Isn't it a liberal thing to "secede"?

[Adammi]

I've yet to completely comprehend what exactly is going on within TEC. But, to me, it seems to be a very liberal thing to break off from one province and join another.

What would the more traditionalist and conservative Roman Catholics think if a diocese were to do such a thing? Wouldn't excommunication be involved?

I'm not asking this as a pro- or con-, I'm just stating a point and following up with a few questions...

Isn't it liberal for conservative groups to do this?

The Huffington Post (my primary source for news) often has videos such as "The Obama Transition in a Minute" or "The Blagojevich Scandal in a Minute". They have yet to create "The Episcopalian Crisis in a Minute." If Arianna, in her oh so glorious accent, were to call you up right now, what would you say?

I want to know.

 

[Adammi]

Hmmm....

 

[New_Found_Faith]

Well, it depends on what standard one is being held to in regards to liberalism or convservatism.

If the standard is the majority opinion of Christians overall in the U.S. and Europe, those that are seceeding would be considered conservative. If the standard is TEC, those that seceed are obviously liberal for going against the consensus in that group.

 

[MarkRohfrietsch]

I'm an outsider trying to understand.

Both "Provinces" are still part of the Anglican Communion, are they not?

 

[calluna]

Isn't it liberal for conservative groups to do this?

If so, can liberals object? Or do liberals not want their shining example to be a beacon to others?

 

[Albion]

I've yet to completely comprehend what exactly is going on within TEC. But, to me, it seems to be a very liberal thing to break off from one province and join another.

I understand you, but I'd say it depends upon the situation. We can't just speak of secession in the absence of all the other factors. There have been many instances of underground churches or unauthorized ones, such as in Communist countries of the past, which we consider heroic for not bending to the 'official' church once it had gone bad.

What would the more traditionalist and conservative Roman Catholics think if a diocese were to do such a thing? Wouldn't excommunication be involved?

Of course, and it is happening in this situation also. But it's only relevant to the church issuing the edict.

I'm not asking this as a pro- or con-, I'm just stating a point and following up with a few questions...
Isn't it liberal for conservative groups to do this?

I wouldn't say so.

videos such as "The Obama Transition in a Minute" or "The Blagojevich Scandal in a Minute". They have yet to create "The Episcopalian Crisis in a Minute." If Arianna, in her oh so glorious accent, were to call you up right now, what would you say?

I want to know.

Taking the side of those seceeding from TEC, I'd probably say that when that church renounced its traditional standards and beliefs, it became necessary--and Biblically right to do--to separate and carry on in company with the majority of the Anglican churches in the world. It is, you see, TEC that changed, not we. Remember, that's a quick answer, since you asked for that, and its me taking that side for the sake of the argument. I am not aligned personally with what you are speaking of, that which is often called the "Anglican realignment."
...................................................................................................................

MarkRohfrietsch:


I'm an outsider trying to understand.

Both "Provinces" are still part of the Anglican Communion, are they not?

Not exactly, Mark. No "still" in this, at least not for both. The dioceses that have seceeded from TEC and formed a new province have yet to receive the official recogniation of the Anglican Communion although there is no doubt that they have the support and recognition of many if not most of the Anglican Communion's provinces, a number of which urged them to take the action they did.