Catholic Discussion

[china]

Darkbeaver:
When your cat screams for your attention and leads you to its catfood bag or can that's not instinct it's reason, it's reasoning instinct.__________________________________________-

the case that you are describing is that of a hungry cat ( impulse) which knows where the food is (conditioning--- Remenber Pavlov) ?
If the cat sensed that there is a poison mixed with its food then you could say that it's the instinct playing its role,and then the cat could reason it out which is better ....the poisoned food ......or one of its nine lives.
PS By the way darkbeaver I hope you are talking about good Catholic celibate cat ,the topic is celibacy. '. '

 

[sanctus]

Reflections on The Universal Declaration of Human Rights


The Universal Declaration of Human Rights, adopted by the UN General Assembly in December 1948 and widely recognized as the "constitution" of the modern human rights movement, approaches its fiftieth anniversary amidst considerable turmoil. The prevailing approach to the rights it contains is pick-and-choose, cafeteria-style. The universality principle itself has been challenged, sometimes by governments claiming all rights are relative, sometimes by those who charge that universality is a cover for cultural imperialism. The latter accusation acquires credibility as UN conferences begin to resemble off-shore manufacturing sites where special interest groups strive to convert their agendas into new rights to be brought back home, or imposed on the developing world, as "international standards."

In researching the history of the Universal Declaration, I have been struck by the degree to which the men and women who framed the Declaration anticipated such problems. As a lawyer, I am impressed by the skill of the drafters, and by the safeguards they devised to help minimize future difficulties. They were well aware that no document, however skillfully crafted, could immunize their project from abuse, but they were convinced that progress in respecting human dignity required a framework based on a few commonly held principles.

The problem of universality loomed large from the moment the idea of an "international bill of rights" was conceived. In 1946, UNESCO appointed a committee composed of many of the leading thinkers of the day to study the feasibility of framing a charter of rights for all peoples and all nations. The committee began by sending a detailed questionnaire to statesmen and scholars in every part of the world. To their surprise, they found that the lists of basic rights and values they received from their far-flung sources were essentially similar. But as Jacques Maritain (one of the most active members of that committee) famously remarked, "Yes, we agree about the rights, but on condition no one asks us why."

Maritain and his colleagues did not regard the lack of consensus on foundations as fatal. The fact that an agreement could be achieved across cultures on several practical concepts was "enough," he wrote, "to enable a great task to be undertaken." More serious, the philosophers realized, would be the problems of arriving at a common understanding of what the principles meant, of reconciling tensions among the various rights, of integrating new rights, and of incorporating new applications. In that connection, Maritain pointed out that if the document were not to be a mere hodgepodge of ideas, it would need a tuning fork or "key" according to which the rights could be harmonized. Everything depends, he said, on "the ultimate value whereon those rights depend and in terms of which they are integrated by mutual limitations."

The UNESCO committee’s rapporteur, Richard McKeon, anticipated another problem. Different understandings of the meanings of rights usually reflect divergent concepts of man and of society, which in turn cause those who hold those understandings to have different views of reality. Thus, McKeon correctly predicted that, down the road, "difficulties will be discovered in the suspicions, suggested by these differences, concerning the tangential uses that might be made of a declaration of human rights for the purpose of advancing special interests." That is a philosopher’s way of saying, "Watch out, this whole enterprise could be hijacked."

The project passed from the philosophers’ committee to the group assigned to do the actual drafting, the UN Commission on Human Rights, chaired by Eleanor Roosevelt. The task that faced the Commission was daunting. Drafts, proposals, models, and ideas had poured in from all over the world. How could they ever be sorted, evaluated, and integrated into a document that the then fifty-eight member nations of the UN would find acceptable? The framers might have ended up like the architects and builders in Pieter Brueghel the Elder’s rendition of the Tower of Babel. Brueghel shows them huddled together in a corner, poring despondently over their plans. Behind them looms their disaster, constructed by a consortium, each member of which seems to have had a somewhat different conception of what the whole should look like. Happily for the Universal Declaration, the eighteen-member Human Rights Commission chose to put a single author in charge of the drafting process.

The choice fell to one of the most accomplished jurists of the twentieth century, René Cassin, who had been General Charles de Gaulle’s principal legal adviser during World War II. What was especially fortuitous about the choice of Cassin is that he was a master of the art of legislative drafting, a craft skill that has remained relatively undeveloped in the Anglo-American common-law countries, but that was brought to a high level of refinement in code-based legal systems like that of his native France.

That professional background facilitated Cassin’s response to Maritain’s call for an interpretive matrix. The Preamble and the Proclamation, as well as Articles 1 and 2 of the thirty-article Declaration, belong to what in continental legal terminology is called the "general part." These sections set forth the premises, purposes, and principles that are meant to guide the interpretation of the specifically enumerated rights in Articles 3 to 27. The Declaration’s last three articles, again, contain interpretive guides, contextualizing rights in relation to limits, duties, and the social and political order in which they are to be realized.

It was at Cassin’s insistence that a Declaration purporting to be universal should begin with a statement of what all human beings have in common. Thus the first article begins, not with a right, but with a statement about the human person.

Article 1. All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights. They are endowed with reason and conscience and should act towards one another in a spirit of brotherhood.
​

It tells us much about the spirit of Cassin, a secularized French Jew who had lost twenty relatives in concentration camps, that he insisted on beginning this document with an affirmation of faith in human conscience and rationality. In 1968, that largeness of spirit was recognized when he received the Nobel Peace Prize for his work on behalf of human rights.

As for the "key" in which the various rights were to be "harmonized," the Universal Declaration belongs to a family of postwar rights instruments that accord their highest priority to human dignity. This is signaled by the prominence and strategic placement of references to dignity in the document.

Also guiding the interpretation of dignitarian rights documents like the Declaration is their implicit image of the rights-bearer. The "everyone" whose rights are recognized is not the radically autonomous individual of recent American court decisions. Rather, he or she is portrayed throughout the document as situated in families, communities, workplaces, associations, religious groups, societies, and nations.

Cassin’s deftness is evident in his treatment of the "new" social and economic rights. Contrary to a view that acquired currency during the Cold War years, the Declaration’s articles dealing with rights to work, unionization, education, and so on were not included as concessions to the Soviets. They enjoyed wide support from the liberal democracies, a fact that is hardly surprising in view of their resemblance to the "second Bill of Rights" proposed in FDR’s 1944 State of the Union message, and to the social rights and obligations that were becoming standard features of most postwar constitutions. Agreement on the precise content of these articles, however, was extremely difficult to achieve. England, in particular, wanted these rights to be handled in a separate document. The Soviet Union, for its part, opposed any language that would appear to relegate such rights to an inferior rank.

Cassin resolved the impasse by drafting a "chapeau" article, a kind of mini-preamble introducing the provisions dealing with social and economic rights. The chapeau tried to satisfy the Soviets by making clear that the new rights, like the old, are importantly related to human dignity. It met the English concerns by establishing that the new rights were different in kind, if not in importance, from traditional political and civil liberties. They are dependent on "the organization and resources" of each state (Mrs. Roosevelt’s language) in a way that, say, the right to be free of torture is not.

Cassin provided the Declaration with several features designed to protect the universal rights idea from misuse. For example, the penultimate article specifies that one not only has rights but duties, and that one’s rights can be limited by "the rights and freedoms of others, and . . . the just requirements of morality, public order, and the general welfare in a democratic society." Noteworthy as well is the document’s recognition that participation in important mediating structures of civil society, such as religious groups and unions, needs to be protected, and that the family is a subject of human rights protection in itself.

Yet another important feature is the Declaration’s implicit embodiment of the principle of subsidiarity. As its "Proclamation" clause makes plain, the Declaration is not a legally binding instrument, but "a common standard of achievement for all peoples and all nations." Though many of its provisions later appeared in treaties binding on the signatory nations, the authors of the Declaration were well aware that, as the Commission’s rapporteur Charles Malik put it, the most effective defense of human rights would always be domestic, "in the mind and the will of the people" as reflected in national and local laws, and above all, social practices. They had read their Tocqueville.

In sum, the architects of the Universal Declaration did their best to allay concerns about the coherence and feasibility of the universal rights idea. Thanks to Cassin, the Declaration is no mere list, or "bill," of rights. It possesses an integrity that has considerable strength when the document is read as it was meant to be read, namely, as a whole.

Cassin’s draft, however, was only the beginning. It took another extraordinary individual to shepherd it through the process of deliberation and revision that led up to adoption by the General Assembly. That man was Malik, a Lebanese philosophy professor whose diplomatic skills were as finely honed as Cassin’s legal talents.

Malik steered the draft Declaration through eighty-one difficult meetings in the tense international atmosphere that prevailed in the fall of 1948. His fluency in many languages, including Arabic, French, and English, enabled him to move easily between East and West, and between large and small nations. He made the most of the fact that the document reflected broad consultation and consensus, and he took pains to point each country to the places in the Declaration where it could find either its own contributions or the influence of the culture to which it belonged. In December, the Declaration was adopted without a single dissenting vote, though eight countries, including the Soviet bloc, abstained. In the end, the inclusion of social and economic rights meant less to the Soviets than the perceived need to resist the slightest derogation from the old principle that how a nation-state dealt with its own citizens was no concern of other nations.

Today, when one reads what Maritain, McKeon, Cassin, Malik, and Roosevelt wrote many years ago, it is striking that they foresaw nearly every problem their enterprise would encounter—its buffeting from power politics, its dependence on common understandings that would prove elusive, its embodiment of ideas of freedom and solidarity that would be difficult to harmonize, and its vulnerability to misuse.

Nevertheless, they hoped that with improved means of communication, and with the accumulation of experiences of successful cross-cultural cooperation, the difficulties confronting their enterprise would be reduced and its benefits gradually realized. And indeed, so far as many traditional political and civil rights are concerned, the years have seen impressive progress, even if not as steady or rapid as was hoped.

As for the main challenge, Maritain said it best. Whether the music played on the Declaration’s thirty strings will be "in tune with or harmful to human dignity" will depend primarily on the extent to which "a culture of human dignity" develops.

To the disappointment of the framers, however, the adoption of the Declaration was followed by nearly two decades during which the international human rights project floundered and stalled amidst Cold War politics. When the Declaration woke up, so to speak, it was like Rip Van Winkle, who went to sleep for twenty years and awakened to find himself in a world from which his friends had disappeared, and where no one recognized him.

By the late 1960s, the architects of the Declaration were mostly departed or inactive, and in their place was forming an extensive human rights industry. The giants of the industry are organizations heavily influenced by the ideas about rights, both good and bad, that were developed in the American judicial rights revolution. The Declaration itself began to be widely, almost universally, read in the way that Americans read the Bill of Rights, that is, as a string of essentially separate guarantees. Alas, that misreading of the Declaration not only distorts its sense, but facilitates its misuse.

It would be a fitting tribute to the hopes and dreams of the men and women of ’48 if friends of human dignity the world over celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the Declaration by reading it—and pondering its structure. The flaws of the human rights project, I would suggest, are less in that document than in ourselves.



Mary Ann Glendon, the Learned Hand Professor of Law at Harvard University, headed the Vatican delegation to UN’s Fourth World Conference on Women, held in Beijing in 1995.

 

[sanctus]

The Gift of Dryness in Prayer


Mother M. Angelica

Every Christian who strives for holiness of life experiences dryness of soul. It is to most people a heart-rending experience. It is a paradox, for the soul becomes confused when it realizes the harder it strives the further away Jesus seems to be. How strange is a spiritual life that draws a soul to a fire only to make it feel freezing cold! It is, to all appearances a contradiction. In the world, the closer we are to a friend or loved one, the more secure and unafraid we become. The deeper the love, the more glowing one feels in the presence of the beloved and so it is as we grow in the love of God. He wants us to love Him "In Spirit and in Truth" and this kind of love is above human love—as much above as is the difference between the flicker of a match and the noonday sun.
Human love in all its beauty and warmth must be raised to a level above itself. The air at the foot of a high mountain is easier to breathe, even though it is not as pure as the air on the summit. To breathe that pure air our bodies would have to adapt themselves to the atmosphere of the mountain peak. The peace and quiet and the view from that height are well worth the effort and the pain of climbing.
We would, however, encounter one phenomenon during our climb and that is a certain kind of loneliness. The further up the mountain we travel, the fewer companions we have. There comes a time when all things seem to drop behind and we find ourselves alone. When we finally arrive on the top, the loneliness is gone for we see things very differently. We see all our former companions and possessions as they really are with no illusions, no regrets and no attachments. In this rare air of God's Love we possess Wisdom, which is the Word of God—Jesus. We see things as He sees them because the breath of His Spirit fills our souls to overflowing.
To those who live in the sunshine of the valley, our life atop the mountain is forever dull and lonely, but it is only because they do not share the view. Sometimes we come down the mountain and bask in the sunshine, but soon we must ascend again and fill our souls with the fresh air of His Love.
This is but a faint picture of dryness of soul and the beautiful work it accomplishes. There are times in life when God seems very close. The sun of His Love shines brightly. Our hearts exult and our being is rapt in the joy of His Presence. There are other times however, when His Presence fades away like a morning mist and we find ourselves shivering from the cold. Though the whole world were to love and applaud us it would all be as nothing, for the sunshine of our life—God—seems gone, and our soul cannot be consoled except by Him.
Though our poor human nature rebels at this state of soul, it realizes that somehow great work is being accomplished. The silent Hand of God moves on, purifying the faculties of our soul, detaching us from possessions, people, and ourselves, raising us to various heights of prayer and increasing our capacity for love.
If our dry spell causes us pain, increases our thirst for God, makes us strive for virtue, and during prayer, makes every other thought outside of God distasteful to us, then we can assume the dryness we experience is of God. God is calling us to a higher form of prayer and a deeper union with Himself.
In the beginning of our spiritual life God floods our souls with consolations, but before long His Love demands that we rise above the feeling level and adore Him "in spirit and truth."
In our daily life human love rests for the most part on a sense level, but since God is Spirit we must communicate with Him on a spirit-to-spirit level. We must be detached from the world and ourselves and seek Him for Himself alone. It is for this purpose that Jesus tells us "every branch that does bear fruit the Father prunes to make it bear more fruit" (Jn. 15:2).
It is those who are putting forth great effort to become like Jesus that God plunges into the darkness of dryness and into an awareness of their imperfections. So begins the purification of our faculties—Memory, Understanding and Will—and the beginning of our ascent to the Mountain of Holiness.
The first faculty to feel the pruning of the Father is our Memory. It is as if all things good and holy were blanked out of our minds. We not only find Meditation impossible but even distasteful.
It is at this state of soul that the evil spirits, who realize the importance of dryness, tempt us to give up prayer or torture us with the thought that some past sin has incurred God's anger upon us and He has left us to our miserable selves.
Another phenomenon occurs in this state of soul and that is an exaggerated view of our weaknesses, faults and imperfections that we have long accepted and fought against; they become so big that they engulf our souls like a huge monster.
Our Intellect, reasoning on a human level, keeps telling us that sanctity is not for us. It is obviously for those who have fortitude to accomplish great deeds and possess great talents and gifts.
It is nearly impossible for the soul to see how any good could come from this state of mind but if the soul perseveres in its prayers and acts of virtue in spite of how it feels, it will soon begin to realize that its purification is good and freedom of spirit will be its reward.
Dryness sharpens every faculty. It forces us to great degrees of Hope when our Memory and Imagination are dulled. It increases our Faith for we must seek Him as He is and believe His Word. It strengthens our Will by making it follow His Commandments and imitate His virtues.
Our Faith tells us that God is always Present to us and by grace He is in our souls. Dryness then forces us to live by what Faith teaches rather than what our feelings make us desire. Unless God bestows upon us the searing power of dryness we shall forever be swayed by emotional feelings designed to prod us on but never capable of changing us.
How beautiful is the cross that brings about such marvelous changes in the soul.
Dryness Of The Heart
Now we stand alone before the majesty of God, and the brightness of that light makes us recoil at the difference between us. We feel unloved and unloving. When dryness attacked our minds there was at least a shred of love residing in our hearts, but now that is gone and we are forced to love only because we want to.
We are so accustomed to love on a human level that we find loving God for Himself, either impossible or beyond our capabilities. We tend to love those who appeal to us, render us a service or are good to us. In the degree they perform these various services we love them.
Because God is spirit, invisible and all-perfect, our relationship with Him is often built on the "Rich Uncle" concept that he has everything to give and we have only to receive. That we have anything to give upsets our theology and increases our responsibility. Any friendship not based on a mutual giving will not last. Selfish love cannot exist between friends for very long and if that love is the basis of our relationship to God, it is a disaster. Yet to love on a selfish level is so basic to our nature. We tend to love Him on the same level as we love our neighbor—for what He does or can give us.
Dryness of heart—that purifying cross— cleanses our love of all selfishness and raises it to a level of unselfish love. We begin to love freely—because we want to—because God is all-lovable. The wrenching of self from our prayer time with God, by this inability to "feel" any love in our hearts, raises us to the level of the New Commandment. On this level of prayer, we pray and love God for Himself alone, not for the gifts or consolations He gives us. This new attitude and degree of love extends itself to our neighbor and we begin to love him in the same way God loves us— unselfishly.
Only through the pain of dryness—where we decrease and He increases—can we begin to love God in the way He wishes us to love. When we pray we are doing so on our will power for our poor human nature receives no compensation for its efforts.
Faith tells us that God is present when we pray and Hope tells us He listens, but only Love makes us continue to pray when darkness, boredom and even disgust fill our souls to overflowing. Only a true love will persevere in praying despite darkness and confusion.
Perhaps one of the first fruits the Spirit bears in our souls through the purification of dryness is detachment.
The people and things we are attached to are the things we love selfishly. We find comfort and consolation in them, and in proportion as our souls cling to these feelings, in that proportion we are attached.
Attachments to spiritual experiences lead to spiritual gluttony. We seek consolations, become disconsolate without them, jealous of those who possess them, and are never satisfied with God's plan in our lives. We demand from God or bring upon ourselves consolations, the fruit of which is a repugnance for suffering in any form. We run from the pruning hand of the Father and in so doing deprive our souls of the consolations at the heights of prayer. We are not willing to give up the sweetness of being aware of the Presence of God for the growth of Faith in our lives.
This unwanted and unappreciated dryness of soul brings about the virtue we do not have the courage to exercise—detachment. It has the power to strip us of the things we desire and covet most of all—feelings. By the stripping down of feelings, dryness leaves our souls open to objective thinking, clear thinking, and an unselfish concern for others.
If we are strong enough to love and commune with God, without feelings, we shall do the same with our neighbor. We shall love that neighbor with a detached love. This means we make loving more important than being loved in return.
The Spirit of God assists us in this painful mortification by giving us a dryness of soul that does not find pleasure or comfort in anything. Even nature, beautiful and majestic as it comes from the Power of God, leaves us cold and unimpressed.
The love of friends only makes us realize how much we miss His Presence. The thought of past spiritual experiences, when we were aware of His Love and Goodness, only creates a greater void that nothing can fill.
The more we reach out to creatures to fill the void in our hearts, the deeper that void becomes. Like the Bride in the Song of Songs, we cry out to everyone, "Have you seen Him whom my heart loves?" (Songs 3:3) What a blessing that God's pruning does not permit us to find comfort in anyone or anything. Surely, we would cling to the least comfort and be willing to forego our climb up the Mountain of Holiness if we could find solace in creation.
Dryness Leads To Humility
One of the most painful lessons that Dryness teaches is the spirit of Humility. Our total helplessness in the face of our inability to pray can almost annihilate our pride. We may rebel against this feeling of inadequacy, but if we accept it we can make a giant stride towards a spirit of Humility.
The humility that is the fruit of dryness is not self-imposed, so the soul is guarded against a false humility which says it can do nothing of itself but does not really believe it. Neither is this humility the fruit of persecution or misunderstanding. It is, therefore, a safeguard against the resentment that often accompanies the clashes of personality traits in our relationship with others.
It is a crushing blow to our pride to realize we must wait upon the Lord to pray well or to pray at all. We often read and reread Jesus' statement that without Him we can do nothing but this hardly reaches an experimental stage in our lives. When we kneel before Him helpless, dry and in a state of confusion, we begin to "feel" our finite condition. A reality of life becomes an experience for us—it becomes a startling fact that without Him we can do nothing—not even pray.
It is good to have an intellectual awareness of our dependence upon God—to understand how great He is and how very small we are in His sight. But when our very bones feel the crushing weight of His Holiness upon us and we are conscious of our sinner condition, we pass on from knowing about God to knowing God, for the former is knowledge and the latter, experience.
Not only does the soul possess a new sense Of its dependence upon God, but its self-knowledge is increased to an alarming degree. Every fault is magnified and the soul sees weaknesses within it that never before came to the surface.
This self-knowledge is the very root of Humility and when the soul sees itself as it really is and then gazes at the Infinite God who loves it, the reality of the vast difference between them engenders Humility, provided this knowledge is accepted with a deep sense of gratitude.
This gratitude is not only for the light given but for the gratuitous love bestowed upon the lowly soul by the Infinite God. The reality of God's personal love for a poor weak human being sends the soul into transports of joy, even though the feeling of dryness fills it with consternation and its weaknesses overwhelm it. In its very depths there begins a quiet acceptance of itself and of God and a determined effort evolves that drives the soul on to a deeper love in a spirit of sacrifice.
The soul slowly understands what humility of heart means. It does not feel crushed or broken but is overwhelmed by a 'sense' of its sinner condition, of its capacity for evil, and the thin thread that separates it from God whose "power is at its best in weakness." (2 Cor. 12:9)
In Praise Of Dryness
Dryness makes us seek God for Himself. strengthens our Faith, Hope and Love. purifies our soul so we can reach for God. creates a vacuum only God can fill. increases our thirst for God. increases our desire for holiness. helps us practice the Beatitudes. gives us an appreciation of suffering and leads us to pray without ceasing.
Dryness leads us gently from vocal prayer, where we learn to speak to God; to Meditation, where we think of God; to Contemplation, where our heart merely gazes upon Him with a love too deep for words.

 

[tamarin]

It's hardly appropriate to have such a declaration without an equal and separate Universal Declaration of the Rights of all Living Species. Foremost in such an effort would be the right to habitat. With humans crowding the planet it's time to get the basics right.

 

[sanctus]

It's hardly appropriate to have such a declaration without an equal and separate Universal Declaration of the Rights of all Living Species. Foremost in such an effort would be the right to habitat. With humans crowding the planet it's time to get the basics right.

You want the UN to consider animals on an equal par with humans?

 

[tamarin]

With 6.5 billion of us swarming the planet- yes! With global warming and human overpopulation choking the planet's future, an unequivocal, fullthroated and categorical - YES!

 

[china]

Andy F:So it was good to see someone bringing this topic up again.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
No Andy ,I wasn't talking about the "I" controller .What I was saying is that the "I" is a process of thought not free of time therfore not spiritual .Tought is a continuity and fact is that that which continues has no rebirth, no renewal. Therefore, in dying every day there is renewal, there is a rebirth. That is immortality. In death there is immortality - not the death of which you are afraid, but the death of previous conclusions, memories, experiences, with which you are identified as the 'me'. In the dying of the 'me' every minute there is eternity, there is immortality, there is a thing to be experienced - not to be speculated upon or lectured about, as people do about reincarnation and all that kind of stuff. When you are no longer afraid, because every minute there is an ending and therefore a renewal, then you are open to the unknown. Reality is the unknown. Death is also the unknown. But to call death beautiful, to say how marvelous it is because we shall continue in the hereafter and all that nonsense, has no reality. What has reality is seeing death as it is - an ending; an ending in which there is renewal, a rebirth, not a continuity. For that which continues decays; and that which has the power to renew itself is eternal.

 

[canadarocks]

With 6.5 billion of us swarming the planet- yes! With global warming and human overpopulation choking the planet's future, an unequivocal, fullthroated and categorical - YES!

So I can assume you wear no animal byproducts nor eat any flesh?

 

[darkbeaver]

Life is the process of death, death is the process of renewal, renewal is accumulation of awareness, awareness is reflection, reflection is incorporation, incorporation is death, death is the whole, life is a fraction of death.

UR=> 1
EVERYTHINGELSE

 

[tamarin]

And I assume you wear no clothes made by sweat shops in China and drink no coffee and take no sugar gathered by the harassed and camp-owned peoples of our southern latitudes.

 

[I think not]

And I assume you wear no clothes made by sweat shops in China and drink no coffee and take no sugar gathered by the harassed and camp-owned peoples of our southern latitudes.

Well said!

The UN Declaration of Human Rights is an admirable document, but it has failed the test of time.

 

[AndyF]

look3467:

Thank you for the kind words.

I think the essence of what you convey is pretty much in line with what I believe, and I wasn't clear of what you were trying to say on your first post. There a few issues in dogma that we don't see eye to eye on, but I think we meet on specific points. I'd like to go in deeper but I don't have the time today. This post is a bit clearer. I think, for example in one, the fate of unbaptised infants.

Briefly....

This issue naturally tugs at the heart of everyone, and there is only one place we can visualize our munchkinsflower: ) could ever go to. But the fact is Jesus really meant it when he said that we can only attain heaven if we have been "born again", ie:baptised(baptism by desire included)

Now for these innocent infants we can only resign their fate to a merciful Father, who we are assured takes good care of His children. In consideration of this fact which we cannot ignore either, most theologians believe they are maintained in a state of natural happiness, but not beatific. They are content in themselves and suffer no discomfort. What they lack is the beatific vision of God.

AndyF

 

[AndyF]

Excellent information, and the anology is right on.!

AndyF

 

[AndyF]

Prayer

From and unknown author Losing Sight of God I get distracted
easily, not just in my prayer life, but in my spiritual life as well;
how can I help myself get back on track when I lose sight of God?
Remember that story of Hansel and Gretel? The two kids who leave a
trail of bread crumbs behind them, only to end up the main course for
some little forest hag witch, with an empty stomach and some bad
intentions? Wow…what a screwed up story that is for kids. But that’s a
different discussion. You might be wondering, “What does Hansel and
Gretel have to do with my question?” Well, follow me on this one…
Distraction is a part of life. We can’t control the things that happen
around us anymore than we can control all the things that happen to us.
There are ways, however, to take ourselves “out of the path” of
distraction and place ourselves more in the path of grace (of God).
That does not mean that all distractions will be eliminated…the devil
wants to distract you and will use any means possible to do so (1 Pet
5:8), to keep you from God. There are things you can do, however, to
better direct and focus yourself in your prayer life and spiritual
life, as a whole. Here’s a quick list of suggestions:

1. 1.
   Create a prayerful environment
   Often times we get distracted because we are in distracting places.
   Quiet (even silence) is essential, especially in the early stages, for
   maturing in your prayer life. If you can’t learn to pray in silence,
   you won’t learn in the midst of noise. Go into your room and close the
   door. Light a candle. Possibly play some quiet music. Turn off your
   phone. Light a candle (but don’t fall asleep…a four alarm fire is not a
   relaxing prayer environment). Better yet, get by the chapel at your
   Church and sit as close to the Tabernacle as possible. And don’t forget
   your posture…kneeling goes a long way in helping us to focus ourselves.
   It’s important to be comfortable, but if you’re too comfortable, you
   might fall asleep because you’re so relaxed. Vary up your posture to
   insure your awareness. 2. Offer up distractions for God’s glory
   If you find your mind “wandering” constantly while you pray, offer up
   those distractions to God. I mean that literally. Say to God, “Lord,
   you know how consumed I am with this relationship or this situation
   right now, I offer them up for your glory.” If the distractions are
   being placed there by the devil (to keep you from prayer), the
   distractions will vanish; the devil will never do anything that gives
   glory to God. IF they are not from the devil, than take that as a sign
   that God wants you to pray about that relationship or situation. Talk
   to Him about it and ask yourself the tough question…not “what do I
   want?”, but “what does God want?”, “what is God’s will?” 3. Utilize
   guided prayers and meditations
   The Church is such a great guide for us. She gives us prayers for just
   such moments and occasions. You always have the Our Father as the
   ultimate prayer. In addition, you have the Hail Mary which, if
   prayerfully recited, will take you to deep levels of meditation, unlock
   amazing insight and bring great grace. There are thousands of guided
   meditations, novenas, prayers of consecration…literally, you could
   spend hours online or in bookstores sorting through an endless treasure
   trove of incredible, prayerful insights that will lead you deeper into
   the very heart of God, even when your mind is racing and you might find
   it “difficult to concentrate” on your own. Take advantage of the
   richness and beauty of our 2000 year tradition as Church. 4. Manage
   your time more effectively
   Sometimes we get distracted because we wait to pray. I’ll give you a
   few examples. Maybe we try to “wake up and pray”, but we do that lying
   in bed half asleep rather than after a shower or a cup of coffee.
   Sometimes we choose to pray at night, but we wait until we’re in bed,
   instead of an hour before we brush our teeth or get ready for sleep.
   Possibly we wait until the food is on the table and our stomachs are
   churning to utter a (very brief) prayer of thanks, rather than praying
   while preparing the food, or while it’s finishing. Do you get the idea?
   The further ahead we “schedule” prayer, the more disciplined we will
   become. Learn about things like the Liturgy of the Hours. Create a
   “prayer schedule” where you can set times and forms of prayer in stone
   over the course of the week. That schedule is the easy part. Now, step
   2 is to follow it. That is the hard part. But it is do-able, so stick
   with it. Research states that it only takes 21 days for something to
   become a habit. [My Note: This is also a good opprtunity for
   sacrifice. One could put aside that cup of coffee or that bacon and
   eggs, and take the time to meditate before prayer. It serves as a
   statement of how important prayer is in one's life]. 5. Find a
   prayer partner [My note: especially effective in the Rosary]
   The old cliché is that prayer is like working out…if you’re not used to
   it, it’s good to have an accountability partner to keep you dedicated
   to it, daily. Ideally, this would mean someone whom you could pray
   with. At the very least, it’s important to have someone in your life
   who will “call you out” when you’re getting lazy and someone who you
   can empower to challenge you consistently. 6. Become an
   intercessor
   How many of your prayers incorporate “I” or “me”? That doesn’t make you
   bad, it makes you (and I) human. It’s not to say you can’t or shouldn’t
   ever pray for yourself…it is to say that proportionally, how often do
   you pray for yourself and how often for others? Spend more time as an
   “intercessor”, let your prayers be intercessions for others. The power
   of prayer is unmistakeable, and if you doubt your own prayer power,
   think again. You can’t change people, but never underestimate the
   power, by God’s grace, for others’ to change. 7. Keep your Bible
   within reach
   Before you leave the house everyday you probably insure that you have
   what you need…money, cell phone, keys, etc. How often to you check for
   your Bible? If our Bible is (at any time) nowhere near us, we might
   want to double-check that we’re not too far from it (or Him). What a
   great gift to have the living Word an arm’s reach away at any and every
   time of day. If you don’t have a “travel” Bible you can throw in your
   backpack, on your car’s passenger seat or in your carry-on bag, every
   day…get one. We’ll never grow in the Word until it’s close enough at
   every minute that we can hold it and be challenged by it.

Now,
you’re probably wondering what any of this has to do with Hansel and
Gretel, as I mentioned at the beginning. Notice that Hansel and Gretel
set out to explore, traveling far from home…they put forth the effort,
they moved out of their comfort zones, and took a different path then
they were used to. That shows initiative. Notice, too, that the bread
was supposed to lead them back home. When all else fails in your prayer
and personal devotions, realize that (at the very least) you always
have Christ with you, in His true presence in the Eucharist (John
6:52-58). You don’t have to say a word if you don’t want to. In fact,
most of the time it’s better if you just sit, just kneel in His
presence silently, and just listen. While the devil (and his
distractions) are prowling (1 Pet. 5:8) and willing to devour you (just
like in “Hansel and Gretel”), Christ is waiting to consume you with
grace and love…follow the Bread (John 6:41). To stay “on the right
track” you need two things…to remember where you came from (God) and to
know where you are going (back to God). Have a good journey.

 

[sanctus]

I will quote a verse: you make the determination.
Joh 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Emphasis
on "whosoever"

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

You once again ignore the point and feel that by pulling a verse out of the Bible you have answered the point. The point was, and remains, that there can only be, logically, one Church and one Church only that God has created. You cannot have a multitude of beliefs on the doctrines which are all equally correct.The fact remains, that your remaining outside of the Church means that your faith, your salvation if you will, is not as solid as you believe it to be.

 

[sanctus]

The Church and Exorcism

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
​

​

​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]WHAT IS POSSESSION? [/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Possession is when Satan enters and takes over the physical and mental capabilities of a victim, however, the soul and will remains free. Satan acts through the victim without the victim's consent, thus the victim is morally blameless. Satan does not act alone when he possesses an individual. He works side by side with many evil spirits such as spirits of lust, hate, destruction, suicide, revenge, anger, anxiety, desperation, death, torment, etc. Such an example is found in Luke 8:30 the case of the possessed man in the territory of the Gerasenes: "Then Jesus asked him, "What is your name?" He replied, "Legion," because many demons had entered him ".
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Satan's army of evil, torment many unknowing lost souls to the point of destruction of others and of themselves. Today a more favorable climate exists for cases of possession and obsession then ever before. Our world has become a playground of pornography, sex, money, material possessions, drugs, and alcohol. There are so many instruments to spread these Satanic messages such as television, Internet, radio, music, and even the clothing we wear; thus our children are exposed to a multitude of temptations and are wide open to evil. The "predominant" Gods of of this age we live in include money, television, music, and sex. Unfortunately, the "cure"-exorcism, is considered an "ancient" ritual and is snubbed by most religious leaving many victims to suffer indescribable torments, and in some instances, even suicide. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]SIGNS OF POSSESSION (from the Roman Ritual of Exorcism)[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The following are symptoms of possession as represented in the Roman Ritual of Exorcism. In most cases, a victim will have one or more of the traits listed. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Victim speaks or understands unknown languages without ever studying the language being spoken or heard

Victim clearly knows things that are distant or hidden

Victim can predict future events (sometimes through dreams)

