Thursday, September 20, 2007

HOB press conference report from BabyBlue

A report from BabyBlueOnline on the HOB's first press conference:

. . . The bishops are now being asked for specifics. Jurisdiction - they decline to talk about what was said about jurisdiction. They will say that the topic came up and they had "conversation" about it.

David Virtue is now asking about the Eight Flying Primatial Vicars. The bishops are saying that nothing happened. "Bishop Katharine" announced she was going to have an announcement about oversight and that was all that was said.

Question again about Pastoral Oversight: What is the substance it. Now O'Neill is saying that Schori will have to answer that, just as Rowan would have to answer to the other question. They are not talking specifics.

Talked about who is invited to Windsor. Being asked to be more specific. Is Gene Robinson going? O'Neill said no one but Canterbury can answer that question.

Who is going to decide whether TEC has complied to the Dar Es Salaam Communique? O'Neill wants to answer about about responding to the Windsor Report (now he's going on and on about that, but of course that was not the question). So he's answering a question about Dar Es Salaam.

Now the other bishop is saying that Dar Es Salaam Communique was issued by the Primates. It was not a Communique - wait? So is Rowan representing the Primates, Kevin asks. No, he's representing Canterbury. The invitation is to him, he doesn't represent the Primates.

Has Canterbury asked you to do anything? No, there have been no specifics just lots and lots of conversation. . .

. . . The press is asking again about when HOB is making a decision about same sex unions and the bishop of Colorado said that he's not sure that reflects an accurate view. They had conversation. But it's like Dar Es Salaam does not exist.

The bishops are being asked whether the bishops understand the high stakes?

The Dar Es Salaam Communique was not the essence of their conversation, says the bishop of Maryland. That was the intent. It was not a specific conversation - it was not about the Communique. When then what the hell are we doing here?. . .

Read it all.

No comments: