collapse

* Recent Posts

Re: new & uncertain! by PerditaPickle
[Yesterday at 07:00:39 pm]


Re: Back pain by Micheál
[Yesterday at 06:42:53 am]


Re: Favorite Beer? by Micheál
[Yesterday at 06:31:29 am]


new & uncertain! by shoemakerlevy9
[January 22, 2021, 01:36:47 pm]


Re: Pagan Traitor Storms the US Capitol? by Altair
[January 22, 2021, 12:44:20 pm]

Author Topic: The Episcopal Church suspended by the Anglican Communion for teachings on SSM &c  (Read 7843 times)

Darkhawk

  • Senior Staff
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 5028
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 931
    • View Profile
    • Suns in her Branches
  • Religion: An American Werewolf in the Akhet; Kemetic; Feri; Imaginary Baltic Heathen; Discordian; CoX; Etc.
  • Preferred Pronouns: any of he, she, they
Quote from: Demophon;185218
I don't think it's about changing with current fashions, it's has more to do with having a better understanding of sexuality and letting go of false teachings stemming from ignorance.

"I know and am persuaded in the Lord Jesus that nothing is unclean in itself, but it is unclean for anyone who thinks it unclean."  - Romans 14:14

Worth keeping in mind that the "clobber texts" from Romans were Paul basically setting up a Jewish audience to be smug about being superior to gentiles so that he could yank the rug out from under them and make that statement, which was essentially about things that were actually theologically important and a source of great difficulty in the Christian community at the time.

So that he could talk about circumcision and kosher food.

The homophobia of Romans 1 was structured to play on the sympathies of conservative Jewish Christians of the time so that he could get treated as an insider well enough to get them to shut up about bacon.

(Romans 14 in context reads a lot like, "Look, your squick is okay, and should be respected, and it's really unkind for people to do things that squick you in front of you, but don't mistake it for a law of nature or a divine command.  Your squick is not a universal.")
« Last Edit: January 15, 2016, 01:39:16 pm by Darkhawk »
as the water grinds the stone
we rise and fall
as our ashes turn to dust
we shine like stars    - Covenant, "Bullet"

RecycledBenedict

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 851
  • Total likes: 6
    • View Profile
Quote from: Darkhawk;185225
The homophobia of Romans 1 was structured to play on the sympathies of conservative Jewish Christians of the time so that he could get treated as an insider well enough to get them to shut up about bacon.


Yes, but the same-sex acts in Romans 1 are also set in a context of worshipping non-Christian deities, perhaps some sort of cultic prostitution. It is hardly surprising, that St. Paul want Christians to stay away from practicing non-Christian religions.

Darkhawk

  • Senior Staff
  • *
  • Join Date: Jun 2011
  • Posts: 5028
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 931
    • View Profile
    • Suns in her Branches
  • Religion: An American Werewolf in the Akhet; Kemetic; Feri; Imaginary Baltic Heathen; Discordian; CoX; Etc.
  • Preferred Pronouns: any of he, she, they
Quote from: FraterBenedict;185226
Yes, but the same-sex acts in Romans 1 are also set in a context of worshipping non-Christian deities, perhaps some sort of cultic prostitution. It is hardly surprising, that St. Paul want Christians to stay away from practicing non-Christian religions.

 
The critical thing is that they are not the point of the writing.  They are the thing set up to make his intended audience go "Ewwwwwwwwwwwww," so that he could say, "I know, right?  They do all this shit that, by the way, you do too, and you don't have the excuse of not having the Law."
as the water grinds the stone
we rise and fall
as our ashes turn to dust
we shine like stars    - Covenant, "Bullet"

RecycledBenedict

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 851
  • Total likes: 6
    • View Profile
Quote from: Darkhawk;185227
The critical thing is that they are not the point of the writing.  They are the thing set up to make his intended audience go "Ewwwwwwwwwwwww," so that he could say, "I know, right?  They do all this shit that, by the way, you do too, and you don't have the excuse of not having the Law."


Yes, yes. I don't contradict that interpretation.

