tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post5734509385550097202..comments2024-03-22T15:15:09.943-04:00Comments on Lionel Deimel’s Web Log: An Episcopal Bridge Too FarLionel Deimelhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08363018512775944659noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-33717239511753875302012-04-17T21:01:22.854-04:002012-04-17T21:01:22.854-04:00I can't imagine why he would sign such a thing...I can't imagine why he would sign such a thing in any capacity, individual or diocesan. Has he missed out on Lambeth '30?Ghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00324636915206892169noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-18538373427724788712012-04-16T12:13:04.733-04:002012-04-16T12:13:04.733-04:00I remember when Jeanie Wylie Kellerman was Editor ...I remember when Jeanie Wylie Kellerman was Editor of the Witness and said she was personally opposed to abortion. She picked up a great deal of flack for that but she had the courage to say what she believed and, while I, as a feminist, was disappointed, as an Episcopalian, I was proud of her courage. <br /><br />I will not pretend for a minute that I am pleased with Bishop Price's statement. I think he is sadly misinformed about what is at the heart of this issue. It remains for Episcopalians - especially bishops, but all the members of the baptized - who understand the issue clearly to speak out and sign statements. <br /><br />The overwhelming majority of Episcopalians who do so will not only make the opinion of one bishop one of a clear minority but it will stand as a witness to the diversity of The Episcopal Church.Elizabeth Kaetonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06787552280232329081noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-8083329850283195912012-04-15T23:40:34.987-04:002012-04-15T23:40:34.987-04:00I am totally disappointed in Ken Price -- shocked ...I am totally disappointed in Ken Price -- shocked as well. And as to signing as an individual - that won't play in the media.Annhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07287169546184325690noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-8370600716077018922012-04-15T15:21:27.433-04:002012-04-15T15:21:27.433-04:00I expressed my displeasure with this to Bishop Pri...I expressed my displeasure with this to Bishop Price today (he was at St. Andrew's for confirmation). He says that he signed the statement as an individual, not as a representative of the Diocese or of the Episcopal Church, and that he made that clear to Don Green. He said that Episcopal Church polity permits him to state his own opinion publicly, but that it would require action of Diocesan Convention for him to make such a statement on behalf of the Diocese, and that he assumes that Episcopalians would understand that. Unfortunately, the news article does not make that clear. It does not actually state that this represents the position of the various denominations, but it could easily be misinterpreted that way.<br /><br />Bishop Price said that the statement was hashed out over a period of time, but he was not present for much of that discussion. He said that the original proposal by Bishop Zubik was quite a bit more radical (calling for the elimination of the health care mandate completely).<br /><br />He says that one of the advantages of being an Episcopalian is that we are allowed to disagree with each other. I accept that, and I exercised my prerogative by expressing my disagreement with the statement. <br /><br />Bill Ghristwdg_pghhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15990866393869521490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-15284213019810567612012-04-15T13:04:55.071-04:002012-04-15T13:04:55.071-04:00Even though I agree that the argument about religi...Even though I agree that the argument about religious freedom is a red herring, I think there is value in serious discussion of the limits of religious freedom. Harvard professor Michael Sandel has argued that the Constitution's special protection of religious liberty indicates the different role that religion plays in public life as contrasted with other voluntary associations. When the government limits religious freedom, it must establish that there is a compelling public interest that is being served. I think that argument needs to be made more forcefully and persuasively in this situation, as the argument for the insurance mandate needs to be made. That argument was made for restricting the religious freedom of Quakers by forcing them to finance through their taxes the military. I was not happy about that, but I accepted that the argument was made.Daniel Weirhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11430381764138066595noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-14910974836932130982012-04-15T07:11:10.818-04:002012-04-15T07:11:10.818-04:00My impression is that the Standing Committee knew ...My impression is that the Standing Committee knew nothing of the Christian Associates statement. Surely, Diocesan Council was equally ignorant.<br /><br />I have to say that I have never really thought about the freedom of the bishop to express his or her opinion in public. The obvious problem in this case, of course, is that the endorsement appears to commit the diocese to a position.<br /><br />It is interesting that nothing on the diocesan Web site addresses the statement. Perhaps the diocese (Diocesan Council?) should repudiate it.Lionel Deimelhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08363018512775944659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-24583112242621179662012-04-14T23:08:03.803-04:002012-04-14T23:08:03.803-04:00I agree entirely with Lionel's comment. The f...I agree entirely with Lionel's comment. The first thing I looked for, in today's news story, was whether Bishop Price was foolish enough to join the herd of sheep following Zubik. Bishop Price's action is upsetting and at best overly simplistic. Garry Wills in the NYReview of Books, and others, have articulately explained that the Bishops' statement turns religious liberty on its head. It is the right of individual to religious liberty, without coercion by religious entities attempting to restrict access, which must be protected. Instead the bishops are attempting to coerce everyone to comply with their views in the false guise of protection of liberty. The Catholic Bishops are deliberately allowing themselves to be used as tools of the Republican extreme right in their intense desire to defeat Obama, and allowing themselves to be used to protect the richest one percent under the camouflage of a manufactured social issue. Was Bishop Price's signature authorized by the diocesan council? Shouldn't the council register its disagreement and disapproval of Bishop Price's action? Is it possible that Bishop Price understood what he was supporting? What are the candidates' positions on this issue?Garyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10008432818028709542noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-45733321715569598412012-04-14T21:48:29.569-04:002012-04-14T21:48:29.569-04:00The president has, when this all began, made the c...The president has, when this all began, made the compromise offer of having the INSURANCE companies offer free birth control rather than asking the religious institutions to pay for birth control. <br /><br />The only way religious institutions are affected is if their employees choose to take advantage of that benefit. It is unhelpful and unChristian to keep lying and saying that they are being required to pay for birth control when they are not. <br /><br />I believe that this uproar is more along the lines of being opposed to anything a democratic president and congress propose since these groups tend to affiliate with the republican party exclusively (excepting their willingness to take government funds for their activities from both democrats and republicans.)<br /><br />That and the fact that they know their followers don't listen to them nor abide by their dictates regarding sex and birth control and that really ticks them off so they want to gain control in other ways. Sad.Priscillahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13810106898462541118noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3320087.post-32795397102251292722012-04-14T16:32:19.139-04:002012-04-14T16:32:19.139-04:00Bishop Price's signature on this thing makes n...Bishop Price's signature on this thing makes no sense at all. I read about this in the paper this morning and was horrified. It seems to be something that the Archbishop of all outdoors is complicit in. There is obviously something that I am missing.Rodgehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00049340142362472535noreply@blogger.com