Victim has an intense hatred for holy things

Victim shows a physical strength far above his age or normal condition[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The Extraordinary Activities of Satan Defined - [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The following is taken from Fr. Gabriele Amorth's second book "An Exorcist More Stories." Fr. Amorth's book is published by IGNATIUS released in 2002. The boundaries between one category and another are not clear-cut, because there is a lot of mingling and compounding of symptoms.[/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]External Pain[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif] [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]- deals strictly with physical suffering. This includes the beatings, scourging, and injuries caused by inexplicable pushing, falling objects, and so on, that we read about in the lives of many saints, such as the Curé of Ars. Saint Paul of the Cross, and Padre Pio. These occurrences are not as rare as we may think, and the demon's activity is usually confined to external activity; internal activity, if any, is only temporary and limited to the duration of a particular disturbance.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Diabolic Possession - is the gravest form of demonic activity, which allows a continuing presence of a demon in a human body. The evil symptoms do not have to be continuous but can alternate between periods of crisis and periods of rest. Possession implies intervals of temporary suspension of mental, intellectual, affective, and volitive faculties. Symptoms can include the knowledge of languages unknown to the victim, superhuman strength, and the ability to know the occult or someone else's thoughts. Typically, there is an aversion to anything sacred, often in conjunction with blasphemy. There are also frauds who pose as demoniac; therefore, we need to be extremely wary.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Diabolic Oppression - is a ransom discomfort. We must remember that symptoms and gravity differ greatly case by case. This oppression can strike health, job, affections, relationship with others, and so on. Its symptoms include unexplainable rages and a tendency to complete isolation. Oppression can affect both individual and groups (even very large groups).[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Diabolic Obsession- causes an almost split personality. Our will remains free, but it is oppressed by obsessive thoughts. The victim experiences thoughts that may be rationally absurd but of such a nature that he is unable [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]to free himself. The obsessed person lives in a perpetual state of prostration, with persistent temptations to suicide. We must be aware that the temptation to commit suicide is also present in diabolic possession and diabolic oppression.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Diabolic Infestation[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]- In this case, the malefic activity is directed toward places (houses, offices, stores, fields), objects (cars, pillows, mattresses, dolls) and animals, therefore it only indirectly affects man. Origen tells us that the early Christians resorted to exorcisms in these situations.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Diabolic Subjugation - The term indicates a voluntary pact--implicit or explicit---with Satan, by which we submit to the lordship of the demon. There are also involuntary times with the evil one; these cases fall into the preceding cat[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]egories, especially the most severe: possession. [/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]HOW DOES ONE BECOME POSSESSED[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]?[/FONT]​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Below, Fr. Amorth explains that there are four principal causes that may cause one to fall victim to these evils. [/FONT]

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Pure Divine Permission[/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]
Clearly, nothing happens without divine permission, but God never wills evil, suffering, or temptation. He gave us freedom and allows the existence of evil, but knows how to turn it into good. When he gives the demon his permission to torment us, he does so to strengthen us in virtue, as in the biblical example of Job, as well as of many blesseds and saints. We must keep in mind that diabolical harassment in itself has nothing to do with the state of grace of its victims.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Subject to a Curse
Here, too, the victim is innocent, but there is culpability on the part of whoever casts and/or commissions the curse. By the word curse, I mean the intention of harming others through demonic intervention. This can be achieved in many ways: malefice (or spell), binding, evil eye, malediction, and so on. The matter is serious, but we need to be on guard against misconceptions. By their nature, curses lend themselves to all sorts of abuses, especially when we consider the current escalation in the number of frauds, suggestions, manias, and more.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Grave Hardening of Sin
Judas Iscariot is the classical Gospel example. The many individuals who abandon themselves to sexual perversions, violence, and drugs fall into this group. The heinous crime of abortion aggravates this situation; its terrible repercussions are clearly seen during exorcisms, because to liberate a victim who is guilty of abortion usually requires a very long period of time. Due to the current devastation of the family and the laxity of morals, the repercussions that stem from the scourge of abortion are much more common than in the past. When we take all these factors into account, we can understand why the number of individuals stricken by evil ailments has multiplied.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Proximity to Evil Places or Persons
This includes attending spiritualistic session, dabbling in magic, or consulting magicians, witch doctors, and some card readers; also, practicing the occult, belonging to satanic sects, or practicing in rites that climax with black masses, and so on, put us at great risk. [/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]To this category we can add the influence of mass media, such as pornographic shows and violent horror movies broadcast by many TV stations. We witness the effects of the widespread presence of rock music, culminating in satanic rock performed in what we could easily refer to as "churches or rock", such as stadiums, parks, [/FONT][FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]and discothèques. We should not be surprised that, today, there is an explosion of these activities: a decline in faith life is directly connected to an increase in superstitions. I will not tire or repeating that members of the clergy have done nothing to oppose, or at least warn against, all these evils, because they are completely ignorant even of what the Bible explicitly says on the subject. This forth category has greatly contributed to the increase in evil ailments in the last decades, especially among the young. Taken from (An Exorcist More Stories by Fr. Gabriele Amorth, published by IGNATIUS PRESS can be purchased at Amazon.com).[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]WHO CAN PERFORM AN EXORCISM?[/FONT]
​

[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]In the early church (according the Early Church Fathers) the casting out of demons was widely accepted and exorcism could be performed by anyone. Why then has this practice changed? It has been found that in severe cases if the one who is casting out the demons is not experienced or grounded in faith and does not have sufficient spiritual protection it can be harmful for both the victim and the so called exorcist. We find in Matthew 17:20-21 a case in which the apostles could not cast out a demon from the epileptic demoniac. Jesus rebuked them for not being prepared and told them only through prayer and fasting could this demon be cast out. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Before Vatican II the exorcism prayer was part of the Baptismal rite. Why? In the days of the early church there were many pagans coming into the church. Part of the long preparation for these pagans coming into the church was exorcism on Holy Saturday before Easter. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Around the third century, Pope Cornelius was the first to make the exorcist a minor order (See on Internet about this). He announced that an exorcist could be a priest, deacon or in the subdiaconate. The minor order of exorcism has since been dropped by Pope Paul VI in 1972. He did not believe there was a need and it was obsolete.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]From the Commentary of the Code of Canon Law[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Canon 1172 - (1) No one can perform exorcisms legitimately upon the possessed unless he has obtained special express permission from the local ordinary. (2) The local ordinary is to give this permission only to a presbyter who has piety, knowledge, prudence, and integrity of life.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]An exorcism is a sacramental by which "the Church asks publicly and authoritatively in the name of Jesus Christ that a person or object be protected against the power of the Evil One and withdrawn from his dominion. The canon pertains to solemn exorcisms observing the Rite of Exorcism of the Roman Ritual, not to the simply exorcism that are part of the Rite of Christian Initiation of Adults or the baptism of infants. [/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]One of the praenotanda to the 1998 Rite of Exorcism (n13) has completely reordered this canon. There are significant differences between the new law and the canon.[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]An exorcist is to be a priest (sacerdos) not a presbyter (presbyterus) as in the canon, which means bishops as well as presbyters may be appointed exorcists.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The priest must have specific preparation for this office.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]"For the most part" (plerumque), the local ordinary who appoints the exorcist should be the diocesan bishop, which implies that the vicar general and episcopal vicar should not do it without a special mandate, except in a case of need when the bishop cannot be reached.
[/FONT]
[FONT=Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]The exorcist, whether appointed to the stable office of exorcist or ad actum, is to fulfill this ministry under the direction of the diocesan bishop.[/FONT]
​

​

[/FONT]

 

[look3467]

You once again ignore the point and feel that by pulling a verse out of the Bible you have answered the point. The point was, and remains, that there can only be, logically, one Church and one Church only that God has created. You cannot have a multitude of beliefs on the doctrines which are all equally correct.The fact remains, that your remaining outside of the Church means that your faith, your salvation if you will, is not as solid as you believe it to be.

My faith is in Christ! Not in any religious organization. I choose to believe it and have been blessed ever since.
Am I not to take God at His word? I would be a fool not to.

Peace>>>AJ:love9:

 

[sanctus]

Emmanuel , God is with us

[SIZE=+1]"Do this is memory of me"[/SIZE]

(John. 6:51) "I myself am the living bread come down from heaven. If anyone eats this bread he shall live forever; the bread I will give is my flesh for the life of the world." 52 The Jews then disputed among themselves, saying, "How can this man give us his flesh to eat?"

53 So Jesus said to them, "Very truly, I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.
54 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood have eternal life, and I will raise them up on the last day;
55 for my flesh is true food and my blood is true drink.
56 Those who eat my flesh and drink my blood abide in me, and I in them.
57 Just as the living Father sent me, and I live because of the Father, so whoever eats me will live because of me.

58 This is the bread that came down from heaven, not like that which your ancestors ate, and they died. But the one who eats this bread will live forever."​

 

[sanctus]

The Forty Days of Lent

A Season of Spiritual Awakening

Christians have observed a penitential season in preparation for Easter since the early centuries of the Church. In our own time three main religious practices are emphasized during Lent - prayer, fasting, and almsgiving. These three practices are the subject of the Gospel reading from the Catholic liturgy for Ash Wednesday.

By prayer we open our hearts to our Father so we can hear his Word and be transformed by his Spirit. By fasting we empty ourselves of bodily satisfaction so we can feel a hunger for God's love. By almsgiving we detach ourselves from worldly things so we can set our hearts on the kingdom of heaven.​

Spare your people, Lord. Do not treat us as our sins deserve, but look upon us kindly and show mercy to us.

