[Magdalen] Bishop Cook: Another unfortunate piece of the story

[Grace Cangialosi]

Same here, Ginga.

> On Feb 4, 2015, at 6:52 AM, Ginga Wilder <gingawilder at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> Sally,
> I was speaking of The Episcopal Church.  Having grown up an Episcopalian in
> SC, and having my best friend's father removed as our parish priest for
> galloping alcoholism, and having grown up with two alcoholic parents, I do
> see a problem.  Here and in MD and now with PB's allowing the consecration
> of a drunk candidate to proceed, in TEC.  (My best friend's father passed
> out at the altar while celebrating an 8 AM Sunday service.  He was sent to
> another parish.  Eventually he was defrocked.)
> 
> I know nothing of the drinking habits in South Africa.  I don't think I
> commented on any entity besides TEC when I wrote my other post.  I believe
> what I said.  TEC has an alcohol problem.
> 
> Ginga
> 
>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2015 at 2:57 AM, Sally Davies <sally.davies at gmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>> If you drive under the influence, you don't get to blame others for
>> accidents. It alters the probabilities completely.
>> 
>> I'm puzzled by the "we as a church have a problem with drink" idea. Is that
>> only in the USA, or elsewhere in the Communion? I'm sure not here.
>> Anglicans are less likely to be abstinent than other protestant church
>> members but as a group not more likely to abuse, I'm sure of that.
>> 
>> Perhaps because of the strong evangelical influence in this part of the
>> world? And also that ideas of social responsibility attach to alcohol abuse
>> in particular. The entire society has severe problems with alcohol
>> abuse/dependency, so if Christians are involved with social ministry in a
>> spirit of love and empowerment (as most churches are), you have to be
>> sensitive to that.
>> 
>> What I'm not hearing in all this, is more about the qualities that Bp Cook
>> possessed which influenced others to overlook such an obvious disaster
>> waiting to happen, despite presumably having at least SOME objectivity.
>> Other than the speculation about wanting to make her someone else's problem
>> which sounds exceptionally bleak.
>> 
>> Sally D
>> 
>>> On Wednesday, 4 February 2015, Jim Handsfield <jhandsfield at att.net> wrote:
>>> 
>>> In addition, she apparently was texting at the time.
>>> 
>>> Jim Handsfield
>>> Sent from my iPad
>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 3, 2015, at 10:31 PM, Jay Weigel <jay.weigel at gmail.com
>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>> Furthermore, she left the scene for some period of time, variously
>>>> described as from twenty to forty-five minutes. That's inexcusable.
>>>> 
>>>>> On Tuesday, February 3, 2015, Grace Cangialosi <gracecan at gmail.com
>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> According to the police report--which, I believe was based on
>> eyewitness
>>>>> accounts--she swerved into the bike lane and hit him from behind. I
>>> haven't
>>>>> seen anything to refute that claim. And if she was texting, that would
>>> be a
>>>>> very likely consequence.
>>>>> 
>>>>> On February 3, 2015, at 10:16 PM, "Mahoney, W. Michael" <
>>>>> wmmah at stoneledge.net <javascript:;> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> On Tue, Feb 3, 2015 at 6:10 PM, Ginga Wilder <gingawilder at gmail.com
>>> <javascript:;>
>>>>> <javascript:;>> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> I
>>>>>> and a young man is dead because she drove while drunk.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Do we really know this to be true beyond any doubt?  Could it be that
>> it
>>>>> was the cyclist's fault, in part or entirely?
>>>>> 
>>>>> One ought not drink and drive.  That's not the issue.  And by the
>>> available
>>>>> evidence, Bishop Cook ought not drink at all.  But that does not mean
>>> that
>>>>> she necessarily caused the accident.
>>>>> 
>>>>> One reason not to drink and drive is that you will almost
>> automatically
>>> be
>>>>> presumed to be the cause of any accident in which you are involved.
>>>>> 
>>>>> It may be that the evidence is clear but I haven't seen it.
>>>>> 
>>>>> Mike M.
>>