Thinking Anglicans

Reactions to B033

A statement from a group of bishops dissenting B033 read by Bishop Chane [the Bishop of Wsashington DC] A Statement of Conscience
“We, the undersigned Bishops of this 75th General Convention, in the confidence of the Gospel and out of love for this great Church, must prayerfully dissent from the action of this Convention in Resolution B033 (on Election of Bishops).”
“Any language that could be perceived as effecting a moratorium that singles out one part of the Body by category is discriminatory.”

Anglican Communion Network General Convention Actions Inadequate
“The responses which the Convention has given to the clear and simple requests of the Lambeth Commission, the clear and simple requests indeed of the Anglican Communion, are clearly and simply inadequate.”
signed by 13 bishops

Mary Ann Sieghart comments in The Times Women bishops and gays? That’s the church for me

Some articles from the press

Guardian Stephen Bates US Episcopal church offers compromise to avoid Anglican expulsion

BBC US Church eases gay bishop stance

The Times Ruth Gledhill and James Bone Our Mother Jesus . . . a sermon by US church’s new head

Updated to add
Andrew Brown comments in the Guardian Fear and loathing in Anglicanism

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
37 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Cynthia Gilliatt
Cynthia Gilliatt
15 years ago

I hope everyone notes the difference in rhetorical strategies in the statements from Bp Chane et alia and the aac/network people.

Chane et alia dissent.

The others – in their offer of pastoral assistance – are prepared to violate what Windsor said about diocesan integrity.

janice
janice
15 years ago

The ACN were correct. The Episcopal Church is a different religion than the Anglican Commuion. I am sorry it came to this. As a life long Episcopalian it is hard to believe. Thank God for the ACN. They have stood up for our faith. I will follow them.

John D
John D
15 years ago

Andrew Brown, unlike the co-dependent majority of bishops in TEC which seeks, fruitlessly, to appease reactionaries in England and points south, has it just right. Same as it’s ever been,
same as it’s ever been.

Charles
Charles
15 years ago

Way to go Bishop Chane and the other dissenting Bishops!!

Christopher Calderhead
Christopher Calderhead
15 years ago

Ruth Gledhill needs to stop spinning her stories so furiously. The ‘mother Jesus’ image is perfectly in line with tradition, esp. if it’s a direct reference to julian of Norwich. But the way the story is written (and including the phrase in the headline) suggests the new PB is pulling some weird, off the wall feminist putsch. Gledhill should know better.

John Henry
John Henry
15 years ago

Each of the Network bishops presumably has a hotline to the mind of the Almighty and speaks uncompromisingly for God. Obviously, there is no possibility of misunderstanding or error due to human sinfulness. The Anglican Network bishops’ detractors might describe their ilk as “drama kings”, subcumbing like the rest of us to the most common and devastating sin of human PRIDE. The late ++Michael Ramsey, in his Nashotah House lectures, reminded his audience that the church may succeed in expelling all fornicators, adulterers and others sinners in order to establish a ‘pure’ church; but it won’t be able to banish… Read more »

Oriscus
Oriscus
15 years ago

Um, did Ms Gledhill & co. even *read +(+)Jefferts Schori’s sermon? The reference to “our mother Jesus” was in passing, in the context of his – yes *his, as she says in almost the same breath – “giving birth” to us.

Sheesh – it’s *y’all’s language; you’d think y’all’d be able to handle metaphor and simile…

hpb
Austin, TX

New Here
New Here
15 years ago

Cynthia, the Duncanites are apparently working from a different version of the Windsor Report, one that doesn’t mention border jumping. That’s the only way I know of that they can claim to be fully committed to Windsor while also declaring their intention to jump borders, something they have been doing quietly for some time. Frankly, I think it’s time to depose the Network bishops and be done with all this. For years they have been threatening to leave, but instead they choose to stay and create as much conflict as possible. We have an old saying in the South that… Read more »

Jeremy
Jeremy
15 years ago

Who were the laudable Bishops who dissented? The website does not include a list.