+Open our eyes that we may see and acknowledge the wrongs we have done.

+Open our hearts that we may turn from sin and seek your mercy and forgiveness.

+Open our hands that we may reach out to our brothers and sisters in justice and peace.​

Gospel Reading from the Liturgy for Ash Wednesday

Take care not to perform righteous deeds in order that people may see them; otherwise, you will have no recompense from your heavenly Father. When you give alms, do not blow a trumpet before you, as the hypocrites do in the synagogues and in the streets to win the praise of others. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you give alms, do not let your left hand know what your right hand is doing, so that your almsgiving may be secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

When you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, who love to stand and pray in the synagogues and on street corners so that others may see them. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you pray, go to your inner room, close the door, and pray to your Father in secret. And your Father who sees in secret will repay you.

When you fast, do not look gloomy like the hypocrites. They neglect their appearance, so that they may appear to others to be fasting. Amen, I say to you, they have received their reward. But when you fast, anoint your head and wash your face, so that you may not appear to be fasting, except to your Father who is hidden. And your Father who sees what is hidden will repay you. Matthew 6: 1-6, 16-18

​

 

[darleneonfire]

The Communiqué Of the Anglican primates’ Meeting

The Communiqué
Of the primates’ Meeting in Dar es Salaam

19th February 2007

1. We, the primates and Moderators of the Anglican Communion, gathered for mutual consultation and prayer at Dar es Salaam between 15th and 19th February 2007 at the invitation of the Archbishop of Canterbury and as guests of the Primate of Tanzania, Archbishop Donald Leo Mtetemela. The meeting convened in an atmosphere of mutual graciousness as the primates sought together to seek the will of God for the future life of the Communion. We are grateful for the warm hospitality and generosity of Archbishop Donald and his Church members, many of whom have worked hard to ensure that our visit has been pleasant and comfortable, including our travel to Zanzibar on the Sunday.

2. The Archbishop of Canterbury welcomed to our number fourteen new primates, and on the Wednesday before our meeting started, he led the new primates in an afternoon of discussion about their role. We give thanks for the ministry of those primates who have completed their term of office.

3. Over these days, we have also spent time in prayer and Bible Study, and reflected upon the wide range of mission and service undertaken across the Communion. While the tensions that we face as a Communion commanded our attention, the extensive discipleship of Anglicans across the world reminds us of our first task to respond to God’s call in Christ. We are grateful for the sustaining prayer which has been offered across the Communion as we meet.

4. On Sunday 18th February, we travelled to the island of Zanzibar, where we joined a celebration of the Holy Eucharist at Christ Church Cathedral, built on the site of the old slave market. The Archbishop of Canterbury preached, and commemorated the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade in the United Kingdom, which had begun a process that led to the abolition of the slave market in Zanzibar ninety years later. At that service, the Archbishop of Canterbury admitted Mrs Hellen Wangusa as the new Anglican Observer at the United Nations. We warmly welcome Hellen to her post.

5. We welcomed the presence of the President of Zanzibar at lunch on Sunday, and the opportunity for the Archbishop of Canterbury to meet with the President of Tanzania in the course of the meeting.

The Millennium Development Goals

6. We were delighted to hear from Mrs Wangusa about her vision for her post of Anglican Observer at the United Nations. She also spoke to us about the World Millennium Development Goals, while Archbishop Ndungane also spoke to us as Chair of the Task Team on Poverty and Trade, and the forthcoming conference on Towards Effective Anglican Mission in South Africa next month. We were inspired and challenged by these presentations.

Theological Education in the Anglican Communion

7. We also heard a report from Presiding Bishop Gregory Venables and Mrs Clare Amos on the work of the primates’ Working Party on Theological Education in the Anglican Communion. The group has focussed on developing “grids” which set out the appropriate educational and developmental targets which can be applied in the education of those in ministry in the life of the Church. We warmly commend the work which the group is doing, especially on the work which reminds us that the role of the bishop is to enable the theological education of the clergy and laity of the diocese. We also welcome the scheme that the group has developed for the distribution of basic theological texts to our theological colleges across the world, the preparations for the Anglican Way Consultation in Singapore in May this year, and the appointment of three Regional Associates to work with the group. The primates affirmed the work of the Group, and urged study and reception of its work in the life of the Communion.

The Hermeneutics Project

8. We agreed to proceed with a worldwide study of hermeneutics (the methods of interpreting scripture). The primates have joined the Joint Standing Committee in asking the Anglican Communion Office to develop options for carrying the study forward following the Lambeth Conference in 2008. A report will be presented to the Joint Standing Committee next year.

Following through the Windsor Report

9. Since the controversial events of 2003, we have faced the reality of increased tension in the life of the Anglican Communion – tension so deep that the fabric of our common life together has been torn. The Windsor Report of 2004 described the Communion as suffering from an “illness”. This “illness” arises from a breakdown in the trust and mutual recognition of one another as faithful disciples of Christ, which should be among the first fruits of our Communion in Christ with one another.

10. The Windsor Report identified two threats to our common life: first, certain developments in the life and ministry of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada which challenged the standard of teaching on human sexuality articulated in the 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10; and second, interventions in the life of those Provinces which arose as reactions to the urgent pastoral needs that certain primates perceived. The Windsor Report did not see a “moral equivalence” between these events, since the cross-boundary interventions arose from a deep concern for the welfare of Anglicans in the face of innovation. Nevertheless both innovation and intervention are central factors placing strains on our common life. The Windsor Report recognised this (TWR Section D) and invited the Instruments of Communion to call for a moratorium of such actions .

11. What has been quite clear throughout this period is that the 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 is the standard of teaching which is presupposed in the Windsor Report and from which the primates have worked. This restates the traditional teaching of the Christian Church that “in view of the teaching of Scripture, [the Conference] upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage”, and applies this to several areas which are discussed further below. The primates have reaffirmed this teaching in all their recent meetings , and indicated how a change in the formal teaching of any one Province would indicate a departure from the standard upheld by the Communion as a whole.

12. At our last meeting in Dromantine, the primates called for certain actions to address the situation in our common life, and to address those challenges to the teaching of the Lambeth Resolution which had been raised by recent developments. Now in Dar es Salaam, we have had to give attention to the progress that has been made.
The Listening Process

13. The 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10, committed the Provinces “to listen to the experience of homosexual persons” and called “all our people to minister pastorally and sensitively to all irrespective of sexual orientation and to condemn irrational fear of homosexuals”. The initiation of this process of listening was requested formally by the primates at Dromantine and commissioned by ACC-13. We received a report from Canon Philip Groves, the Facilitator of the Listening Process, on the progress of his work. We wish to affirm this work in collating various research studies, statements and other material from the Provinces. We look forward to this material being made more fully available across the Communion for study and reflection, and to the preparation of material to assist the bishops at 2008 Lambeth Conference.

The Panel of Reference

14. We are grateful to the retired Primate of Australia, Archbishop Peter Carnley for being with us to update us on the work of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Panel of Reference. This was established by the Archbishop in response to the request of the primates at Dromantine “to supervise the adequacy of pastoral provisions made by any churches” for “groups in serious theological dispute with their diocesan bishop, or dioceses in dispute with their Provinces” . Archbishop Peter informed us of the careful work which this Panel undertakes on our behalf, although he pointed to the difficulty of the work with which it has been charged arising from the conflicted and polarised situations which the Panel must address on the basis of the slender resources which can be given to the work. We were grateful for his report, and for the work so far undertaken by the Panel.

The Anglican Covenant

15. Archbishop Drexel Gomez reported to us on the work of the Covenant Design Group. The Group met in Nassau last month, and has made substantial progress. We commend the Report of the Covenant Design Group for study and urge the Provinces to submit an initial response to the draft through the Anglican Communion Office by the end of 2007. In the meantime, we hope that the Anglican Communion Office will move in the near future to the publication of the minutes of the discussion that we have had, together with the minutes of the Joint Standing Committee’s discussion, so that some of the ideas and reflection that have already begun to emerge might assist and stimulate reflection throughout the Communion.

16. The proposal is that a revised draft will be discussed at the Lambeth Conference, so that the bishops may offer further reflections and contributions. Following a further round of consultation, a final text will be presented to ACC-14, and then, if adopted as definitive, offered to the Provinces for ratification. The covenant process will conclude when any definitive text is adopted or rejected finally through the synodical processes of the Provinces.

The Episcopal Church

17. At the heart of our tensions is the belief that The Episcopal Church has departed from the standard of teaching on human sexuality accepted by the Communion in the 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 by consenting to the episcopal election of a candidate living in a committed same-sex relationship, and by permitting Rites of Blessing for same-sex unions. The episcopal ministry of a person living in a same-sex relationship is not acceptable to the majority of the Communion.

