There is a fascinating video interview with the Bishop of Pittsburgh, Robert Duncan. It can be found here. (changed URL)
It is almost 26 minutes long, and so takes a while to download. However, it is well worth watching if you wish to understand what and how he thinks.
It includes more “colour” on the New York meeting and also discusses briefly this week’s Camp Allen meeting.
Update
Greg Jones has commented at Anglican Centrist Response to Bob Duncan.
Duncan speaks up for “the vulnerable”, “the unprotected”, “the minority” and “those that are being exterminated.”
I think they changed the link:
http://www.anglicantv.org/blog/index.cfm/2006/9/18/Interview-with-Bishop-Duncan
Some Duncan Interview Notes / Podcast 1 1st expected: No possible resolution of our differences, as we have ever believed 2nd Unexpected: better listening – message of unbridgeable chasm was maybe heard for first time ACC Kearon opening statement: invitation to a long-term listening process Duncan remarks: 1. Iker: Rejected process in favor of action, last mtg to attend, shifted nature of mtg 2. God is always reforming the church, backwards to the original revelation 3. Church pension fund is obviously well-endowed 4. No future mtgs anticipated in this series, because our appeal isn’t agreed as the sole, dominant frame… Read more »
Some Duncan Interview Notes / Podcast 2 14. The most important thing now is to get unprotected parishes into our orthodox network so that the liberalisms or non-orthodoxies of the rest of the provincial church are not a risk to their eternal souls 15. No more business as usual, everything is not just fine, peoples’ souls are at stake as long as they are outside the network and related protective umbrella entities 16. Orthodox bishops are here (in the consecration of new Bishop Love) without vesting, and no photos are to be taken of our participation – as a symbol… Read more »
New url for interview: http://www.anglicantv.org/blog/index.cfm/2006/9/18/Interview-with-Bishop-Duncan
So far as I can hear, so far: the rest of us need to get the point: No more negotiations, Our Neocon Anglican way or the highway. Our Neocon Orthodoxies cannot coexist, institutionally. No matter what. Any institutional or theological accommodations that leave room for non-neocon orthodox views and practices are by absolute definition a danger to we who remain Christians in this difficult, difficult era. Follow Bishop Duncan or Bishop Iker or whomever as they follow Jesus, or else you are not following Jesus. So, maybe, we need to start taking effective TEC institutional actions to preserve/protect us from… Read more »
Wrote drdanfee is perceptively: “So far as I can hear, so far: the rest of us need to get the point: No more negotiations, Our Neocon Anglican way or the highway. Our Neocon Orthodoxies cannot coexist, institutionally. No matter what. Any institutional or theological accommodations that leave room for non-neocon orthodox views and practices are by absolute definition a danger to we who remain Christians in this difficult, difficult era. Follow Bishop Duncan or Bishop Iker or whomever as they follow Jesus, or else you are not following Jesus.” Also, shut down the Theology Faculties of Oxford and Cambridge and… Read more »
Someone was asking me if there is a transcript of this interview. Anyone know?
Drdanfee’s 18th point “The problem of separation is not coming from the liberals, the problem is that good conservative families in the pews tell us they cannot raise their children in this unorthodox sort of parish environment – so we have to listen to them and find ways to separate from the liberal agenda…” From personal observation, this is a problem. One of the reasons I left my last parish is that the conservatives would fret that the parish was becoming too liberal (i.e. I looked happy) and so there would be a hate sermon to prove they were not… Read more »
Suave, sincere, but complacent. His use of “godly” is heavily tilted — it excludes people he thinks are undesirable in a family-friendly church. Schori is written off as a “revisionist” but Jesus and Paul were written off as that too, so it is not a category that one can throw around complacently.