RecycledBenedict

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 851
  • Total likes: 6
    • View Profile
Quote from: Demophon;185218
I don't think it's about changing with current fashions, it's has more to do with having a better understanding of sexuality and letting go of false teachings stemming from ignorance. People don't like change because it's temporarily uncomfortable, but it's necessarily if they want to stay relevant in a society in which secularism is wiping the floor with religion when it comes to being in touch with reality and doing away with ignorance.


The Anglican Communion claim to balance Reason, Scripture and Tradition, and there is a 460 year old practice of translating Byzantine prayers into English within Anglicanism. I am surprised that Anglican liturgists haven't made use of the Byzantine adelphopoiesis rite. That would make male same-sex union liturgies more traditional.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adelphopoiesis

Allaya

  • Staff
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Location: Out of My Mind
  • Posts: 933
  • Country: no
  • Total likes: 71
    • View Profile
  • Religion: It's Complicated
  • Preferred Pronouns: she/her/hers
Quote from: FraterBenedict;185223
No, it was not implied, and I do not nitpick. I hope that those Anglican/Episcopal churches who are ready for it will bless civil marriages, but not by using poorly worded liturgies with crude and dysfunctional theology. Anglicans have justified pride over the high stylistic quality of their liturgical texts, and they have been able to gather quite different churchmanships under one umbrella for 450 years. Why let same-sex couples suffer a lower standard of liturgy than hetero couples?

Wait...you're trying to tell me what my own words meant? The fuck?
« Last Edit: January 15, 2016, 03:02:02 pm by Allaya »
Service is the rent we pay for the privilege of living on this earth.  — Shirley Chisholm
No doubt the truth can be unpleasant, but I am not sure that unpleasantness is the same as the truth.  — Roger Ebert
It is difficult to get a person to understand something when their livelihood depends upon them not understanding it. — Upton Sinclair (adapted)
People cannot be reasoned out of an opinion that they have not reasoned themselves into. — Fisher Ames (adapted)

RecycledBenedict

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 851
  • Total likes: 6
    • View Profile
Quote from: Allaya;185234
Wait...you're trying to tell me what my own words meant? The fuck?

 
Wait...you're trying to tell me what my own words meant? The fuck?

Castus

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Location: Virginia
  • Posts: 824
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 77
    • View Profile
  • Religion: Mar Thoma Liberal Catholic Church
Quote from: FraterBenedict;185216
Civil or sacramental?


I have problems with both, but more with sacramental marriages than civil ones.

Quote
Sorry to hear that. It is possible, that I have interpreted your position in a more positive  light than what you intended. I am, though, still not sure exactly what your position is. Doesn't Conservative synagogues perform same-sex weddings?


The Conservative position re: homosexuality and same-sex marriage is... complicated. In 2006, the Rabbinical Assembly adopted a variety of responsa, some of which directly contradicted each other. Same-Sex Attraction and Halakhah by Leonard Levy and Homosexuality Revisited by Joel Roth both stand on the conservative end of the spectrum. The former counsels against outright discrimination and encourages LGBT participation in the Jewish community, but maintains that there ought not to be same-sex marriage ceremonies or blessings of same-sex unions. As well, Rabbi Levy states that while those who flout the prohibitions on homosexual conduct should still be accepted into the Conservative community -- much like those who don't keep kosher or observe the Sabbath are -- their actions should not be validated. As well, it is the position of Levy's responsa that those with same-sex attraction can be admitted to rabbinical and cantorial schools, but should refrain from having sex.

Rabbi Roth, on the other hand, states in his conclusions that "[t]he Rabbinical and Cantorial schools will not knowingly admit sexually active homosexual students, nor will they be admitted to either the Rabbinical Assembly or the Cantors Assembly.' but otherwise tends to mirror Same-Sex Attraction and Halakhah. Both responsa agree that homosexuals shouldn't be ostracised, but that sodomy remained prohibited, and that neither same-sex blessings or marriages should be assented to; as that would undermine the standard ideal of a monogamous, heterosexual marriage. Celibacy is counselled, but with the attitude of "if you can't be celibate, that's okay; just try to live up to Jewish ethics in that relationship" in line with the Conservative ideal of encouraging Jewish observance as normative and beneficial, but not penalising those who fail to live up to it.