Laurence Roberts
Laurence Roberts
15 years ago

The ‘Network’ dissenters are 11 in number. 9 diocesns and 3 retired chaps. They are entitled to their ( foregone) conclusion, but I always thought they wanted to be disappointed, outraged and out -of-sorts ! My theory is that this is their perverse way of enlivening themselves–or is it just narcisistic gratification thru exhibitionism ? (Well, i am an analyst ! 🙂 ). ‘To the Faithful in JC’ seems a bit over the top to me-but would fit my theorising ! I loved the high sactuary camp picture, accompanying their agust ststemnet. 🙂 I take heart that John Howe hasn’t… Read more »

Cheryl Clough
Cheryl Clough
15 years ago

You know a lot of these debates are about sectarian golden cows and diehards resisting change. It will be lovely to see the “third way” developing that draws out the best from all the factions. For example, genuinely praying for the best for our Babylonian communities for if they have peace we have peace (we are meant to be in the world but not of the world). Remembering to respect God’s creation and look after the environment, the alien and the afflicted. For if if humans don’t do it with each other, how can they remonstrate the “naughty” angels who… Read more »

Christopher Shell
Christopher Shell
15 years ago

Anything that has once been said by one person is in some sense part of tradition, especially if it were a long time ago. In what sense does that justify it?

(1) ‘Jesus’ is the name of a male human being;
(2) Jesus spoke of his Father, to whom He was not married;
(3) Anyone can refer to particular traditions; but the context in which this particular reference took place was no coincidence.

One has seen so much ‘spin’, so much manipulation of language to correspond with preferred ideologies. This is politics. It’s not Christianity.

Ford Elms
Ford Elms
15 years ago

Why are people stating that the Anglican Church is one Church with two religions as though this were something new? For the record, I am an Anglo-Catholic. Most of what Evanglicals believe are things that I find misguided, frightening, or even out and out heretical. I refrain from specifics in the interest of space. Suffice it to say that I am content to be part of a Church in which others hold beliefs that I feel are inconsistent with the faith, why can they not do the same? Is it because people like me have not been willing to stand… Read more »

drdanfee
drdanfee
15 years ago

Andrew Brown, in Guardian U.K.: I do not want to underestimate the passion and sincerity with which conservatives loathe gay people. Their demands that the American Anglican church be expelled from the Anglican communion, most recently made by the Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, are entirely serious. And in the end, Dr Williams will go along with them. Whatever happens to the women and the gays, there is always room in any organisation for a heterosexual male who does what the powerful want. ———————————————– Ah, guess the realignment campaign will continue for the foreseeable near Anglican future. Freedom train,… Read more »

Caelius Spinator
Caelius Spinator
15 years ago

Christopher Shell–

First, There’s this piece .

Second, please explain, “Therefore, to consecrate the people by his own blood, Jesus also suffered outside the gate. Let us then go to him outside the camp, bearing the stigma that he bore.” Hebrews 13:12-13 in the light of Numbers 19:2.

New Here
New Here
15 years ago

Ford, you raise an excellent point that there is nothing new about differences in belief among Anglicans. Your example of Sydney is very apt, because the things that go on there represent much more of a departure from Anglican tradition and belief than much, if anything, that is happening in the U.S. And among the so-called “reasserters” in the U.S.you will find hints of Jensenism, such as the teaching that the sacrament is purely symbolic, among others. I think that what we are seeing right now has a lot to do with secular politics in the U.S. American conservatives have… Read more »

Don
Don
15 years ago

You guys are hilarious. That you are even having this discussion is a joke. There are concrete scriptures specifically prohibiting the behaviors that you are now condoning??? Think of this: I would like your church to know that I was born an adulterer. I really need other women. I am not going to change for you (because I am born this way), but I would like you to change for me. Am I not one of God’s children? Should you not be merciful to me? Nevermind the word of God, it is old, out of date, and really meaningless in… Read more »

Cheryl Clough
Cheryl Clough
15 years ago

I felt humbled reading Christopher and Fords’ postings. Try to “impose” a third way is merely adding another faction. Sorry. What is a common theme is a need for an awareness that there needs to be more than one stairway to heaven, or that we should not be rude and block souls wanting to use the escalators whilst waiting for the Jesus express lift (symobilism from a dream of two nights ago – quite cute I thought). Again, is is not just humans who need to learn this humility. This excellent article from Algemeiner demonstrates that the debate also happens… Read more »

Shawn
Shawn
15 years ago

Ford:

Praise God! An articulate moderate! And there are many more of you (and I) in CofE and TEC than the extreme orthodox and radical progressivists who dominate these postings. All I can do is live, laugh, and love in my own congregation. What these bozos lip about at the top is what they lip about at the top–what we do on the ground is what we do on the ground. I’m beginning to understand just why Jesus was so frustrated with the Pharisees and Scribes–we’ve been listening and reading their gassin’ and crabbin’ for years.

