Re: Impaired Communion

[Louie Crew <lcrew@andromeda.rutgers.edu>]

On Nov 24 11:03am XXXXX XXXXXX wrote:

> Hi Louie, [my bishop] wants to know "how many provinces or dioceses have
> impaired relationships to the Anglican Communion because of the Church's
> recognition of women as priests..."
>
> Although I doubt there is any official record, I figure if anyone would
> know that, or know where to look you would.
>
> Ideas?
>
> Thanks!
> XXXXXX  

Gentle XXXXXX,

I am copying your query to Canon John Peterson, Canon Jim Rosenthal,
and TEC archivist Mark Duffy -- who will know if anyone does.

I suspect no one has put major effort into keeping up with these
snits, since, as best I can tell, no one knows what 'impaired
communion' means beyond 'I don't like you, so there!'  I know of no
case where 'impaired communion' led to someone refusing a sizable
gift or prevented a guest from the scorned part from receiving Eucharist
in a parish of the scorners.

The phrase "impaired communion is misleading as is "disassociation,"
with much the same function.  Each tells the world, "I disagree with
my relatives on issues X, Y, and Z; so don't blame me.  They're just
my relatives."

The good news is that we're still relatives.  Given enough time, most 
people get over snits like these, and if not -- as Theologian Norman 
Pittenger was fond of saying -- "So long as there is death, there 
is hope" (ours or theirs? it tends not to matter)!

Lutibelle/Louie