Comments: Presiding Bishop writes to Fort Worth

Seems each side is starting to talk clearly for a change.

"And if it seem evil unto you to serve the LORD, choose you this day whom ye will serve; whether the gods which your fathers served that were on the other side of the flood, or the gods of the Amorites, in whose land ye dwell: but as for me and my house, we will serve the LORD."

Posted by anon at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 12:12am GMT

Multiple Luthers perhaps, up against what the Archbishop called a "unity of canon law".

Posted by Pluralist at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 1:16am GMT

That's the sound of your chickens coming home to roost, Jack.

Posted by JCF at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 1:20am GMT

Thank you, Katherine, for having the strength of character to step up and properly warn these bishops, who are preparing to claim to take their dioceses out of TEC, of the inevitable consequences of their actions. After many years of attempts at dialogue, it has come to this. I had a small role on the sidelines of the diocesan reconciliation commission in the diocese of Los Angeles, now almost a decade ago. From the beginning, from the demands made on us by David Anderson, it was clear that the threat of schism was there. It was spelled out in the original reconciliation process proposal that he presented. That process of dialogue went on for several years, to no avail. No amount of provision for the "orthodox" in our diocese was sufficient. It has been the same all over TEC. No episcopal visitor, no matter how conservative, has been good enough for those determined to leave TEC. All of this became very clear during the last HOB meeting. The now about to be departing bishops attended the HOB meeting only as long as Rowan was there. As soon as he departed, these bishops refused to meet further with the HOB and convened their own meeting in another city, where they planned their departure, and where Bishop Venables spoke to them and gave them assurances that he would provide "a safe haven" from the "persecution" of TEC. It could not be clearer that there is nothing further that can be done to seek accomodation with these bishops. If reconciliation was ever on their agendas, it was a long time ago. They simply cannot abide the majority decisions of the General Convention and they refuse to cohabit with us in this House of God. Their suffering is the anguish that some of them feel to leave the Church of their ordinations. The suffering they inflict on others is that of whipping their parishioners into a headlong rush to the door. It would serve their integrity a great deal more if these bishops simply resigned their offices, as Jeff Steenson so nobly did at the HOB meeting. Then they could seek office in the actual Global South, as opposed to creating this ecclesial mess in the U.S. But that won't happen. And, having repudiated their consecration vows to defend the faith as this Church has received it, having turned their backs on every offer of reconciliation and alternate oversight that was compatible with the Constitution and Canons of TEC, they will now send out a cry of outrage that they will not be allowed to trample on the Constitution and Canons of the Church that ordained them. Nor will they be allowed to make off with as much of the property as possible to create an ersatz Anglican entity in the U.S. in which they can further fragment over ordination of women, which prayerbook should be controlling, and various other matters that they deem necessary to salvation. This would be funny, if it weren't so sad. I pray that God will bless and guide all of us in this shameful episode of church history. And, most especially, that God will forgive us for once again failing to live up to our Lord's call on us to refrain from judgement and to genuinely love one another. Now to the business at hand, protecting the Episcopal Church from those who would tear it apart in their hurt and anger.

Posted by revkarenm at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 2:25am GMT

Feel the Love

Posted by Margaret at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 2:47am GMT

Firm and clear. Jefferts Schori is shaping up as one of the great church leaders of our time.

Posted by Fr Joseph O'Leary at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 3:10am GMT

The ABC said that the diocese and its bishop is much more important than the "abstract reality" of TECUSA...didn't he?

Posted by NP at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 10:51am GMT

See, even if you think she's Mrs. Satan incarnate, you can't argue with her right and, I would argue, responsibility, to do this. I would not be able to argue if it were +Akinola saying the same thing to a liberal bishop who had behaved as Iker has. It doesn't mean she's right, though I think she is, but it is legitimate discipline. It'll be interesting to see how fast legitimate discipline gets turned into, yet again, oppression of the poor faithful remnant.

Posted by Ford Elms at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 12:18pm GMT

"Feel the Love"

She isn't spouting bile and vitriol against him, she isn't calling him inhuman or a cancer on the Body of Christ, she isn't denying his faith, she isn't lying about him or pretending propaganda is actually science to prove how sick he is. In short, Margaret, she isn't employing any of the tactics the Right routinely uses in this fight, so it's a bit much to have you come out with this snide little comment. When "your side" shows even the slightest bit of Christian love towards those THEY oppose, you might have the right to say this. Till then, look to your own sins.

