Well, I guess they don’t do many marraiges or baptisms any more, gotta feel useful somehow.

These requests will be refused.  Before Lambeth. That makes +Ingham look good.
And later approved. After Lambeth. When +Ingham won’t care how he looks to outsiders.

At the very least, this reflects the intensification of the polarizing of opinion and action that’s taking place in New Westminster, just as elsewhere.  Now that eight churches have disaffiliated from that ultra-liberal diocese, it’s hardly surprising that more churches are moving the other direction too.

This is the standard pattern I expect to see replicated in many places.  The light is getting brighter and brighter, while the darkness is becoming all the darker and more completely and ominously so.

David Handy+

Paraprhasing a Biblical phrase;  This is a case of the blind leading the blind and they both fall into the ditch!!

Toral1,
What makes you think Ingram cares what Lambeth thinks?  He will Ok their request just has he has for the others.

JonReinert:  No, I think Toral1 is correct.  Ingham will use these requests for propaganda purposes (“look at me, there is an increasing groundswell in my dioceses asking for permission to do SSB’s but I am not giving permission right now out of respect (cough, cough) to the Windsor Report (as I interpret it).  But look at those wicked, tricksy and false parishes joining the Southern Cone, they are violating Windsor, while I am sacrificing oh so much to follow it”).  Then once this play acting doesn’t matter (i.e., post-Lambeth) he will give the permission.

Of course the point is that eight parishes (according to the article) already are doing same-sex blessings, in direct contradiction of the last Lambeth.  Ingham shouldn’t be on the invitation list at all, nor should any other bishop who is allowing same-sex blessings.

#3 David Handy+: “The light is getting brighter and brighter, while the darkness is becoming all the darker and more completely and ominously so.”
I agree with you completely. For different reasons, obviously, but completely.

PadreWayne (#8),

I’m glad you chimed in, and as someone from the other side, endorsed my interpretation of current reality as reflecting a growing, not lessening polarization.  Clarity is always helpful.

I see absolutely no realistic prospect for “reconciliation” between the hardcore activists on both sides (and I freely admit to being one on the “reasserter” side).  It is neither possible, nor even desirable.

David Handy+
Uncompromising advocate of the New Reformation

New Westminister miss a chance to get out of the Shadow of ECUSA/TEC/GCC?  No way.  Their avowed policy in this was expressed by their fearless Primate at Dar es Salaam to KJS, “We’re BEHIND you, whatever you want.”  On the other hand, Ingham’s got plenty more parishes to lose, so why not continue his megalomanaical histrionics?  Gotta be a tough call: second fiddle or torch Rome?  Poor Mikey.