re Cheryl Clough’s Tuesday at 10.06pm BST piece. I wanted to say this has moved me deeply. It is a very important contribution. I too, can testify that this kind of character assassination, blame and attack-in-various-forms does go on. It has delusional depths, beyond all rational thought or discussion; and feels mad and of ‘demonic’ depths. Further historical examples are the Salem ‘Witch’ Hunt Trials, the McCarthy ‘Communist’ trials and the whole craziness of the AC Primates and their sayings and doings. I note how Patriarchy is central to all this. White, heterosexual males must control and be in control.The… Read more »
As events move forward it becomes more obvious there are very complex layers and alliances being formed, there are many hands now at play in the intrigue that is developing within Anglicanism. We have long past the time of simple choices. Many of those who have kept in the background up until now are making their play. The Canterbury machine is trying to play catch-up but is being finessed as the coup gathers force. There are attempts to recapture the initiative, such as the New York meetings, and the appointment of Drexel Gomez to head-up the Covenant Group, but others… Read more »
I think this interview exposes more about Bishop Duncan and his own personal insecurities than it does about any particular reality of the Church. It’s been obvious for a long time that the Network, at least at its leadership level, is uninterested in anything but power and division. The real questions, which again come back to sexuality and what we discern to be the will of God, are conspicuously absent from the bishop’s long list of complaints and accusations.
Cheryl, I was moved by your story as well. What you describe goes on elsewhere and has happened to others. People have tried to do it to me. Someone is trying to do it to Father Jake right now on TitusOneNine — see http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=15271#comments You are right to say: “The idea that one group in a church have the right to slander “unsuitable” members behind their backs within the parish is one thing, but then when they took it to the broader community they crossed a line.” I’m not even sure they have the right to slander people within the… Read more »
I warrant to guess that Bishop Duncan and other neocon believers presume, definitively, that they already know just what the life experience of LGBTQ believers (or unbelievers) patently is: nothing but filth, danger, and self-delusions to the point of near madness. What other sort of human would dare to step outside of patriachy in our own century? When you already know that much, that deeply, in such a closed and final fashion, about somebody else, it makes little sense to bother talking with them. Ditto, for progressives, liberals, educated women, and oddly enough that list is still intentionally open, despite… Read more »
I don’t think it is helpful to demonise Duncan or the Network. Perhaps they should also be “listened” to and treated with some generosity – which, as I have said before, does not mean anyone has to agree with them. They too must listen to you but do not have to agree, having listened. The labels (“neocon” etc) do not make sense or add any value. Pls remember, probably 99% of the 77m Anglicans in the world do not find Duncan et al to be extreme, so there is little to be gained by labelling, insulting Duncan et al as… Read more »
drdanfee asked (rhetorically, I hasten to add)
“Can this new Anglican neo-orthodoxy realignment exist, even, without a target or a scapegoat?”
Just wait for the ‘Real Anglican Network” to issue a statement denouncing the “Provisional Anglican Network”, while “The Popular Front for Real Anglicanism” (membership of two) declares itself out of communion with “The People’s Anglicanism” (membership three).
With apologies to Cleese, Idle et al, but we’ve seen this fissiparous purification thinking so many times before – look at all the reformed reformed free Presbyterian Churches in Scotland.
I peruse this site, TitusOneNine, Blog of Daniel and other sites and must say there is astonishing insularity. There are always one or two outsiders but mostly it is mutual “we are so much more enlightened/truthful than they are” kinds of discussion. For your consideration and reflection I offer the use of the word “neocon” in this particular thread. It is meaningless. It is nothing more than an epithet. If the prototypical “neocons” were leftists who “switched sides” how on earth is Duncan a “neocon”. Was he at one time a Wiccan who came to Christ? The use of the… Read more »
I think Martin is correct in his analysis. The only point to add is that for the coup to be effected they need to take Canterbury along with them. So far +Rowan is giving every indication that he will play ball with them, giving them added moral authority. The analogy one can draw is with Thailand: the King of Thailand has no political power as such but a coup cannot be effected without his passive connivance.
If, as Duncan claims, the Network etc are not all about power and property, how come they don’t willingly give up property and power and leave TEC? If I recall a meeting a while back, this was a question Archbishop Akinola put to them, too.
I think the irreconcilable differences have existed for a long time.
If they can’t be reconciled, then surely it makes sense to look to move forward not continuing to try and create something which just isn;t going to happen ie a united denomination.
As an unfortunate dialup user, I would like thank drdanfee for his summary.
Well, I’ve pointed out all along that the Network (et. al.) have said all along that there is nothing to talk about, so this simply reinforces that. In fact, the ABC’s continued emphasis on talking things through is about the only way in which he does not appear to have “sold out” to the conservative evangelical extremists.
NP and Bob:
Excellent posts. Your points are well taken.
Cynthia:
The “property” argument works both ways.