Posted by Ford Elms at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 2:17pm GMT

"Feel the Love"

Why are those who show no love always so outraged when they don't receive any?

Posted by Erika Baker at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 3:08pm GMT

The posting by revkarenm is perhaps the finest statement of the situaton in the Episcopal Church I have ever read. It is a perfect description of where we are and what we need to do. If you can read only one posting or one article, read revkarenm's post.

My prayers go out for our great Presding Bishop. May she indeed be granted the strength, courage and wisdom to lead us to the "business at hand, protecting the Episcopal Church from those who would tear it apart in their hurt and anger".

Posted by Dallas Bob at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 3:33pm GMT

Oddly, a larger, longer view of some of all this realignment campaign really seems to center on (1) certain men's utter inabilities to cope with intelligent women (who may not ask their higher male permission first before offering their considerable gifts to the community), along with of course, (2) having an alternating cycle of tremendously powerful roller coaster ride feelings - fear plus disgust plus anger that is, so far as I can actually tell, stimulated by modernity.

Rocking and rolling above these fear-anger-disgust cycles rooted in responses to women and modernity, we get all the rest: anti-gay stuff, anti-intellectual stuff, Rushdoony-leaning hermeneutics - that denies that interpretation is at work in reading scripture or places all bets on its presuppositionalist method in religion, scornful attacks on anything modern, attacks on democracy and citizenship, studied ignorance of and disinterest in empirical hypothesis testing tools, and a great deal more.

Even odder: That any of these phenomena rooted in the fear-disgust-anger cycles should come to be viewed by us as quintessentially Anglican. Even far odder: That any historically informed Anglican believer among us can be expected to remain docile and silent while being constantly and loudly threatened or bullied by people preaching presuppositionalist truths, all fired up by the burning realignment cycles of fear-anger-disgust.

This realignment campaign is a presuppositionalist Home Invasion, hard and simple. A clear paper trail tells us it was planned to be so, from outside to inside Anglican communities. So the campaign continues to play out as a winner takes all effort, no matter what denials to the contrary are published from time to time by anybody campaigning for their sole rights to take all without accountability beyond themselves. Certainly the realignment leaders enact no accountability to any authority outside themselves, though they constantly preach that God rules them, especially and uniquely.

Alas. Lord have mercy. Keep on keeping on.

Posted by drdanfee at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 3:45pm GMT

"Feel the Love" - Margaret

Sorry, Margaret, beware the attempted theft.

Individuals may leave, but they may NOT take the property of the Episcopal Church when they do depart.

And, if they violate their ordination vows, there are consequences for that as well.

Posted by Jerry Hannon at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 5:14pm GMT

New sheriff in town, +Jack!

Posted by Cynthia Gilliatt at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 5:35pm GMT

I thought the 'orthodox' were agaisnt feeling the love of so many ---preferring to feel the width !

than leave lgbt folk in peace

Posted by L Roberts at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 5:46pm GMT

Good on Katherine and TEC for sticking to their principles (and their apologies elsewhere for backsliding at New Orleans have been gratefully noted).

To continue Ford's argument.

Neither Katherine nor the loving TEC are calling the separatists "beasts" or "inhuman". Nor are they advocating for legislation to imprison them. Nor are they seeking to deprive them of civil rights or an education. Nor are they seeking to deprive them of a safe communion.

What they are doing is acting to preserve an existing communion that does provide sanctuary for those "inhuman beasts" and those who would advocate on their behalf. They are manifesting hospitality, faith, trust, love, compassion, humility (there but for the grace of God...), hope, forgiveness, abundance, healing, repentance (e.g. refusing to continue enslaving others or justifying tyranny). They are acting to preserve a communion that is manifesting the best of Christian principles. They are demonstrating valour, strength, courage.

Such souls have a hope of bringing about global peace because they are inspirational, not just to pure heterosexual Christian males, but to the afflicted and outcaste and "others". They are a role model not just for humans, but also for higher consciousnesses who thought that God did not want this world and who had failed to understand why God loves humanity so much.

One of the main reasons God loves humanity so much is their capacity to love and heal, even when all logic and evidence says it is futile. Human faith transcends angelic faith because humans love God even when there are veils placed between them and God.

Posted by Cheryl Va. Clough at Friday, 9 November 2007 at 10:56pm GMT

Why are those who show no /little love so outraged when they recieve love ?

Comes in the form of many considerations, courtesies and accomodations recieved from some liberals and even from some of us hoary old queers...

