It seems to me that one rarely sees a priest who happens to be a woman happen to wear a maniple.
Actually, one doesn’t see many people wear the maniple these days, for reasons that I’ve never quite understood.
Why, when one does see such a thing, does it seem invariably to be sported on the left forearm of a priest who happens to be a man?
Your thoughts please.
Hurrah! Evidence, like the interview with +Gene a few years back, that you’d make a great ecclesiastical chat show host Kelvin 😉 I’d watch it!
Loved her vision of the church as holding different perspectives in tension. Hard work, but much better than settling for a monochrome church!
Yes – a well produced and conducted interview. But why no quesions asked that might challenge +Katharine. E. g. why does she seem so determined to turn the TEC into a monochrome (i.e. liberal) church by driving out those who hold conservative theological views? Why is she so intent ( using the full weight of secular law) to grab the church properties from those Episcopal parishes which have decided to realign with another Province? Of course, legally in the USA the church buildings do belong to the denomination. But morally? After all most of those churches have been built and maintained by the local people with not a penny being contributed by TEC. Bishop Katharine impresses me in many ways although she is at the opposite end of the theological spectrum. I just find it so sad that since she became PB the TEC has become increasingly fragmented. And just in case I am asked – I do not support the action of parishes that have decided to defect. I believe they should stay and continue to witness to their understanding of the Faith.
Well, I guess its a matter of perspective. I did kind of think that the oil spill affecting the US coast and the most devastating earthquake in recent history were kind of big stories. They also both related to the Synod that +Katharine was at. We were discussing ecological stuff quite a lot and we gave money directly to Episcopal Sisters in Haiti.
It seems to me that the US church ownership thing is a bit of a non-story in the long run, however emotive it might be today. The SEC here and the Church of England down south would surely behave in exactly the same way to any vicar and congregation claiming they own the buildings and church fabric. Indeed, I think that in Scotland at least, it might well be the case that the charity regulations would make the Diocesan Trustees liable if they were not to press such a case.
I’m no lawyer, I’m a priest. And I’m not as brave as you are, Ross, if you really think that the law of the land in the US (or in the UK) and moral values are not more closely linked than you seem to suggest.
In Scotland we have no choice. Our canons acknowledge that our church will be governed in accordance with Scots Law.
The "trim the enormous beech tree" project is underway even as I write. I do wish that whoever has planted that tree had planted something a good deal more demure and petite. We have lots and lots of leaves. Next door has lots and lots of of bird dung. Hopefully this will help. Perhaps thinning…
This documentary on Channel 4 is very wearisome. Too many pantomime characters. Too much like real life.
Tomorrow is the day that Episcopal churches count the number of people at services. You have to be there to be counted. Tomorrow there is also a Big Sing at the church of St Peter and St Mildred, Linlithgow – starts 6 pm.
Two consultations exercises today. This morning I was in Edinburgh taking part in a discussion about what General Synod is for. (Polite answers on a postcard or in comments or e-mails). How to connect General Synod with local congregations? Which is the primary entity in the Christian church, the province/nation, the diocese, the charge (multiple…
Leave a Reply