<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Still boggling about Rome&#8217;s offer!</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.liturgy.org.uk/archives/164/feed" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.liturgy.org.uk/archives/164</link>
	<description>Dana Delap's Blog</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Mon, 05 Apr 2010 11:00:57 +0200</lastBuildDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.1</generator>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
		<item>
		<title>By: James Collett</title>
		<link>http://www.liturgy.org.uk/archives/164/comment-page-1#comment-2081</link>
		<dc:creator>James Collett</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sat, 20 Feb 2010 11:23:11 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liturgy.org.uk/?p=164#comment-2081</guid>
		<description>I think the Church (I mean the Roman Catholic Church) simply wants the different schisms to re-join and become one again. A pretty tall order, admittedly. And the timing of such an offer is odd, I suppose; I thought the offer had been there since ages ago.

But why does offering a home to disaffected ministers bring the universal church into disrepute? Maybe it does if this gesture is seen in the context of power play politics, which it never struck me as. But then I am not in the thick of it, hearing the buzz and gossip in hallowed halls, so maybe I would not pick up on that.

Plus, despite my cultivated cynism there is still a little lad inside me who looks up to authority and says, &quot;But they wouldn&#039;t do that, would they?&quot;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I think the Church (I mean the Roman Catholic Church) simply wants the different schisms to re-join and become one again. A pretty tall order, admittedly. And the timing of such an offer is odd, I suppose; I thought the offer had been there since ages ago.</p>
<p>But why does offering a home to disaffected ministers bring the universal church into disrepute? Maybe it does if this gesture is seen in the context of power play politics, which it never struck me as. But then I am not in the thick of it, hearing the buzz and gossip in hallowed halls, so maybe I would not pick up on that.</p>
<p>Plus, despite my cultivated cynism there is still a little lad inside me who looks up to authority and says, &#8220;But they wouldn&#8217;t do that, would they?&#8221;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: clayboy &#187; The purple cloth ceiling</title>
		<link>http://www.liturgy.org.uk/archives/164/comment-page-1#comment-2030</link>
		<dc:creator>clayboy &#187; The purple cloth ceiling</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 01 Nov 2009 01:01:22 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.liturgy.org.uk/?p=164#comment-2030</guid>
		<description>[...]   In the continued brouhaha about Papa Ratzi&#8217;s offer to disaffected soi-disant Anglicans my friend Dana Delap comments [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...]   In the continued brouhaha about Papa Ratzi&#8217;s offer to disaffected soi-disant Anglicans my friend Dana Delap comments [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