Posted by L Roberts at Saturday, 10 November 2007 at 2:31pm GMT

.Oddly, a larger, longer view of some of all this realignment campaign really seems to center on (1) certain men's utter inabilities to cope with intelligent women (who may not ask their higher male permission first before offering their considerable gifts to the community), along with of course, (2) having an alternating cycle of tremendously powerful roller coaster ride feelings - fear plus disgust plus anger that is, so far as I can actually tell, stimulated by modernity.

Rocking and rolling above these fear-anger-disgust cycles rooted in responses to women and modernity, we get all the rest: anti-gay stuff, anti-intellectual stuff, Rushdoony-leaning hermeneutics - that denies that interpretation is at work in reading scripture or places all bets on its presuppositionalist method in religion, scornful attacks on anything modern, attacks on democracy and citizenship, studied ignorance of and disinterest in empirical hypothesis testing tools, and a great deal more.

Even odder: That any of these phenomena rooted in the fear-disgust-anger cycles should come to be viewed by us as quintessentially Anglican. Even far odder: That any historically informed Anglican believer among us can be expected to remain docile and silent while being constantly and loudly threatened or bullied by people preaching presuppositionalist truths, all fired up by the burning realignment cycles of fear-anger-disgus....'

Posted by: drdanfee on Friday, 9 November 2007 at 3:45pm GMT

What an extra-ordianrily thought=provoking analysis is this.

Well worth pondering the piece in its entirety.

Posted by L Roberts at Saturday, 10 November 2007 at 4:15pm GMT

L Roberts: Yes, drdanfee is right. It's really weird, because for the whole of my lifetime, Anglicanism has been synonymous with the most reasonable/ liberal of all the mainstream denominations, and yet now we suddenly find all these people like NP being outraged that it is not Calvinist. And, furthermore, they expect the rest of us to leave if we disagree with them! It's an outrageous attempt at hijacking!

Posted by Fr Mark at Tuesday, 13 November 2007 at 8:08pm GMT

I don't want you to leave, Mark...... but I do expect clergy to treat with respect agreed Anflican positions (like Lambeth 1.10) which even the liberal ABC says represents "the mind of the communion"

If people cannot keep to that agreed Anglican standard of teaching and life, then I suppose people with integrity leave.....but I would much prefer it if people stay, repent and live lives compatible with scripture given God hates sin and will not accept it in us...

See 1John1, Eph 5:1-21 and
Hebrews 12:14
"Strive for peace with everyone, and for the holiness without which no one will see the Lord."

Posted by NP at Wednesday, 14 November 2007 at 12:35pm GMT

Fr. Mark,
If you look back over Anglican history, we have always had Puritans of some sort or another. One of the earlier groups actually had to cross an ocean to avoid the contamination of the rest of us. The funny thing is that they cannot seem to understand that actions speak louder than words. They mouth pious platitudes most of the time, but even then their true colours show through, and by their actions they put the lie to their claims of holiness, truth, and honesty. Since they are unable to understand this, it is very easy for the rest of us to identify them. They don't listen to the little boy telling them they have no clothes on, since said little boy is 'unsaved/unGodly/not among the Elect/faithless', whatever that particular generation's catch phrase is for those who disagree with them. They're quite content to ride along naked, blissfully unaware that everyone can see their bare behinds. What larks!

Posted by Ford Elms at Wednesday, 14 November 2007 at 1:18pm GMT

The holiday of Thanksgiving (like the Harvest Sunday in the UK) is coming up next week here in the U.S. So most of us will pretend to be thankful, and in a way we really should, as the native Americans taught the stubborn pious platituded gun powder plot failures how to survive in a place that was vastly different than Devonshire.

And then look their sons, daughters and generations following did to the native Americans. In the name of "God" no less. Beyond shame. Yes, actions speak louder than words.

Posted by choirboyfromhell at Wednesday, 14 November 2007 at 3:25pm GMT

Ford - it would help if some could tell us that your clobber verses do not mean what they say....then we would put some fine vestments on, matching the season etc

Posted by NP at Wednesday, 14 November 2007 at 4:51pm GMT

NP: well, nobody consulted me, or any of the organisations representing gay people in the church, before passing that ridiculous Lambeth resolution, which all of the English bishops have certainly broken anyway. It would be more sensible to ask the gay people in the Church to be involved in drawing up rules to regulate exclusively their conduct: you can't imagine a committee composed exclusively of white people, or of men alone, drawing up guidelines to apply only to ethnic minorities, or women, can you? I am fed up with being talked about, regulated, but never listened to by the Church authorities, and I think that is a common feeling among gay Anglicans.