18. In 2005 the primates asked The Episcopal Church to consider specific requests made by the Windsor Report . On the first day of our meeting, we were joined by the members of the Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council as we considered the responses of the 75th General Convention. This is the first time that we have been joined by the Standing Committee at a primates’ Meeting, and we welcome and commend the spirit of closer co-operation between the Instruments of Communion.

19. We are grateful for the comprehensive and clear report commissioned by the Joint Standing Committee. We heard from the Presiding Bishop and three other bishops representing different perspectives within The Episcopal Church. Each spoke passionately about their understanding of the problems which The Episcopal Church faces, and possible ways forward. Each of the four, in their own way, looked to the primates to assist The Episcopal Church. We are grateful to the Archbishop of Canterbury for enabling us on this occasion to hear directly this range of views.

20. We believe several factors must be faced together. First, the Episcopal Church has taken seriously the recommendations of the Windsor Report, and we express our gratitude for the consideration by the 75th General Convention.

21. However, secondly, we believe that there remains a lack of clarity about the stance of The Episcopal Church, especially its position on the authorisation of Rites of Blessing for persons living in same-sex unions. There appears to us to be an inconsistency between the position of General Convention and local pastoral provision. We recognise that the General Convention made no explicit resolution about such Rites and in fact declined to pursue resolutions which, if passed, could have led to the development and authorisation of them. However, we understand that local pastoral provision is made in some places for such blessings. It is the ambiguous stance of The Episcopal Church which causes concern among us.

22. The standard of teaching stated in Resolution 1.10 of the Lambeth Conference 1998 asserted that the Conference “cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions”. The primates stated in their pastoral letter of May 2003,
“The Archbishop of Canterbury spoke for us all when he said that it is through liturgy that we express what we believe, and that there is no theological consensus about same sex unions. Therefore, we as a body cannot support the authorisation of such rites.”.

23. Further, some of us believe that Resolution B033 of the 75th General Convention does not in fact give the assurances requested in the Windsor Report.

24. The response of The Episcopal Church to the requests made at Dromantine has not persuaded this meeting that we are yet in a position to recognise that The Episcopal Church has mended its broken relationships.

25. It is also clear that a significant number of bishops, clergy and lay people in The Episcopal Church are committed to the proposals of the Windsor Report and the standard of teaching presupposed in it (cf paragraph 11). These faithful people feel great pain at what they perceive to be the failure of The Episcopal Church to adopt the Windsor proposals in full. They desire to find a way to remain in faithful fellowship with the Anglican Communion. They believe that they should have the liberty to practice and live by that expression of Anglican faith which they believe to be true. We are deeply concerned that so great has been the estrangement between some of the faithful and The Episcopal Church that this has led to recrimination, hostility and even to disputes in the civil courts.

26. The interventions by some of our number and by bishops of some Provinces, against the explicit recommendations of the Windsor Report, however well-intentioned, have exacerbated this situation. Furthermore, those primates who have undertaken interventions do not feel that it is right to end those interventions until it becomes clear that sufficient provision has been made for the life of those persons.

27. A further complication is that a number of dioceses or their bishops have indicated, for a variety of reasons, that they are unable in conscience to accept the primacy of the Presiding Bishop in The Episcopal Church, and have requested the Archbishop of Canterbury and the primates to consider making provision for some sort of alternative primatial ministry. At the same time we recognise that the Presiding Bishop has been duly elected in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church, which must be respected.

28. These pastoral needs, together with the requests from those making presentations to this meeting, have moved us to consider how the primates might contribute to healing and reconciliation within The Episcopal Church and more broadly. We believe that it would be a tragedy if The Episcopal Church was to fracture, and we are committed to doing what we can to preserve and uphold its life. While we may support such processes, such change and development which is required must be generated within its own life.

The Future

29. We believe that the establishment of a Covenant for the Churches of the Anglican Communion in the longer term may lead to the trust required to re-establish our interdependent life. By making explicit what Anglicans mean by the “bonds of affection” and securing the commitment of each Province to those bonds, the structures of our common life can be articulated and enhanced.

30. However, an interim response is required in the period until the Covenant is secured. For there to be healing in the life of the Communion in the interim, it seems that the recommendations of the Windsor Report, as interpreted by the primates’ Statement at Dromantine, are the most clear and comprehensive principles on which our common life may be re-established.

31. Three urgent needs exist. First, those of us who have lost trust in The Episcopal Church need to be re-assured that there is a genuine readiness in The Episcopal Church to embrace fully the recommendations of the Windsor Report.

32. Second, those of us who have intervened in other jurisdictions believe that we cannot abandon those who have appealed to us for pastoral care in situations in which they find themselves at odds with the normal jurisdiction. For interventions to cease, what is required in their view is a robust scheme of pastoral oversight to provide individuals and congregations alienated from The Episcopal Church with adequate space to flourish within the life of that church in the period leading up to the conclusion of the Covenant Process.

33. Third, the Presiding Bishop has reminded us that in The Episcopal Church there are those who have lost trust in the primates and bishops of certain of our Provinces because they fear that they are all too ready to undermine or subvert the polity of The Episcopal Church. In their view, there is an urgent need to embrace the recommendations of the Windsor Report and to bring an end to all interventions.

34. Those who have intervened believe it would be inappropriate to bring an end to interventions until there is change in The Episcopal Church. Many in the House of Bishops are unlikely to commit themselves to further requests for clarity from the primates unless they believe that actions that they perceive to undermine the polity of The Episcopal Church will be brought to an end. Through our discussions, the primates have become convinced that pastoral strategies are required to address these three urgent needs simultaneously.

35. Our discussions have drawn us into a much more detailed response than we would have thought necessary at the beginning of our meeting. But such is the imperative laid on us to seek reconciliation in the Church of Christ, that we have been emboldened to offer a number of recommendations. We have set these out in a Schedule to this statement. We offer them to the wider Communion, and in particular to the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church in the hope that they will enable us to find a way forward together for the period leading up to the conclusion of the Covenant Process. We also hope that the provisions of this pastoral scheme will mean that no further interventions will be necessary since bishops within The Episcopal Church will themselves provide the extended episcopal ministry required.

Wider Application

36. The primates recognise that such pastoral needs as those considered here are not limited to The Episcopal Church alone. Nor do such pastoral needs arise only in relation to issues of human sexuality. The primates believe that until a covenant for the Anglican Communion is secured, it may be appropriate for the Instruments of Communion to request the use of this or a similar scheme in other contexts should urgent pastoral needs arise.

Conclusion

37. Throughout this meeting, the primates have worked and prayed for the healing and unity of the Anglican Communion. We also pray that the Anglican Communion may be renewed in its discipleship and mission in proclaiming the Gospel. We recognise that we have been wrestling with demanding and difficult issues and we commend the results of our deliberations to the prayers of the people. We do not underestimate the difficulties and heart-searching that our proposals will cause, but we believe that commitment to the ways forward which we propose can bring healing and reconciliation across the Communion.

Notes

1. Namely, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lambeth Conference, the Anglican Consultative Council and the primates’ Meeting.

2. Cf The Windsor Report and the Statement of the primates at Dromantine.

3. Gramado, May 2003; Lambeth, October 2003; Dromantine, February 2005.

4. Dromantine Statement, paragraph 15.

5. The Episcopal Church is the name adopted by the Church formerly known as The Episcopal Church (USA). The Province operates across a number of nations, and decided that it was more true to its international nature not to use thedesignation USA. It should not be confused with those other Provinces and Churches of the Anglican Communion which share the name “Episcopal Church”.

6. (1) the Episcopal Church (USA) be invited to express its regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached in the events surrounding the election and consecration of a bishop for the See of New Hampshire, and for the consequences which followed, and that such an expression of regret would represent the desire of the Episcopal Church (USA) to remain within the Communion (2) the Episcopal Church (USA) be invited to effect a moratorium on the election and consent to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate who is living in a same gender union until some new consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges. (TWR §134)
(3) we call for a moratorium on all such public Rites, and recommend that bishops who have authorised such rites in the United States and Canada be invited to express regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached by such authorisation. (TWR §144)
A fourth request (TWR §135) was discharged by the presentation of The Episcopal Church made at ACC-13 in Nottingham, UK, in 2005.

6. Bishop Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh and Moderator of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes; Bishop Christopher Epting, Deputy for Ecumenical Affairs in The Episcopal Church; Bishop Bruce McPherson, Bishop of Western Louisiana, President of the Presiding Bishop’s Council of Advice, and a member of the “Camp Allen” bishops.