That's a big reversal from the CJLS' (Committee of Jewish Law and Standards, the Rabbinical Assembly's halachic arm) blanket prohibition of homosexuals and homosexuality across the board, but is still relatively conservative. Rabbi Levy's responsa is very nuanced in addressing the subtleties of sexual orientation and attraction, and I'm not quite doing it justice. It's easy to find if you'd like to skim it. However, a third responsa was also adopted: Homosexuality, Human Dignity, and Halakah. This is generally understood to be the 'liberal' one among the three responsa. In comparison to the position of other religions (Episcopalianism) or Jewish denominations (Reconstructionist Judaism, Jewish Renewal, and Reform Judaism spring to mind) it may not really seem that liberal; but in a Conservative context it's pretty close. The explicit ban on sodomy remains in place, and "[h]eterosexual marriage between two Jews [is confirmed as] the halakhic ideal," but with the significant caveat that "for homosexuals who are incapable of maintaining a heterosexual relationship, the rabbinic prohibitions that have been associated with other gay and lesbian intimate acts are superseded based upon the Talmudic principle of kvod habriot, our obligation to preserve the human dignity of all people." As regards admittance to seminaries and cantorial schools the paper instructs that LGBT students are to be admitted without prejudice.

Importantly, it also refrains from addressing the issue of same-sex marriages or blessings for civil unions; saying that the many halachic questions which would have to be addressed fell outside the scope of the paper. The rabbis did say though that they "favor the establishment of committed and loving relationships for gay and lesbian Jews", paving the way for the adoption, in 2012, of an addendum to Homosexuality, Human Dignity, and Halakah which laid out ceremonies and blessings for Jewish same-sex marriages. As is the way with the Conservative movement, the various synagogues, seminaries, and cantorial schools which are affiliated with the movement can choose which responsa they wish to adhere to; recognising that they all establish valid halachic positions. I, obviously, tend towards the first two responsa; and if I ever ended up a rabbi I would not officiate same-sex marriages. But taken as a whole, I would say that if one were to average the three responsa together, the position of Conservative Judaism could broadly be summed up as "no anal, please, and celibacy and/or heterosexual marriage are ideal, but while we encourage you to live up to these standards we understand if you can't."

Quote
This discussion (and this is not directed exclusively to you, but to all participants of this thread) will not become balanced and nuanced until we take a few other observations in consideration:

The Scottish Episcopal Church has not adopted any official liturgy for blessing of a civil marriage, but it permit its clergy to use locally adopted rites in order to bless same-sex civil marriages. The Scottish Episcopal Church is not suspended from the Anglican Communion.

The Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia have a liturgy for trial use in order to bless same-sex civil marriages. The Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia is not suspended from the Anglican Communion.

What the Episcopal Church (vague name!) has done, is to adopt a liturgy that blurs the sacramental theology of Christianity, something the Scottish and New Zealandic liturgies do not.


I think the problem is that TEC is large and influential, and is in any case far more blatant about gay marriages and non-celibate gay priests (Gene Robinson, anyone?) than any of the churches you named; so obviously they will be of more concern to the conservative wing of the church. I should also add that, despite Kiya's surprising attempts to paint the African portions of the Communion as backwards stone-throwing savages (perhaps the benevolent white prelates of Europe and North America can enlighten them...), it isn't just the African church which is dismayed. I've heard that the South American and Latin American contingents of the Communion aren't exactly thrilled either. TEC is a bit of a renegade and that's coming back to bite them. Anglicanism prides itself on the via media, and on collegiality and consensus, and The Episcopal Church is too busy thrusting doctrine into a paper-shredder and screaming that it knows better than everyone else.
 
Quote from: Allaya;185219
And you're correct...I'm not mollified. You're entitled to your opinion, but damn. Being okay with gay people as long as they remain second-class citizens doesn't really fly with me.

Equal rights means equal rites.