Ford: quite right.

Posted by Fr Mark at Wednesday, 14 November 2007 at 5:30pm GMT

"then we would put some fine vestments on, matching the season etc"
No need. As long as two or three are gathered in His name, it's a perfectly valid, and perhaps more meaningful, Eucharist if it's celebrated on an overturned cardboard box in a ditch! And you really need to contemplate what I said about everybody else being able to see your nakedness. You know what I'm talking about, anyone can see you aren't nearly as righteous as you want us to believe, and the way you turn sin into virtue while claiming only the EHBLs do that is really amusing.

Posted by Ford Elms at Wednesday, 14 November 2007 at 6:47pm GMT

Mark - you really want to claim that Lambeth 1.10 was passed without knowledge of arguments which try to justify behaviour "incompatible with scripture"?

I suggest people like N T Wright know the arguments at least as well as you but do not find them convincing.... so most bishops still stand by Lambeth 1.10

Posted by NP at Thursday, 15 November 2007 at 12:12pm GMT

L Roberts: Yes, drdanfee is right. It's really weird, because for the whole of my lifetime, Anglicanism has been synonymous with the most reasonable/ liberal of all the mainstream denominations, and yet now we suddenly find all these people like NP being outraged that it is not Calvinist. And, furthermore, they expect the rest of us to leave if we disagree with them! It's an outrageous attempt at hijacking!

Posted by: Fr Mark on Tuesday, 13 November 2007 at 8:08pm GMT

Mark, I too am amazed by this sudden volt face !

Anglo-catholic parishes were particularly obviously gay (camp helps!) and still are I imagine.

Imagine --getting to wear / see the rose pink vestments on Laetare !! Or siten to a homily about their wonders !....


Posted by L Roberts at Thursday, 15 November 2007 at 12:17pm GMT

"I suggest people like N T Wright know the arguments at least as well as you but do not find them convincing"

And I'd suggest people like Rowan Williams also know the arguments at least as well as you do, and find them quite convincing, so what's your point? This "My God can beat up your God" style of argument is a bit Grade 2, don't you think?

Posted by Ford Elms at Thursday, 15 November 2007 at 2:36pm GMT

Ouk ésontaí soi Theoì éteroi;
prò prosåpou mou ou poiäseis seautoû Aídålon,
oudè pantòs Omoíåma,
ósa en tå Ouranå ánå, kaì ósa en tä Gä kátå,
kaì ósa en toîs Údasin upokátå täs Gäs.

Do not have other Gods;
before my face don't make yourselves Idols,
or any Likeness,
either of anything in the Heavens or anything upon Earth, or anything in the Waters which covers the Earth.

Posted by Göran Koch-Swahne at Friday, 16 November 2007 at 8:42am GMT

Ford - my point is that I do not buy the assertion that agreeing with Lambeth 1.10 is anti-intellectual or an unstudied position.....however many times people try to paint it as such. Note how quickly some look past a person's pHD or standing in the church as an Archbishop to dismiss their views because they are African.....


Yes, the ABC wrote some contradictory things years ago as an academic but as ABC he has tried to uphold the teaching of the church and unity......he has not behaved as if those who support Lambeth 1.10 are stupid, wrong or nasty people.

The ABC and ALL the Primates of the AC (including doublespeaking Griswold) called on TECUSA not to "tear the fabric of the communion" and were ignored.....because others care less for AC unity than the ABC and the Primates and certainly do not have the respect the ABC has shown for what he has called "the mind of the communion" which is firmly supportive of Lambeth 1.10

Now the ABC is being forced to choose between keeping those in the AC who tore the fabric of the Communion and those who oppose the unilateral abandonment of an agreed position by a single province.

Posted by NP at Friday, 16 November 2007 at 1:01pm GMT

Ford - would that be the same Rowan Williams who was ABC when we got TWR and the Tanzania Communique? Does not seem he is so convinced of his view that he would force the church to accept it...... he asked TECUSA not to give the AC a fait accompli in the shape of VGR but they ignored him because their right to do what they want trumps everything else, of course

Posted by NP at Friday, 16 November 2007 at 4:50pm GMT

NP:

Picking and Choosing!!!!!!

Posted by choirboyfromhell at Friday, 16 November 2007 at 10:05pm GMT
Post a comment









Remember personal info?






Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.