7. Set out and discussed in the Report of the Communion Sub-Group presented at the Meeting.

The Key Recommendations of the primates

Foundations

The primates recognise the urgency of the current situation and therefore emphasise the need to:

• affirm the Windsor Report (TWR) and the standard of teaching commanding respect across the Communion (most recently expressed in Resolution 1.10 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference);
• set in place a Covenant for the Anglican Communion;
• encourage healing and reconciliation within The Episcopal Church, between The Episcopal Church and congregations alienated from it, and between The Episcopal Church and the rest of the Anglican Communion;
• respect the proper constitutional autonomy of all of the Churches of the Anglican Communion, while upholding the interdependent life and mutual responsibility of the Churches, and the responsibility of each to the Communion as a whole;
• respond pastorally and provide for those groups alienated by recent developments in the Episcopal Church.

In order to address these foundations and apply them in the difficult situation which arises at present in The Episcopal Church, we recommend the following actions. The scheme proposed and the undertakings requested are intended to have force until the conclusion of the Covenant Process and a definitive statement of the position of The Episcopal Church with respect to the Covenant and its place within the life of the Communion, when some new provision may be required.

A Pastoral Council

• The primates will establish a Pastoral Council to act on behalf of the primates in consultation with The Episcopal Church. This Council shall consist of up to five members: two nominated by the primates, two by the Presiding Bishop, and a Primate of a Province of the Anglican Communion nominated by the Archbishop of Canterbury to chair the Council.
• The Council will work in co-operation with The Episcopal Church, the Presiding Bishop and the leadership of the bishops participating in the scheme proposed below to
  • negotiate the necessary structures for pastoral care which would meet the requests of the Windsor Report (TWR, §147–155) and the primates’ requests in the Lambeth Statement of October 2003 [1];
  • authorise protocols for the functioning of such a scheme, including the criteria for participation of bishops, dioceses and congregations in the scheme;
  • assure the effectiveness of the structures for pastoral care;
  • liaise with those other primates of the Anglican Communion who currently have care of parishes to seek a secure way forward for those parishes within the scheme;
  • facilitate and encourage healing and reconciliation within The Episcopal Church, between The Episcopal Church and congregations alienated from it, and between The Episcopal Church and the rest of the Anglican Communion (TWR, §156);
  • advise the Presiding Bishop and the Instruments of Communion;
  • monitor the response of The Episcopal Church to the Windsor Report;
  • consider whether any of the courses of action contemplated by the Windsor Report §157 should be applied to the life of The Episcopal Church or its bishops, and, if appropriate, to recommend such action to The Episcopal Church and its institutions and to the Instruments of Communion;
  • take whatever reasonable action is needed to give effect to this scheme and report to the primates.

A Pastoral Scheme

* We recognise that there are individuals, congregations and clergy, who in the current situation, feel unable to accept the direct ministry of their bishop or of the Presiding Bishop, and some of whom have sought the oversight of other jurisdictions.
* We have received representations from a number of bishops of The Episcopal Church who have expressed a commitment to a number of principles set out in two recent letters[2] . We recognise that these bishops are taking those actions which they believe necessary to sustain full communion with the Anglican Communion.
* We acknowledge and welcome the initiative of the Presiding Bishop to consent to appoint a Primatial Vicar.

On this basis, the primates recommend that structures for pastoral care be established in conjunction with the Pastoral Council, to enable such individuals, congregations and clergy to exercise their ministries and congregational life within The Episcopal Church, and that

* the Pastoral Council and the Presiding Bishop invite the bishops expressing a commitment to “the Camp Allen principles” [3], or as otherwise determined by the Pastoral Council, to participate in the pastoral scheme ;
* in consultation with the Council and with the consent of the Presiding Bishop, those bishops who are part of the scheme will nominate a Primatial Vicar, who shall be responsible to the Council;
* the Presiding Bishop in consultation with the Pastoral Council will delegate specific powers and duties to the Primatial Vicar.

Once this scheme of pastoral care is recognised to be fully operational, the primates undertake to end all interventions. Congregations or parishes in current arrangements will negotiate their place within the structures of pastoral oversight set out above.

We believe that such a scheme is robust enough to function and provide sufficient space for those who are unable to accept the direct ministry of their bishop or the Presiding Bishop to have a secure place within The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion until such time as the Covenant Process is complete. At that time, other provisions may become necessary.

Although there are particular difficulties associated with AMiA and CANA, the Pastoral Council should negotiate with them and the primates currently ministering to them to find a place for them within these provisions. We believe that with goodwill this may be possible.

On Clarifying the Response to Windsor

The primates recognise the seriousness with which The Episcopal Church addressed the requests of the Windsor Report put to it by the primates at their Dromantine Meeting. They value and accept the apology and the request for forgiveness made [4]. While they appreciate the actions of the 75th General Convention which offer some affirmation of the Windsor Report and its recommendations, they deeply regret a lack of clarity about certain of those responses.

In particular, the primates request, through the Presiding Bishop, that the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church
1. make an unequivocal common covenant that the bishops will not authorise any Rite of Blessing for same-sex unions in their dioceses or through General Convention (cf TWR, §143, 144); and
2. confirm that the passing of Resolution B033 of the 75th General Convention means that a candidate for episcopal orders living in a same-sex union shall not receive the necessary consent (cf TWR, §134);
unless some new consensus on these matters emerges across the Communion (cf TWR, §134).

The primates request that the answer of the House of Bishops is conveyed to the primates by the Presiding Bishop by 30th September 2007.
If the reassurances requested of the House of Bishops cannot in good conscience be given, the relationship between The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion as a whole remains damaged at best, and this has consequences for the full participation of the Church in the life of the Communion.

On property disputes

The primates urge the representatives of The Episcopal Church and of those congregations in property disputes with it to suspend all actions in law arising in this situation. We also urge both parties to give assurances that no steps will be taken to alienate property from The Episcopal Church without its consent or to deny the use of that property to those congregations.

Appendix One

“The Camp Allen Principles”

The commitments expressed in the letter of 22nd September 2006 were:

* an acceptance of Lambeth 1998 Res. I.10 as expressing, on its given topic, the mind of the Communion to which we subject our own teaching and discipline;
* an acceptance of the Windsor Report, as interpreted by the primates at Dromantine, as outlining the Communion’s “way forward” for our own church’s reconciliation and witness within the Communion;
* a personal acceptance by each of us of the particular recommendations made by the Windsor Report to ECUSA, and a pledge to comply with them;
* a clear sense that General Convention 2006 did not adequately respond to the requests made of ECUSA by the Communion through the Windsor Report;
* a clear belief that we faithfully represent ECUSA in accordance with this church’s Constitution and Canons, as properly interpreted by the Scripture and our historic faith and discipline;
* a desire to provide a common witness through which faithful Anglican Episcopalians committed to our Communion life might join together for the renewal of our church and the furtherance of the mission of Christ Jesus.

The principles expressed in the letter of 11th January 2007 were:

1. It is our hope that you will explicitly recognize that we are in full communion with you in order to maintain the integrity of our ministries within our dioceses and the larger Church.
2. We are prepared, among other things, to work with the primates and with others in our American context to make provision for the varying needs of individuals, congregations, dioceses and clergy to continue to exercise their ministries as the Covenant process unfolds. This includes the needs of those seeking primatial ministry from outside the United States, those dioceses and parishes unable to accept the ordination of women, and congregations which sense they can no longer be inside the Episcopal Church.
3. We are prepared to offer oversight, with the agreement of the local bishop, of congregations in dioceses whose bishops are not fully supportive of Communion teaching and discipline.
4. We are prepared to offer oversight to congregations who are currently under foreign jurisdictions in consultation with the bishops and primates involved.
5. Finally, we respectfully request that the primates address the issue of congregations within our dioceses seeking oversight in foreign jurisdictions. We are Communion-committed bishops and find the option of turning to foreign oversight presents anomalies which weaken our own diocesan familieis and places strains on the Communion as a whole.

Notes:

1. Whilst we reaffirm the teaching of successive Lambeth Conferences that bishops must respect the autonomy and territorial integrity of dioceses and provinces other than their own, we call on the provinces concerned to make adequate provision for episcopal oversight of dissenting minorities within their own area of pastoral care in consultation with the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the primates (Lambeth, October 2003)

2. Namely, a letter of 22nd September 2006 to the Archbishop of Canterbury and a further letter of 11th 2007 to the primates setting out a number of commitments and proposals. These commitments and principles are colloquially known as “the Camp Allen principles”. (see Appendix One)
3. As set out in Appendix One.

4. Resolved, That the 75th General Convention of The Episcopal Church, mindful of “the repentance, forgiveness, and reconciliation enjoined on us by Christ” (Windsor Report, paragraph 134), express its regret for straining the bonds of affection in the events surrounding the General Convention of 2003 and the consequences which followed; offer its sincerest apology to those within our Anglican Communion who are offended by our failure to accord sufficient importance to the impact of our actions on our church and other parts of the Communion; and ask forgiveness as we seek to live into deeper levels of communion one with another. The Communion Sub-Group added the comment: “These words were not lightly offered, and should not be lighted received.”