Wednesday, March 07, 2012

Hysterical?

The Right Rev. Gregory Cameron- an architect and supporter of the Covenant has written reasons for voting yes. Published at the Fulcrum website he offers 5 points.

Cameron: 1. A covenant is the way we say we belong together.
Answer: 1. Can't we just say we belong together without a piece of paper?
Cameron: 2. The Covenant would restore trust.
Answer: 2. Doesn't seem to be working- so far it has made people more mistrustful and it is not even in effect yet.
Cameron: 3. The Covenant sets out our common ground.
Answer 3. While many agree about this, there is a non-Anglican emphasis on a literal reading of scripture as a primary source for decision making.
Cameron 4. Anglicanism has always sought out the middle way (the Via Media) to find a centre around which people can gather.
Answer: 4. And we have never had a covenant to find this middle way - an external piece of paper to force the middle way goes against our way of sorting it out.
Cameron 5. The Covenant offers a better way of doing business.
Answer: 5. Better? how? reduced to eternal squabbling instead of moving ahead in mission.
Other points: Cameron: So why the opposition? There has been some hysterical language from the “No to the Covenant” campaign, saying such things as the Covenant is institutionalised homophobia (It isn’t actually mentioned in the Covenant, which is designed to facilitate conversation on this subject among others) and that no cleric could feel safe in his or her own pulpit, but the objections seem to boil down to ...
We (No Anglican Covenant Coalition) are hysterical? Who is using red font? Not us.
It is a common tactic to accuse one's opponents of being hysterical when one has no real answer to the questions asked and facts presented. Read the rest of Bishop Cameron's essay and decide for yourself if he adequately responds to the questions and facts presented at the No Anglican Covenant: Anglicans for Comprehensive Unity web site The Revd Canon Dr Sarah Coakley, Norris-Hulse Professor of Divinity, Cambridge University, Church of England says:
“The disturbing theological vacuity of the Covenant document nonetheless comes with a hidden iron fist: do not be misled by its rhetoric of friendly collaboration between national churches,” writes Prof Coakley. “The Covenant bespeaks a quite different ecclesiology from that of Cranmer's ‘blessed company of all faithful people,’ and profoundly alters what it means to be Anglican. The deepest theological challenges of our day cannot be answered by hapless bureaucratic manipulations of our theological tradition.”