Agree to disagree? :ange:
“Castus, meanwhile, goes straight for the bad theology like one of those creepy fish that swims up streams of pee.” — Darkhawk

“A time is coming when men will go mad, and when they see someone who is not mad, they will attack him, saying, “You are mad; you are not like us.” — St Anthony the Great

Allaya

  • Staff
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Location: Out of My Mind
  • Posts: 933
  • Country: no
  • Total likes: 71
    • View Profile
  • Religion: It's Complicated
  • Preferred Pronouns: she/her/hers
Quote from: Castus;185242
Agree to disagree? :ange:

Sure. As I said, you're entitled to your opinions.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2016, 03:46:06 pm by Allaya »
Service is the rent we pay for the privilege of living on this earth.  — Shirley Chisholm
No doubt the truth can be unpleasant, but I am not sure that unpleasantness is the same as the truth.  — Roger Ebert
It is difficult to get a person to understand something when their livelihood depends upon them not understanding it. — Upton Sinclair (adapted)
People cannot be reasoned out of an opinion that they have not reasoned themselves into. — Fisher Ames (adapted)

Allaya

  • Staff
  • *
  • Join Date: Sep 2013
  • Location: Out of My Mind
  • Posts: 933
  • Country: no
  • Total likes: 71
    • View Profile
  • Religion: It's Complicated
  • Preferred Pronouns: she/her/hers
Quote from: FraterBenedict;185240
Wait...you're trying to tell me what my own words meant? The fuck?

 
I made a statement with a set of implications contextually attached to them that are perfectly valid in US language usage and culture. It appears that Swedish English does not seem to have the same contextual implications.

So rather than throw rocks at each other, maybe it can be agreed that we're separated by a common language.
Service is the rent we pay for the privilege of living on this earth.  — Shirley Chisholm
No doubt the truth can be unpleasant, but I am not sure that unpleasantness is the same as the truth.  — Roger Ebert
It is difficult to get a person to understand something when their livelihood depends upon them not understanding it. — Upton Sinclair (adapted)
People cannot be reasoned out of an opinion that they have not reasoned themselves into. — Fisher Ames (adapted)

RecycledBenedict

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 851
  • Total likes: 6
    • View Profile
Quote from: Castus;185242
The rabbis did say though that they "favor the establishment of committed and loving relationships for gay and lesbian Jews", paving the way for the adoption, in 2012, of an addendum to Homosexuality, Human Dignity, and Halakah which laid out ceremonies and blessings for Jewish same-sex marriages.


I guess, that my impression of Conservative Judaism, pertaining to this topic, was based on newspaper articles about this 2012 addendum. Thank you for deepening my knowledge about the diversity within Conservative Judaism. This was very informative. Regarding the subject itself, we have to agree to disagree.

Quote from: Castus;185242
I've heard that the South American and Latin American contingents of the Communion aren't exactly thrilled either.


That's true, and the Sydney Anglicans aren't thrilled either, but they are very odd Anglicans: Defending the practice of Deacons presiding at the celebration of Eucharist, in theory defending lay-led celebration of the Eucharist, and being very far from the general tenor and spirit of Anglican standard divine Richard Hooker. It is very strange when a so divergent type of Anglicanism tries to style itself as 'orthodox' and normative.

Quote from: Castus;185242
TEC is a bit of a renegade and that's coming back to bite them. Anglicanism prides itself on the via media, and on collegiality and consensus, and The Episcopal Church is too busy thrusting doctrine into a paper-shredder and screaming that it knows better than everyone else.


In my experience, Canadian, Scottish and New Zealandic Anglican theologians keep a higher intellectual standard than the American ones. The English ones became incoherent in December 2015, when they undermined the authority of the Scottish Episcopal bishops, and recommended their members to receive communion at Presbyterian altars when they visit Scotland. The Scottish Episcopalians are not amused.

RecycledBenedict

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 851
  • Total likes: 6
    • View Profile
Quote from: Allaya;185246
I made a statement with a set of implications contextually attached to them that are perfectly valid in US language usage and culture. It appears that Swedish English does not seem to have the same contextual implications.

So rather than throw rocks at each other, maybe it can be agreed that we're separated by a common language.


I do not understand what is happening. There is no reason for our discussion to deteriorate. Is it best to disentangle our mutual puzzlement in private messages instead?

