Efforts Towards Church Unity

To the Mildenhalls & Gordon Bateman,

Greetings.

I am in the receipt of your broadcast email, dated 26^th December, 2002, bringing up-to-date, and proposing accelerated action with a suggested date of sometime in mid-2003 to work forward too.

I have taken the liberty of reproducing that letter as an html page on my site: St. Gabriel's Appeal For Unity

In response to your letter, I wish to make the following points:

As you are aware, I now acknowledge the Claim of David Bawden, and acknowledge him to be the True Pope. As such, I do not either seek the Pope, nor can I support any attempt, as such, to elect one. However, I will support the position taken by His Holiness Pope Michael I to this proposed action or movement, so that if he supports it and resigns his claim in favour of the one to be elected, prior to the actual election, I shall accordingly accept it, but that if he rejects it, I too shall reject it.

In your letter, I wish to point out these mistakes:

One should always (I stress, because it is important!) list claimants in chronological order. Therefore, one must mention Michael I before Linus II. This is important because if Linus II was elected before Michael I, then one would be obliged to consider his claim first and only upon finding it defective enough to be rejected, ought one to proceed to the next claimant.

It is never too irrelevant to specify always and stress the grounds upon which one rejects the claims of Senor Clemente Dominguez y Gomez (aka Pope Gregory 17 of the Palmarian sect), or Lucian Pulvermacher (aka Pius 13 of the Drowsers' sect ;->). Atleast, links should be provided to pages that specify the grounds for rejecting them as heretics.
Further, without nitpicking, I want to draw your attention to the fact that your letter is liable to be accused of inconsistency: You deprecate the tendency of factions for rejecting or eliminating persons or schools on the ground of illegitimacy of orders or for heresy, yet you too do exactly the same thing by rejecting some persons, factions or parties as illegitimate or heretics.

This problem could have been avoided if you had been more specific: We accept as Orthodox and Legitimate all that can be shown as Orthodox and Legitimate from the Teachings of the Church as it was up until 1958, and reject all that cannot meet this criteria.

Please do not misunderstand this as nitpicking. All that I want to say (regarding this) is that one cannot be too careful in such a matter.

I am attaching a document to this letter with the request that you circulate it, if you find it acceptable: Why I Accept Pope Michael. Thanking you,

Yours sincerely,

Prakash João Maskaren