John Henry
John Henry
15 years ago

I couldn’t agree more with Shawn when he writes: “I’m beginning to understand just why Jesus was so frustrated with the Pharisees and Scribes–we’ve been listening and reading their gassin’ and crabbin’ for years.” Several years ago while preparing to preach on Mark 4:30-32, I came across sermon notes quoting Pope Pius VII, a Benedictine monk, before his elevation to the See of St. Peter. The story is told, almost certainly apocryphal, of Napoleon Bonaparte saying to the Pope, whom he held prisoner for five years: “I will destroy that church of yours.” That wise Pope responded: “I doubt it.… Read more »

Counterlight
Counterlight
15 years ago

Dear Don, If the meaning of the Scriptures was so plain and clear about anything (let alone the issue at hand), then why did all those generations of rabbis waste so much time writing the Talmud? If it is all just so obvious and clear as a bumper sticker, then why did all those generations of Church Fathers, AnteNicene and Nicene, spend so much time and effort arguing and writing and filling up the shelves in our libraries? Why is Christianity split among thousands of denominations all claiming to be The One True Church if it’s all just so simple?… Read more »

J. C. Fisher
15 years ago

“That you are even having this discussion is a joke.”

Are there any SADDER words in the English language?

[But why stop at merely *excoriating* discussion, Don? Papist thumbscrews were more effective at eliciting . . . well, if not silence, at least less humorous *screaming*. Even today, I’m sure you could find a few imams would approve some cutting-out of tongues—that’d shut us up!]

Backwards, into the New-Ancient Age of Religious Terror, hoo-ah!

Or, instead of using those “concrete scriptures” as just a doorstop, you could try actually *reading* (ALL of) them”? Then, you could actually *discuss* them, too!

Christopher Shell
Christopher Shell
15 years ago

Caelius Spinator- I don’t fully understand your first point, but as for your second I heartily agree. Jesus was the ultimate outsider. That is partly why Christians who historically have often been outsiders can so closely identify with him (and vice-versa). You’re not implying, surely, that if I am a criminal rejected by society, and therefore an outsider, that Jesus *both* identifies with me *and* encourages me to continue in my harmful ways. He does the first; but he does the very reverse of the second. (‘Neither do I condemn you. Go, and sin no more.) The same goes for… Read more »

Ford Elms
Ford Elms
15 years ago

Don, See, the Anglican Church has never believed that God said “Moses, take a letter.” Need I quote the old saw “the Church gave us the Bible, the Bible didn’t give us the Church”? The Church existed before the New Testament existed. Of all the writings that existed claiming to be Christian, the Spirit led the Church to discern which ones were inspired by God and which ones weren’t. It is therefore the the responsibility of the Church to ask the guidance of the Spirit in understanding those scriptures, and to expect that prayer to be answered. While Biblical literalism… Read more »

Steven
Steven
15 years ago

Ford and Shawn: As a traditionalist, I’ve got problems not with anglo-catholics or evangelicals, but with anglo-catholic extremes (proto-papists) and evangelical extremes (proto-puritans). However, this is only because the extremes strain the limits of the theological via media that makes Anglicanism what it is (and makes it great in my opinion)–i.e., the apostolic faith without papist additions or protestant substractions. However, even the extremes of anglo-catholicism and evangelicalism do not generally go outside the bounds of orthodox Christian faith and doctrine. I can live with them in the same denomination, even though I’m bound to try and uphold what I… Read more »

Merseymike
Merseymike
15 years ago

I certainly hope they do, Steven!!

Cheryl Clough
Cheryl Clough
15 years ago

I don’t have a problem with people like Spong putting forward an alternative reform agenda. Many conservatives ridiculed themselves in their reviews of his latest books, because they based it on Spong’s early formulations decades earlier. Apparently people can not learn by their mistakes, incorporate new evidence or refine their models through the process of dialogue. Fortunately engineers, scientists and doctors have more robust thinking skills that orthodox theologans. Otherwise we would continue to build dangerous airplanes with known flaws, fail to make scientific breakthroughs and not have technology such as the internet, and be unable to find cures to… Read more »

Nick Finke
Nick Finke
15 years ago

Steven,

I also think of myself as a traditionalist and while I agree with you as to the opinions of Bishop Spong I am not sure that I would tar all the Episcopalian liberals with the same brush.