Steven
About Necon 1 I use the shorthand tag, neocon, advisedly to connote two explicit background claims. First, it is short for new conservative, at least. Easier to type fast in a post. Second, in our religious believers and global contexts it has a possible rather technical meaning as an initiative in critical theory. It means: historically beholden to one or more foundational claims made by R. J. Rushdoony and similar precursors or founding figures of religious/Christian new conservatism. There is variety within new conservatism, yes. But as a rule of thumb the common theme is the narrower, privileged approach to… Read more »
About Necon 2 The sad mischief is in all these new conservative technical details. Two other functional or effective consistencies appear to be, so far, that it mainly serves to close inquiry and conversation down (i.e., narrow and conform any diversity which it addresses, but not always, just mainly in things connected with power or resources), and it readily offers its understandings as a foundation for scapegoating somebody who is defined negatively from the start of whatever paragraph you are reading. Most instances of so-called new conservative inquiry reliably reach destinations or conclusions which can be easily predicted from the… Read more »
re #16 in the summary – what was this protest of Bp Love about? Any newspaper coverage of that?
“For my part, I know that representatives of the many sides of this issue are committed to their stances out of a sense of deep conviction that that is what they are called to do.” I agree, Bob: there is profound conviction on both sides. The only *concrete* difference I that I can see, is that TEC (and TEC *alone*, BTW), is trying to negotiate a delicate balance between its own Constitution and Canons (which are de jure, public, and haven’t signficantly changed in the last 10 years), w/ the DEMANDS of the AC (which are de facto, largely implicit—*who*… Read more »
I had no idea “neocon” had such a complex pedigree. Over here (Washington DC) it’s generally short hand for “conservatives I really don’t like”, honestly, much like the term “fascist” used to be. I had never heard it associated with hermeneutical positions. Thanks for the info. On other comments, being religiously “orthodox/traditional/conservative” and fully realizing all those terms are quite loaded, what frustrates me is that we seem to be speaking different languages and even worse, speaking different languages with the same words. For example, I was in Mexico City listening to a very liberal gay priest from the Diocese… Read more »
And so the news from KIGALI (Reuters) – Conservative Anglican bishops largely drawn from developing countries are expected to agree on a pact condemning the ordination of gay clergy, Nigeria’s archbishop said on Wednesday.
(snip)
“In order to put to rest this issue of homosexuality, we are working on an Anglican covenant with provisions that very clearly say what it means to be an Anglican,” Nigeria’s Archbishop Peter Akinola, told reporters.
“Who ever subscribes to this covenant must abide by it and those who are unable to subscribe to it will walk out.”
And so the end begins ….
Duncan is quite a piece of work, isn’t he? It’s time he faced presentments.
Bishop Duncan only mentions his criticisms or doubts about Bishop Love in passing. He describes the bishop as out of bounds, in rather brief and mild tones which nevertheless connote final disapproval and maybe some implicit sense of some sort of spiritual danger. Given the operative subtexts of not being defined as biblical enough, or of being too soft on queer sexuality/committed partner relationships, one tends to guess that these might be involved in Bishop Love’s alleged unorthodoxy. But who knows? Thus, Duncan says he intentionally does not wish to wear vestments although he arrives to participate in the consecration.… Read more »
The insularity is not as profound as it might seem, I personally would like to see a “broad tent” Anglicanism that includes a healthy representation across the spectrum. It just needs a good dollop of moderation when one extreme tries to completely shut down/out the other extreme. The comments about neocon is an example of suppression – whatever word is used someone sticks up their hand to complain that it is being overgeneralised and they feel slighted, so people try to create a new word but are then critisized for using a non-word. Thus this is the form of Black… Read more »
So,if Martin is right, we have to prepare properly for ‘the end’ and look towards the founding of a new denomination.
Or are people going to remain in an institution where they are clearly not welcome?
Cynthia and drdanfee, re: Bp. Duncan regarding Bp. Love: Bp. Duncan is not in any way expressing disapproval of Bp. Love or alleging him to be unorthodox. Pls replay the video. The problem for Duncan and the other Network bishop there was (a) participating in a TEC episcopal ordination at all, i.e., giving the impression that it’s “business as usual” for TEC (Duncan even notes that he has not particpated in a TEC episcopal ordination since before GC ’03, iirc), and (b) doing so with PB Griswold presiding and being chief consecrator (again, Duncan notes that he personally has been… Read more »
With the GS primates drawing up their own covenant, where does that leave the one supposedly being drawn up by +++Williams’ choice of drafter?