Altair

  • Adept Member
  • ********
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Location: New York, New York
  • *
  • *
  • Posts: 3131
  • Country: us
  • Total likes: 489
  • Fly high and make the world follow
    • View Profile
    • Songs of the Metamythos
  • Religion: tree-hugging pagan
  • Preferred Pronouns: he/him/his
Quote from: Castus;185242
Kiya's surprising attempts to paint the African portions of the Communion as backwards stone-throwing savages


I don't recall Kiya doing that, in this thread or anywhere else. But I'm happy to.

From less than 2 years ago:
BILL TO STONE GAYS TO DEATH INTRODUCED IN KENYA
http://religiondispatches.org/bill-to-stone-gays-to-death-introduced-in-kenya/

This is the lot that the African Anglican churches have thrown in with. I hope it helps this indictment go down easier for you, coming from a black man.

Quote
(perhaps the benevolent white prelates of Europe and North America can enlighten them...)


Perhaps they can, considering much of the recent rash of anti-gay hatred has been whipped up by less-than-benevolent white prelates of American conservative evangelical churches, traveling to Africa to peddle their discredited hatred in more fertile ground, since they've lost so much ground in the Americas.

Or since the taboos against homosexuality were largely introduced by white Europeans during colonial times.

You may notice that I'm less concerned about skin color than with the human rights principles involved.
The first song sets the wheel in motion / The second is a song of love / The third song tells of Her devotion / The fourth cries joy from the sky above
The fifth song binds our fate to silence / and bids us live each moment well / The sixth unleashes rage and violence / The seventh song has truth to tell
The last song echoes through the ages / to ask its question all night long / And close the circle on these pages / These, the metamythos songs

Juniperberry

  • Grand Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2011
  • Banned!
  • Posts: 1891
  • Total likes: 4
    • View Profile
Quote from: Altair;185250
I don't recall Kiya doing that, in this thread or anywhere else. But I'm happy to.

From less than 2 years ago:
BILL TO STONE GAYS TO DEATH INTRODUCED IN KENYA
http://religiondispatches.org/bill-to-stone-gays-to-death-introduced-in-kenya/

This is the lot that the African Anglican churches have thrown in with. I hope it helps this indictment go down easier for you, coming from a black man.



Perhaps they can, considering much of the recent rash of anti-gay hatred has been whipped up by less-than-benevolent white prelates of American conservative evangelical churches, traveling to Africa to peddle their discredited hatred in more fertile ground, since they've lost so much ground in the Americas.

Or since the taboos against homosexuality were largely introduced by white Europeans during colonial times.

You may notice that I'm less concerned about skin color than with the human rights principles involved.

 

I'm not entirely sure what the situation here is.

I've read that this move is less about same-sex marriage, but about TEC taking matters of doctrine and policy into their own hands. For that, they have been suspended for three years from voting on doctrine and policy at the Anglican Communion.

As in, it could have been any issue that created this schism, and not that this is necessarily an Anglican attack on homosexuality. It's that there is still a process in which things need to happen, and TEC didn't follow that process.

Is that an accurate understanding?
The pace of progress in artificial intelligence (I’m not referring to narrow AI) is incredibly fast. [...] The risk of something seriously dangerous happening is in the five year timeframe. 10 years at most.--Elon Musk

I am in the camp that is concerned about super intelligence," [Bill] Gates wrote. "First the machines will do a lot of jobs for us and not be super intelligent. That should be positive if we manage it well. A few decades after that though the intelligence is strong enough to be a concern. I agree with Elon Musk and some others on this and don\'t understand why some people are not concerned."

RecycledBenedict

  • Sr. Master Member
  • *******
  • Join Date: Jul 2015
  • Posts: 851
  • Total likes: 6
    • View Profile
Quote from: Juniperberry;185252
I'm not entirely sure what the situation here is.

I've read that this move is less about same-sex marriage, but about TEC taking matters of doctrine and policy into their own hands. For that, they have been suspended for three years from voting on doctrine and policy at the Anglican Communion.

As in, it could have been any issue that created this schism, and not that this is necessarily an Anglican attack on homosexuality. It's that there is still a process in which things need to happen, and TEC didn't follow that process.

