‘A Covenant to Promote Biblical Renewal’ – a Response (3) (22 April 2015)

Comments 1

• Wally Schiller June 28, 2015

  I am saddened to read the questions postulated at the end of this paper:

  “Have people, who have signed the Covenant, already decided what they will do if
  Convention decides in favour of Ordaining women? Having publically committed themselves
  to this position by signing the covenant, can they properly participate meaningfully in the
  process of a convention decision in the matter of women’s ordination?
  Should Parishes, which are sending delegates to Convention consider not nominating as
  their delegate any person who has signed the Covenant?
  Should the Church in Convention, exclude from the process of the vote on ordination, any
  person who has signed the Covenant?
  Should those who have signed the Covenant exclude themselves from the vote?”

  Now, these questions either have validity or they do not. Whichever it may be, they apply to both sides of an argument, ie, if one person comes with a certain opinion and another comes with an opposite opinion, the same applies to each. If that is still not clear, re-write the above questions from the perspective of someone who favours the ordination of women and publically says so!

  This shows clearly that these questions have no bearing to reality whatsoever – not to mention the apparent arbitrary disenfranchisement that is suggested. The latter reeks of something quite unacceptable.