Reflections on time spent in Thailand
I found these interesting thoughts regarding time spent in Thailand and the way it changed this man’s perspective on “stuff,” materialism, relation ships etc. . .
More than my lack of charity was bothering me, though: My friends were Thai and, in the back of my mind, I knew that I would’ve given them the laptop had they been Americans.
Living in Thailand forces Americans to adjust to quite a few things. Among these is the fact that, compared to Americans, the Thai generally don’t care about stuff.1 I’d applied this generalization to my friends when I told them they couldn’t use my laptop, assuming that, because they were Thai, they shouldn’t be trusted with it. Though I had initially felt guilty about my willingness to treat Thai friends differently than I would have treated American friends, I slapped a lame excuse on this as well, convincing myself that the value of my computer, combined with the Thai disposition toward stuff, justified my behavior. [read more]
[Listening to: Inside Us All – Creed
– Human Clay (5:39)]
Ecumenical Insanity has some interesting news regarding the ECUpagan debacle:
The Episcopagan story is about to get bigger. Word in the blogosphere is that the Washington Times is going to be running a story in the next day or two about it. And from there it’s only a matter of time before other media outlets jump into the fray.
Hatchetman in the “grove” of the Lord
Chris Johnson has dug up this tidbit on Our Man Melnyk from the Druidry.org site, where his posts are now apparently stored under the name of “Thrum,” though he’s signing them “Bran.” (Those posts haven’t been deleted, just altered.) This one gives us an idea of how he and his wife view their ministry:
Very interesting reading–very interesting indeed.
[from the GetReligion blog]
Larry Stammer’s report in Wednesday’s Los Angeles Times could leave readers with the impression that if reconciliation fails in the Anglican Communion, it is largely the fault of Archbishop Peter J. Akinola of the Church of Nigeria.
Despite Akinola’s angry response, he should not be blamed for any failure of the report–after all, it is righteous anger, I don’t think anyone could disagree that the report was even handed for conservatives and liberals, whatever their outlook, they’d have to admit the report was more critical of boundary crossing than of the events that precipitated such crossing. If any single person ought to be blamed–and I don’t believe a singler person really ought to be–then it is Frank “Im OK you’re OK” Griswold and his patronizing sentiment of “regret” released only shortly after the Windsor report itself. The only thing Akinola can be faulted for is poor media relations and providing the liberals with something to take the attention off of theit own responses which, while much worse than Akinola’s, are couched in the ambiguous language of our political system. Honest and passionate disagreement looks like overt aggression in this system, while simpering and disingenuity look possitive.
Windsor Report Reactions
I’ve read most of the Windsor report and I’ve been keeping up with the reactions as much as possible. Reguarding the report itself, I have to say that I was pleased. I believe I had a more possative reaction than many conservatives because I never expected the report to be something it was not. This report is primarily about ecclesial structure and as such, it is unsurrprising that it directs attention toward the boundary crossing of the orthodox bishops, which, whether one approves or not, is something that simply must be dealt with. This report was intended to make recommendations about the future of our communion’s structure, how we handle disputes etc. .. it was never meant, because of its mandate, to provide a point by point refutation or a clear means of discipline, rather it was intended to lay a ecclesiological framework for the future decisions of the primates. The Primates meeting has always been the key to this situation, and the sooner they recognize and grasp thier own authority, the better. I believe they are preparing to do so based upon thier reactions (particularly Akinola’s) however, I don’t feel that Akinola’s negative response was very helpful–except perhaps as a bit of a pep talk to conservatives in the US. Actions are what is important and I hope and pray the primates will be clear and decisive. I feel that a possative reception of the report, along with a clear intent on the part of the orthodox primates to implement it and give it teeth would have been most helpful, but I still believe we are headed in that direction and that this report should be viewed as the first step toward an orthodox victory.
Southern Voice Online: “Gay bishop says schism won’t lead to Anglican split
Robinson tells Atlanta audience church should “prepare for reconciliation”
By DYANA BAGBY
Friday, October 15, 2004
The U.S. Episcopal Church’s first openly gay bishop said the Anglican archbishop of Nigeria is committing “idolatry” for using sexual orientation as a tool to divide the church.
Bishop V. Gene Robinson made his comments during a stop last week in Atlanta to address an Episcopal gay-rights conference at All Saints Episcopal Church in Midtown. His Oct. 7 appearance came just 11 days before the expected release of a report from an Anglican Communion commission on a growing split in the church over gay issues and Robinson’s ordination”
The ability of revisionists to state something completely counterfactual and reverse of the true situation never ceases to amaze me. Robinson accusing Akinola of Idolatry? That’s amazing–he needs to reread Paul and revisit those things in his own life that amount to idolatry–the current situation of the Anglican Communion and ECUSA stand as a testament to the Idolatry of the Episcopal Church, with Robinson’s own pride and idolatry at the top of the pile.