Tom Stuart wrote:

> When the sexuality proposal was presented and dealt with at the last
> Assembly there was a huge outcry as to how the church at large was not
> informed nor prepared.  Now personally I think the sexuality issue,
> except as a matter of principle, will have little impact on the actual
> day to day activities of the church.  I mean, I doubt if many
> congregations will have some person of homosexual orientation knocking
> on their doors asking to be ordained.
>
> What I think CAN have substantial implication for the life of the
> Uniting Church is the deal we have made with the other denominations
> of the Australian Council of Churches (have I got the right council)
> with regard to sharing property, acknowledging each other�s baptism �
> so on and so forth.
>
> My question is:  Who knew about this pending agreement.  When was the
> church consulted even at the level of presbytery?  Was it raised at
> Assembly?  (Reports to me about Assembly suggests not).  Where did
> this come from?
>
> Now it so happens that I support such a move and think it could have
> far more significant implications than most other things we have
> decided to do and not do since the change of church structures but
> what if I thought it was a disastrous idea?  What happens if we all
> thought it a disastrous idea?  How were we meant to know it was going
> to happen?
>
> Now I�m not going to lose much sleep over this but it seems a little
> curious.
>
> Tom
>
No one has picked up on this (as far as I know), I wonder if that means
we are more concerned with issues than the process used, and is that
necessarily bad? Providing we get what we (whoever the "we" may be) want
it doesn't matter how. Is there a potential of corruption and abuse in
neglect of due process?

Or then perhaps this decision stands in continuity with the Basis and
several documents issued through the years (co-operation and trinity),
and thus we were already notified of the direction, with the implication
that this is a predictable outcome.

Another question though. In a hierarchical model a decision made by the
authority is valid. Which of the interrelated councils of the UCA is
responsible for these decisions. Property belongs to Synods, mission is
the responsibility of the church council, presbytery for ordination and
settlement. How are we going to implement all this? And what if one
council objects?

Peace,
Rob
--
Robert & Barbara Dummermuth
Uniting Church in Australia
Esperance / West Nullarbor Patrol
18 Hicks Street, Esperance, 6450
tel 08 9071 1184
fax 08 9071 5814
mobile 0428 532 304
[EMAIL PROTECTED]




------------------------------------------------------
- You are subscribed to the mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
- To unsubscribe, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] and put in the message body 'unsubscribe 
insights-l' (ell, not one (1))
See: http://nsw.uca.org.au/insights-l-information.htm
------------------------------------------------------

Reply via email to