Is that an accurate understanding?


That depend on whom you ask. The expectations on, and visions of, what Anglicanism/Episcopalianism ought to be differ considerably within the Anglican Communion, even regarding the proper way of making decisions.

The present situation is a convoluted fabric, and the same-sex issue is only one of the threads in that web. The considerable influence of the controversial bishop-theologian John Shelby Spong is another thread causing conflicts in the background, but that is less obvious in the newspapers.

Despite how the Anglican Communion sounds in media this week, in some parts of the world it is probably the most LGBTQI-friendly church there is (But Liberal Quakers and Old Catholics are also LGBTQI-friendly, and some Lutherans pretend to be). The difference between provinces, and between parishes within provinces is considerable.

Since the late 1550s, Anglicans have tried to embrace doctrinal positions other Christian confessional communions have held unreconcilable. That sort of compromise is only achievable if everyone within the Communion agree to disagree. That is no longer the situation.

The debate is not binary. It is not a matter of conservative and liberal, but a tension between several positions:

  • Anglicans with a high regard of episcopacy, baptismal regeneration, real presence of the body and blood of Christ in the Eucharist, and with a progressive view on ordination of women and LGBTQI issues (Affirming Catholicism)
  • Anglicans sharing the sacramental theology of the former group, but not sharing their progressive views (Conservative Anglocatholicism)
  • Anglicans with progressive views on ordination of women and LGBTQI issues, but with a vague theology about the sacraments, in favour of old liturgical services
  • Anglicans with progressive views on ordination of women and LGBTQI issues, but with a vague theology about the sacraments, in favour of new liturgical services
  • Anglicans stressing the Protestant aspect of Anglican history, and personal conversion experiences, but with a progressive view on ordination of women and LGBTQI issues
  • Anglicans stressing the Protestant aspect of Anglican history, and personal conversion experiences, with a negative view on ordination of women and LGBTQI issues, believing in the free will of humankind
  • Anglicans stressing the Protestant aspect of Anglican history, and personal conversion experiences, with a negative view on ordination of women and LGBTQI issues, believing in predestination, and with a view of ordained ministry considerably 'lower' than other Anglicans


All of the above come in charismatic and non-charismatic flavours.

Tags:
 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
0 Replies
1558 Views
Last post June 02, 2012, 12:20:52 pm
by RandallS
1 Replies
1020 Views
Last post August 13, 2012, 09:36:52 pm
by victoreia
0 Replies
1761 Views
Last post May 19, 2013, 01:57:01 pm
by RandallS
1 Replies
867 Views
Last post July 02, 2015, 10:51:33 pm
by Altair
11 Replies
2060 Views
Last post September 09, 2017, 01:34:36 pm
by Dragonoake

* Who's Online

  • Dot Guests: 39
  • Dot Hidden: 0
  • Dot Users: 2
  • Dot Users Online:

* Please Donate!

The Cauldron's server is expensive and requires monthly payments. Please become a Bronze, Silver or Gold Donor if you can. Donations are needed every month. Without member support, we can't afford the server.

* Shop & Support TC

The links below are affiliate links. When you click on one of these links you will go to the listed shopping site with The Cauldron's affiliate code. Any purchases you make during your visit will earn TC a tiny percentage of your purchase price at no extra cost to you.

* In Memoriam

Chavi (2006)
Elspeth (2010)
Marilyn (2013)

* Cauldron Staff

Host:
Sunflower

Message Board Staff
Board Coordinator:
Darkhawk

Assistant Board Coordinator:
Aster Breo

Senior Staff:
Aisling, Jenett, Sefiru

Staff:
Allaya, Chatelaine, EclecticWheel, HarpingHawke, Kylara, PerditaPickle, rocquelaire

Discord Chat Staff
Chat Coordinator:
Morag

Cauldron Council:
Bob, Catja, Emma-Eldritch, Fausta, Jubes, Kelly, LyricFox, Phouka, Sperran, Star, Steve, Tana

Site Administrator:
Randall

SimplePortal 2.3.6 © 2008-2014, SimplePortal