Two points that ought to be noted

General Convention

The author of the EmberDays blog points out two things that I think people have noticed, but haven’t recognized the implications of:

“Archbishop Williams has expressed two propositions:

(1) that Gene Robinson is a genuine bishop of the Anglican Communion, but a stumbling-block to the weaker brethren, and

(2) that Martyn Minns is an outlaw.

Both these propositions have the merit of being true.”

Read the rest here: Just because all your friends are talking about Lambeth

The Author

Episcopal bishop, dad, astronomer, erstwhile dancer...


  1. Yes, he’s right – I was going to link to that post myself. We need to slow down and get this right; it’s going to take time and patience, but the end result will be solid and better for everbody.
    Minns IS an outlaw, and I don’t know why anybody would ever have expected him to be invited, anyway. Akinola was just firmly rebuked on this account, and in my view is slowly being marginalized. That’s what it’s going to take.

  2. WilliamPaul says

    Lovely to see the inclusivists types dip into name-calling. Minns is an ‘outlaw’? Give me a break.
    Next, the rhetorical strategy of calling those who object to VGR ‘weaker brethren’ is pretty transparent. Why not stick with the truly true thing: VGR’s manner of life, his sexual policy, is objectionable–and remember one more time if you want something ‘that people haven’t recognized the implication of’: we never in ECUSA have voted on the merits of the case and affirmed SSB and SSS.

  3. That’s all right, William Paul. I find it hilarious for “exclusivists” to chide “inclusivists” for being exclusive. (FYI, I don’t consider myself “inclusive” – just interested in what’s true. And what’s true, I’m afraid, is that gay people are just like straight people except for affectional orientation. Everybody’s starting to recognize this, even if the so-called “orthodox” continue to try to hold out against reality.)
    And BTW, don’t you believe in Canon Law? Since Minns was consecrated in violation of it, he’s illegal as a Bishop in the U.S. and shouldn’t even be working here. Does that make you feel better than using the word “outlaw”?

  4. (Anyway, what are you worried about? You got what you wanted: Gene Robinson has been singled out, of all U.S. bishops, and has not been invited to Lambeth.
    Why do you continue to complain?)

Comments are closed.