tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post115127328307132682..comments2023-12-17T16:13:06.670-05:00Comments on In a Godward direction: Our New Primate: God Bless Her!Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-1151929280283166492006-07-03T07:21:00.000-05:002006-07-03T07:21:00.000-05:00Paul might or might not have been the author, or w...Paul might or might not have been the author, or wrong, about some of the passages in question. What makes it interesting is that if you read it whilst noting that the cultural norm was for women not *even* to learn at all, then `in silence at home' makes Paul out to be a *liberator*. Go for it!Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-1151728011226793802006-06-30T23:26:00.000-05:002006-06-30T23:26:00.000-05:00We have indeed come a long way from the days in wh...<I>We have indeed come a long way from the days in which Saint Paul said it was not proper for a woman to speak in church or to teach, but that she should learn in all submission.</I><BR/><BR/>Um, better NT scholars here than me (by a long shot!) . . . but I thought that "the ink was still wet" on these ones? (i.e. they're <I>not</I> by Paul, nee' Saul, of Tarsus?)<BR/><BR/>I mean, not that it matters: Paul was (IMO) wrong (when not unintelligible) about plenty of other matters, so he could be wrong about this one, too!<BR/><BR/>I am precisely 0% interested in the alleged "motivations" of some of those who elected +Katharine. God has worked in far <I>weirder</I> ways, than to use "what some meant for ill" for GREAT good (Joseph in Egypt? Ultimately, Jesus on the Cross?)<BR/><BR/>+(+)KJS is my PB: that's all I need to know.<BR/><BR/>That said: I think she screwed up w/ B033, and---since she is a bishop who enthusiastically affirms "the ministry of ALL the baptized"---I feel it's part of <I>my</I> ministry, to tell her so! ;-/Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-1151352149147529402006-06-26T15:02:00.000-05:002006-06-26T15:02:00.000-05:00Dear DF,You may be right; but I suspect that a num...Dear DF,<BR/>You may be right; but I suspect that a number of the Jenkins supporters would rather take the high road and not "vote for schism" -- and more importantly could not bring themsleves to support Parsley because of his strong anti-Network stand. In the long run I think it was their unwillingness to give up on Jenkins that led to ++Katharine's election, although as a matter of fact, since she won by the minimal required majority, a single mischievous vote may have been decisive.<BR/><BR/>There is, of course, a strange history in episcopal elections of people using the ballot for something other than actually expressing their favor for a candidate. I've heard it said in the present case that a number of bishops voted for +KJS on the first ballot as a "courtesy" to show support for her, intending to shift in subsequent ballots. Again, this is a rumor and I do not know it to be true -- but it is plausible.Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-1151351466618135522006-06-26T14:51:00.000-05:002006-06-26T14:51:00.000-05:00Tobias,I'm not so sure that Schori basically had t...Tobias,<BR/><BR/>I'm not so sure that Schori basically had the election and could have gotten it without conservative bishops' support.<BR/><BR/>In looking at the official results from each ballot, taking into consideration each candidate's stand on GLBT issues, and hearing even Griswold comment that conservative bishops voted for Schori in order to facilitate schism, I think it could easily have gone to Parsley. Especially if conventional wisdom is on target with the number of conservative bishops voting for Schori being between 6 - 9.<BR/><BR/>On the fifth ballot Sauls had 0 votes, Gulick had 0 votes, and Alexander had 2. If you take 6 - 9 bishop votes away from Schori and give them to Parsley, plus take Duque-Gomez's 6 votes and Jenkins 3 votes and give them to Parsley, Parsley could have won with 97 votes.<BR/><BR/>Somewhat speculative, but as for political mischief it could have been pretty easy to do.<BR/><BR/>Frankly, Schori won, I'm glad (well, I was until Wednesday... now "the jury" in my mind is re-deliberating), and any political mischief by conservative bishops voting intentionally for Schori doesn't taint her as a Presiding Bishop in my mind.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-1151336320847069592006-06-26T10:38:00.000-05:002006-06-26T10:38:00.000-05:00Dear Douglas (H),Thanks for the note. I too had he...Dear Douglas (H),<BR/>Thanks for the note. I too had heard this rumor, but I don't know whether to credit it or not. Ultimately I can't imagine more than a handful of conservative bishops voting this way, and as the ballots were tending I think +Katharine would have prevailed on the next ballot regardless of any such political mischief.Tobias Stanislas Haller BSGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08047429477181560685noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6786565.post-1151282428716656542006-06-25T19:40:00.000-05:002006-06-25T19:40:00.000-05:00Tobias,I don't mean to be a downer after such an u...Tobias,<BR/><BR/>I don't mean to be a downer after such an uplifting post, but this seems to be the most germane place to ask this: what do you make of what has been reported elsewhere that some of the more conservative bishops voted for Jefferts Schori in a move calculated to hasten schism?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com