Day Two of Anglican Communion "Standing Committee" meetings in London
The appeal to naivete is overwhelming - is anyone fooled? Nope.
One hopes that someone, somewhere understands that "dialogue" and "conversation" are actually strategic methods of wearing down opposition.
The leadership of the Episcopal Church, practiced by decades of political activism, are experts at it and it just never ceases to amaze me how easily manipulated the so-called "structures" of the Anglican Communion are to this type of strategic maneuvering. We recall that after the Presiding Bishop returned from the Primates Meeting in Tanzania a few years ago, she spelled it out quite plainly to her staff (which was recorded and later removed from the TEC website) exactly what the strategy would be. TEC would keep dialoguing until all the opposition had either retired or thrown up their hands and gone home.
Hearing today's news from the so-called "Standing Committee" meeting in London - not apparently accountable to anyone (and hence why so many people have resigned from it!) - that the Episcopal Church will continue to dominate the structures (it's been years now since the primates have actually met) with no discipline what-so-ever and the reason given is so that "dialogue" will continue. It's such a joke - there is no such thing as dialogue (that would mean there is an openness to the distinct possibility that TEC has careened off the rails and is running ripshod over landscape, intending to take everyone with them) - "dialogue" is a METHOD for wearing down opposition.
Here's the scoop from today's "meeting" in London:
But wait, there's more! Patterson - the man who WON'T GO AWAY is now BACK!
The one province that is as progressive as TEC will host the next ACC meeting - and let's be sure it's as far away as possible, say - not only a different time zone, but a different date zone. How much is that going to cost? Who knows - because there's no public report on the finances. Can it get even worse?
Even Kenneth Kearon is seeing the writing on the wall, "noting that the credibility of the Primates' Meeting and the ACC was being openly questioned by some and this criticism was increasingly focused on the Standing Committee itself." But guess what the rest of the "committee" says? Tough Doo Doo, folks, with Elizabeth Paver defending their sinking ratings by saying "the Committee needed to respond to criticisms positively and robustly," and then pointed out the flak that has just been hired to carry the shovel.
Rowan Williams gets two thumbs up for trying. He is reported to have warned, excuse me "questioned" the "committee" by asking (a nice rhetorical method) "whether the ACC's committee structure was appropriate for this new century." Bingo, your Grace! You are absolutely right. But guess what - the Standing Committee responded by putting together a little self-appointed insiders group of their own members to type up "a strategic review and planning process relating to ACC membership and meetings and Standing Committee structure and operation" Who's on this little inside group? Who knows? Pass the pizza!
The leadership of the Episcopal Church, practiced by decades of political activism, are experts at it and it just never ceases to amaze me how easily manipulated the so-called "structures" of the Anglican Communion are to this type of strategic maneuvering. We recall that after the Presiding Bishop returned from the Primates Meeting in Tanzania a few years ago, she spelled it out quite plainly to her staff (which was recorded and later removed from the TEC website) exactly what the strategy would be. TEC would keep dialoguing until all the opposition had either retired or thrown up their hands and gone home.
Hearing today's news from the so-called "Standing Committee" meeting in London - not apparently accountable to anyone (and hence why so many people have resigned from it!) - that the Episcopal Church will continue to dominate the structures (it's been years now since the primates have actually met) with no discipline what-so-ever and the reason given is so that "dialogue" will continue. It's such a joke - there is no such thing as dialogue (that would mean there is an openness to the distinct possibility that TEC has careened off the rails and is running ripshod over landscape, intending to take everyone with them) - "dialogue" is a METHOD for wearing down opposition.
Here's the scoop from today's "meeting" in London:
Committee decides separation would inhibit dialogue:
Committee decides separation would inhibit dialogue.
UN Anglican Observer: "Our Anglican witness is becoming visible."
ACC "proper body" to consider Primates' request for eight Standing Committee members
Yikes - they don't even "report" what the "report" said - and it does make one wonder. Since the meetings are "closed" who has any clue what they are doing? They might as well just order pizza and catch the cab to Heathrow.
ACC consultant Robert Fordham and ACO Director for Finance and Administration Andrew Franklin introduced the Report and Financial Statements for the year ended 31 December 2009. The Committee subsequently agreed to adopt the report.
But wait, there's more! Patterson - the man who WON'T GO AWAY is now BACK!
Canon Kearon then reported that during his visit to New Zealand earlier this year he had met with an informal group about the planning of ACC-15. Bishop John Paterson has been selected to Chair an official planning group and the venue has been selected as Holy Trinity Cathedral in Auckland. The group also identified the strong mission theme of ACC-14 as something they would like to continue.
The one province that is as progressive as TEC will host the next ACC meeting - and let's be sure it's as far away as possible, say - not only a different time zone, but a different date zone. How much is that going to cost? Who knows - because there's no public report on the finances. Can it get even worse?
Even Kenneth Kearon is seeing the writing on the wall, "noting that the credibility of the Primates' Meeting and the ACC was being openly questioned by some and this criticism was increasingly focused on the Standing Committee itself." But guess what the rest of the "committee" says? Tough Doo Doo, folks, with Elizabeth Paver defending their sinking ratings by saying "the Committee needed to respond to criticisms positively and robustly," and then pointed out the flak that has just been hired to carry the shovel.
Rowan Williams gets two thumbs up for trying. He is reported to have warned, excuse me "questioned" the "committee" by asking (a nice rhetorical method) "whether the ACC's committee structure was appropriate for this new century." Bingo, your Grace! You are absolutely right. But guess what - the Standing Committee responded by putting together a little self-appointed insiders group of their own members to type up "a strategic review and planning process relating to ACC membership and meetings and Standing Committee structure and operation" Who's on this little inside group? Who knows? Pass the pizza!
No comments:
Post a Comment