speak in ways the other Gospels' proximity and excitement sometimes prevents. The beloved disciple is "he who remains," abides, literally leans on Jesus, and remaining is a key word in this Gospel. Because remaining allows one the space, the time, even the awkwardness of inaction, to discern and believe.
John does not criticize the active role of apostles; this has its place in God's plans of sending forth and announcing and doing as Jesus did. But John stays where he is, close to Jesus, and so dwells on details and lets their significance come into focus.
|
|
Last Updated ( Saturday, 29 March 2008 )
|
|
Read more...
|
|
| | << Start < Prev 1 2 3 Next > End >>
| | Results 1 - 7 of 15 |
|
|
|
|
