The ACNA is going to be ordaining at least one person this afternoon to the transitional diaconate just down the road from here. Where is their gracious restraint? (Never mind that they are not in communion with the ABC; they think they are.)

What about the consequences of espousing open discrimination against GLBT folks and women? What about our consciences? What about we start demanding a little respect for our prayerful process of discernment?

"...if our bonds of affection are to hold."

I must speak out. I can stand it no longer. Affection is not affection at all if it is conditional on anything. Affection has no prerequisites. It is not qualified.

Most of all, affection carries no thinly veiled threats of breaking affection.

Rowan has no affection for TEC, except we throw our LGBT brothers and sisters under the bus. Others in the Anglican Communion, for whom we still have affection, have no affection for us except we declare our LGBT brothers and sisters intransigent, disordered, unhealthy sinners. Subsequently, there is no bond of affection in the Anglican Communion.

But worst of all, to base communion on "bonds of affection" is a fallacy, if not a category mistake.

Communion is in and through Christ Jesus, and him alone. In him and through him our paltry, meager affections toward one another are unnecessary. We can never feel our way to loving one another. We can only do our way to loving one another, and that's hard work, because it holds up to judgment our refusals to work with another because in our judgment the other has "broken the bonds of affection".

Let me get this straight....

The ABC can send a strongly worded statement (threat) within a matter of hours when TEC chooses an LGBT person as bishop--but still can't be bothered to do the same to protest the impending pogrom against LGBTs in Uganda?

Rowan Williams just murdered the Anglican Communion in cold blood.

Paige Baker

Spectacular contrast to his sorry dithering on Uganda. Aside from "hoovering" the Lambeth carpets, for which he could be paid at a rate more in keeping with his talents, what the hell is the man good for? The only factor I see that favors his continuing employment as archbishop is Sentamu lurking in the wings.

Williams is of the same ilk as the Ikers, the Andersons, the Minns, the Akinolas. I personally think that he secretly approves of the ACNA. His silence on the Ugandan anti-gay law is bothersome. I question where he stands on human rights. It almost sounds like the North African leaders have some sort of hold over Williams. He threatens the future of the Episcopal Church in the Anglican Communion in his statement and yet the Nigerian and Ugandan bishops are just as guilty of genocide and get to remain in the communion. These bishops should have been thrown out years ago. Williams should be vested in the suit of the knave for he is a great fool for not taking care of all of the children in the Communion.

Paige's point is the telling one here. Lambeth Palace says it would be counterproducrive to speak out against a law that legalizes the murder of gays people and the imprisonment of their confidants, but thinks that inserting itself into the middle of the consent process of a duly elected Episcopal bishop is a good use of the Archbishop's moral authority. Do the clergy and people of the Church of England feel comfortable with this?

Another voice, our presiding bishop, from an NPR interview just a few days ago:
http://www.episcopalcafe.com/lead/presiding_bishop/pb_interviewed_on_npr_in_atlan.html

KJS: The Canons or the Church Law of The Episcopal Church has for a long time said that the discernment process is open to any baptized person. So it does not represent a change. It [actions of GC 2009] represents a reaffirmation of what church law has said for a long time. It did not say anything about repudiating the statement that the bishops made in 2007.

NPR: So the bottom line is it fair to say that at least the door has been opened for gay and lesbian bishops in addition to Bishop Robinson.

KJS: The door has been open for many years.

NPR: So if an openly gay or lesbian person were to make it through to the stage where he or she could be consecrated bishop you would go ahead with that.

KJS: It is my duty, my canonical duty as Presiding Bishop, to take order for the consecration of a bishop whose election has been affirmed by the consent process.

Between Uganda, and the C of E's yet to be resolved debate over women bishops, I'm stunned that ++Rowan thinks he has any moral authority to stand on here. His is a church riddled with patriarchy. It's no surprise that they don't support TEC's actions, only that they don't see the problem of pronouncing judgment on others while their house is in such disarray. Something about a log in the eye comes to mind.

Donna McNiel

Bravo to Bp. Bruno for his straightforward and courageous statement. He is a powerful witness for Christians everywhere.

"Bravo to Bp. Bruno for his straightforward and courageous statement."

When I read his statement it sounded more threatening to conservatives than straightforward, assuming there are conservative commitees/bishops out there. More like,"No real Episcopalian can possibly say no." Or, "It's in the canons so if you do refuse, presentment could follow." Are the resolutions passed this summer that binding? As for the divorce part, I know some did refuse consent because of his divorce, so why should that stop them from voting no now?

Chris Harwood [Name added by ed.]

Why isn't the ++ABC scolding the Ugandan Bishop who suggests that glbt folk are more reprehensible than cockroaches? The Dromantine statement anathematizes statements like this and those of other Ugandans who support this legislation. Lest we forget Nigeria was backed off a similar law just a few years ago.

I agree with those who suggest that the ++ABC is inequitable in his actions and absent any moral authority. Let him return to academia where he can ponder and posture and make all the insincere statements he wants as intellectual experiments.

It is astounding to me that +Rowan would respond so quickly, as Paige pointed out, and with a statement that clearly frames the consent process for Mary+ as a line in the sand. Cross this line, he says, and you have deliberately broken the communion.

The thing is, he knows which way this is likely to go. So by declaring so swiftly and with so little nuance that this is the final test, I can only assume he is taking actions now that he will later use to justify a declaration that TEC is out (and maybe that ACNA is in, although there aren't very many of them).

Jason Cox

It's not for Williams to declare that TEC is "out", Jason.

Well, at least we understand why Rowan hasn't responded to the proposed law in Uganda: "a period of gracious restraint"....

Marshall Scott

++Bushybrows has by fraud ascended to the role to which he seemed to have felt himself anointed from his youth. Now secure in his place (how secure, I wonder, given it is a political job), he has cast off his sham liberalism and shown Papist (in the worst contemporary sense) soul. He wants to be a fellow Pope with Herr Ratzinger and like the latter's former leader is happy to sacrifice inconvenient folk to the glories of his triumph. Since he like to meddle in our affairs, maybe we should do a little politicking in Merrie Olde Englande and get the PM to suggest outr leader be elevated to Lord Rowan of Snowdonia and get the genuine article in the see of Augustine to carry out the 21st-centurization of the C of E.+