tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5449677811690616608.post2959552838786797394..comments2023-12-15T21:49:46.651+01:00Comments on Pluralist Speaks: Here Comes the Attack BackPluralist (Adrian Worsfold)http://www.blogger.com/profile/01922153724523820866noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5449677811690616608.post-86117511732395954292008-11-23T05:23:00.000+01:002008-11-23T05:23:00.000+01:00Well the sense of it would not continue after a co...Well the sense of it would not continue after a correction, so I have left the matter of 'restraint' aside by removing reference to the intervention regarding the vote at the time. Still, thanks for the correction.<BR/><BR/>Grandmère Mimi - I think there is plenty left in the North American drama.<BR/><BR/>I've submitted on this topic to Episcopal Cafe, with an opening line 'How does your GAFCON grow?', which is supposed to sound like 'How does your garden grow?' but this poetic is probably not obvious. It does look at both sides of the pond.Pluralist (Adrian Worsfold)https://www.blogger.com/profile/01922153724523820866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5449677811690616608.post-2256988986102886422008-11-23T05:15:00.000+01:002008-11-23T05:15:00.000+01:00I'll correct this error. I'm sure I read it somewh...I'll correct this error. I'm sure I read it somewhere so I'd better not spread it further, assuming I did read it.Pluralist (Adrian Worsfold)https://www.blogger.com/profile/01922153724523820866noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5449677811690616608.post-33993022452828159232008-11-22T20:14:00.000+01:002008-11-22T20:14:00.000+01:00I find this all somewhat confusing. I suppose it ...I find this all somewhat confusing. I suppose it could be that it's an English thing, and I am but a humble citizen of a former colony.<BR/><BR/>The strictures of Turnbull's definition of evangelicalism are narrow, indeed.<BR/><BR/>If the English evangelicals see their counterparts in the US, who were "harassed out of their churches by those with an inclusive agenda", as one in spirit and practice, then they should continue to watch the series as the story unfolds. There may be more excitement than the English foresee.June Butlerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01723016934182800437noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5449677811690616608.post-68030538285657748272008-11-22T19:18:00.000+01:002008-11-22T19:18:00.000+01:00Just to clarify, I think you will find it was Phil...Just to clarify, I think you will find <A HREF="http://www.peter-ould.net/2008/11/17/talking-together-staying-together/" REL="nofollow">it was Philip Lovegrove</A> of the General Synod, not Philip Giddings of Anglican Mainstream, who tried to 'apply the brakes' to Richard Turnbull.<BR/><BR/>It would also be more accurate to say that it was <I>some</I> (albeit the majority), of "the group in attendance" at NEAC 5 who decided not to vote on the motion presented to them, rather than "the group" <I>simpliciter</I>. It was, after all, a split vote, not a unanimous one.<BR/><BR/>It cannot, of course, be predicted which way the vote would have gone had it been put. There may well have been many who, if push had come to shove, would have voted in favour, despite preferring not to vote at all. Similarly, there may well have been others who wanted to vote, only in order to vote down the motion!Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03590979027426082714noreply@blogger.com