The actions of the ACN and the Global South Primates who want to impose some sort of litmus test on fellow Anglicans are innovations easily equal to those of Bishop Spong. They would do well to review what they were taught concerning the Elizabethan compromise.

Göran Koch-Swahne
15 years ago

“That is partly why Christians who historically have often been outsiders can so closely identify with him (and vice-versa).”

Do they really?

LurenceRoberts
LurenceRoberts
15 years ago

The trouble with ‘traditionalism’ is how far back do you ( want to ) go ? and how far back is it possible to go ? Also, it agonising contingency and realtivity. E.g. In 1549 the BCP looked like an exciting new innovation, or hideous betrayal of the truth and the past, depending on where kife had placed you. Similarly, the C of E itself, the King James Bible and so on. Jesus wasn’t too gone on tradition either, it would seem. ‘The Tradition ‘ seems different in every time and place. But that is hard to see at the… Read more »

Ford Elms
Ford Elms
15 years ago

Steven As to extremes, I agree entirely, it just seems to me that this is entirely about extremes. Extreme liberals, extreme conservatives. I would certainly call ++Akinola and ++Jensen extreme. As to orthodox Christian faith, I find it odd for Anglicans to use that word. Those who have always considered themselves “Orthodox”, those in the East, do not consider us such. In our context, I’m not sure what “orthodox” means, other than agreeing with a particular conservative position. Going back to the Gospels means that true “Orthodox” Christianity is far more radical than any conservative would tolerate. Also, please do… Read more »

Shawn_H
Shawn_H
15 years ago

“I do not want to underestimate the passion and sincerity with which conservatives loathe gay people.” Crap. As both a political conservative and a Christian the claim that I hate gay people is both offensive and an outright lie. Some of my dearest friends have been and are “homosexuals” and I spent some of the hardest moments of my life by the bed of a homosexual friend dying from aids. I frankly am sick and tired of liberals claiming that the reason some of us are faithfull to Scripture and Tradition is because of a “phobia” or hatred. Use of… Read more »

Göran Koch-Swahne
15 years ago

I may not be particularly “nice”, and thus not very Anglican fudgy, to enquire about ulterior motives, but when people throw in such a patently false claim that “the Bible” “teaches” about sex outside “marriage” – when there isn’t even a word for “marriage” in Biblical Greek – what explanation is left???

Shawn
Shawn
15 years ago

“but when people throw in such a patently false claim that “the Bible” “teaches” about sex outside “marriage” when there isn’t even a word for “marriage” in Biblical Greek – what explanation is left???” Firstly… You shall not commit adultery. Therefore a man leaves his father and mother and cleaves to his wife and they become one flesh. It was also said, ‘Whoever divorces his wife, let him give her a certificate of divorce.’ But I say to you that everyone who divorces his wife, except on the ground of sexual immorality, makes her commit adultery. And whoever marries a… Read more »

Nersen
Nersen
15 years ago

Poor old Don – taking personal attacks because he points out what the Bible says……

Göran Koch-Swahne
15 years ago

Shawn wrote: “You shall not commit adultery.” Now, I am afraid this is not a translation of the 7th Commandment ou moixeueis. Nor does moixeía mean modern “adultery”, it means to deceive, to be disloyal, to let someone down. Don’t deceive anyone! Just read the Good Book; out of 30 occurrences of “moixeía” in the NT only once is it found (twice) in a context that (tangentially) has anything to do with sex: alias John 7:53-8:11, originally Luke 21:39ff. The man and the woman have been caught trousers down, but the story of the woman in the Temple yard is… Read more »

Dora Smith
Dora Smith
15 years ago

Are any other moderate and liberal Episcopalians as rocked by Bishop Schori’s reference to Mother Jesus as I am? I know that the entire Gospel story is a metaphor. It is spiritually well balanced, workable metaphor. Jesus as dead and rising god brings the feminine principle to the divinity through the merger of the dead and rising god with the Judaic creator/father god. The “mother Jesus” metaphor inappropriately confuses Jesus with the Great Mother, and would destroy the Trinity itself. Jesus is not a woman, Jesus is not a mother, and Jesus never gave birth to anyone. His mother can… Read more »

37
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x