KJS Muttered about Lambeth
Dear blogging friends, did any of you post or comment on the statement that Katharine Jefferts-Schori emitted after Lambeth? I didn't, nor am I seeing that any of you did. The best I could see in it is that this time she managed not to ask us to "stand in a crucified place" nor to "fast for a season." Did any of you find it worth the electrons involved in its distribution? Did any of you comment? For the life of me, I did not. And I can't find that any of my blogging buddies even bothered to post or link to it.
I'd like to know if you posted a link and what you said. If you ignored it (as I did) I'd like to hear why.
I'd like to know if you posted a link and what you said. If you ignored it (as I did) I'd like to hear why.
posted by Lisa Fox at 8/05/2008 09:24:00 PM
17 Comments:
I didn't say a mutterin' word, because I thought, "OMG, did she finally just have enough of it, say what she meant, and get it 'right'???!"
:-)
Really, Scott? You thought she got it right??
I thought she was vying for the Dimosthenes Award.
I saw it linked a few places - ELO, ECafe, etc - but no comment. blah blah blah --
Yes, Ann, the places allied with "815" covered it. But did anybody else find it even remotely worth noting?
can't even find it. Anyone got a link?
OK, Malcom+. You force me to give this link. Like anyone cares. :(
I think ++Katharine is trying very hard to be PB for ALL of us, which is why she cannot adopt what would be an essentially schismatic stance "on the left." I want to cut her a great deal of slack as she tries to make public statements that don't give aid and comfort to the reactionaries who want to polarize us.
Basically, she said pretty much nothing. This is the first time I've seen the statement. It's a lot better than her response after the primates' meeting last time around. I'm sure she'll have more to say as time passes, but, perhaps, it's not too bad for the time being. With William, I'd like to cut her slack on this one.
I'm with Mimi. It's a nonstatement. Right now, the Americans need to avoid making any news or waves, so that they and everyone else can just have some time to digest. She has to say something, though, so she may as well make it something not worth quoting.
And like Mimi, I hadn't seen it before. And even if I had, I probably wouldn't have blogged about it. I'm a bit Lambeth'd out, I'm afraid.
OK, y'all. Thanks for the comments. You go cut her some slack. I'll try to hold my tongue.
I always hope for a stronger commitment to inclusion - ala Fred Hiltz in Canada - instead of pablum and some wink and nod. I want leadership. The right seems to have no problem stating their commitment - I am tired of people like KJS and RW (see his current now coming to light "letters" here. Everyone knows what the 2 of them think in private - and I don't think unity is served by supporting bigotry.
Lisa, cutting KJS slack is pretty much the same as ignoring her statement. I understand why some of you think that is not enough. On the other hand, Rowan is impossible to ignore. I read somewhere (can't remember where) that at the end of the final Presidential Address, KJS did not join the ranks of those applauding the speech but stood with her arms folded.
I'm concerned about the spring 2009 primates meeting. What will come out of that?
I Googled around and found that BabyBlue reported this from sources who were allegedly present at the address.
Possibly one of the more interesting items is that several bishops report that when Rowan Williams finished his final presidential address, he was greeted by a rousing standing ovation by all. Well, almost all. Several non-American bishops report that Katharine Jefferts Schori did not join in the applause, but stood with her arms folded as the ovation continued, while a number of Episcopal bishops walked out.
My sense of it is this (and yes I read it at a couple of sites, but did not post on it):
She issued a statement because she thought she should. She said almost nothing, because, probably tired, she needed to also mull over the situation and respond on US soil, which she did today.
I actually, politically, appreciate that she did not respond to much in Lambeth. I think that was VERY politically and strategically savvy, which can also be seen as courteous and respectful to Williams/Lambeth/The listening process, etc.
Remember, every time she opens her mouth, certain so-and-sos respond. Sometimes the biggest statement one can make is silence... something the Gafconites still have not realized.
While Orombi, Bul and others shot arrows, she stayed quiet. Classy, respectful, VERY smart and right, imho.
OK. First I need to say that I did not see her webcast this week. I was actually working in the vineyards, trying to figure out how to rescue our diocese's relationship with a southern Sudanese diocese ... despite many people here who want to shuck it.
Having not seen the webcast, but only KJS's Official Comment after Lambeth, I have only one word to respond to her.
Laodicea.
Lisa,
Respectfully ... one person's Laodicea is another person's Anglican Via Media.
We're all free, of course, to say whatever we want about how our PB is leading ... but I don't think our cause is served by criticizing her. I'm committed to giving her my support ... and as much patience as I can muster.
WilliamK, thanks for the continuing dialogue. I think a statement in the Anglican Via Media would have affirmed the faithful GLBTs she knows are in our church, while warmly embracing the faithfulness of those who still differ from the "majority" within TEC. What she offered, I still believe was something between Laodicea and Ostrichville. I'm not against her; I'm just very, very disappointed in her, as in Rowan Williams.
Post a Comment
<< Home