Not that I expect there to be too much difference between the two covenants (strict literalism, strict orthodoxy, no GLBTS or women need apply).
[Simon, I’m sorry if this is going off-topic—it just seems important] “When I ask my liberal interlocutors whether Jesus of Nazareth really bodily rose from the dead the reaction is generally to dismiss the question as irrelevant.” I confess, Bob, that when I read the above, I realized that I needed to look up “interlocutors.” I see that it means “one w/ whom one is engaged in conversation.” The thing is, when I first read it, I was thinking of “interrogator”—because in *my* experience, speech between a liberal and a conservative begins, w/ an interrogation of the liberal, by the… Read more »
Bob, I appreciated your comments and your hoping that there might be common ground. I honestly don’t know what to think of so many of these labels as they mean so many different things. I do believe in the bodily resurrection, Incarnation, Trinity, would be quite orthodox in terms of creedal concerns, and I’m a gay man in a relationship. I know many like myself in my parish, yet I would be lumped as liberal even though my theological perspective and approach are traditional in many ways (even Platonic) when it comes to theology proper or considerations of ethics. I’m… Read more »
There are useful precedents for remaining to some extent, both within and outside of, any institution which does not welcome but tells tall bad tales about you. Dignity in the Roman Catholic churches comes to mind, now really outside of the church sites but inside just to the extent that many people participating are located inside in this way or that. The womens’ ordination movements also come to mind. I am not entirely sure what the new orthodox will do if the rest of us do not leave, and yet remain unconformed. I certainly do not see us being discerned… Read more »
Bob on Wednesday, wrote: “… speaking different languages with the same words.” This is by no means new, it predates the Elizabethan settlement (the unified Lithurgy), it predates the Carolingian settlement (“you may stay as long as you don’t start another civil war”), it predates early 20th century “literalism”, it even predates the 1960-1980 heterosexist cum Fertility Cult innovations; Pater Zerwick, the 1966 Jerusalem Bible and Focus on the Family. Bob on Wednesday, wrote: “… For example, I was in Mexico City … and ask them what “the gospel” is, what would they tell me?” I got a cold stare… Read more »
First, thank you all for the responses. Goran, ‘Bob on Wednesday, wrote: “… For example, I was in Mexico City … and ask them what “the gospel” is, what would they tell me?” I got a cold stare and no answer.” Sorry I don’t at all understand what this is about.’ My point was that the priest from Los Angeles had claimed to have catechised his congregation in “the gospel” but I could not get an answer the question of what that “gospel” was. I no longer proceed from the assumption that when a word, especially one as serious as… Read more »
Thanks to Nadine Kwong for trying to clarify Bp. Duncan’s comments about the Diocese of Albany’s new Bishop Coadjutor, Bill Love. When my wife and I viewed the Duncan interview over lunch (not recommended!), we found no evidence that either Bp. Love or the DOA is out of favor with the Network or its Moderator. As a candidate for Coadjutor, Bill Love spoke of the need for reconciliation. The many liberals and moderates in this mixed diocese hope he will soon show,in word and deed, that he was sincere: That he will hear and serve all of his sheep, not… Read more »
JCF wrote, “…an unAnglican “window into my soul” is being forcibly scoured!”
But don’t you understand ?! That’s their *job*. After all, if you don’t spend time obsessing over the personal morality of others, then the angels will score all that great “separating the sheep from the goats” action instead of you. Then you’ll be stuck scouring the window into your *own* soul – which is a real bummer 😉
My understanding is that Canon Kearon had seen the material on the petition that had “leaked” on to a website – but like the rest of us thought it a spoof
“His reluctance to answer, for my part, indicated that his definition of “gospel” and mine “gospel” were not the same and we both knew it.” Could he possibly have thought he was being *interrogated*, as I indicated above? Not all questions are true inquiries, Bob. Sometimes they’re “Have you stopped beating your wife?” GOTCHA GAMES. No one likes being (or even merely feeling) “set up” . . . to LOSE. [Which is why I think questions BEYOND the language of the Creeds we affirm—Yes, even beyond “The Gospel” we all preach—should be reserved for FRIENDS, and not become the subject… Read more »
I was at Nashotah House with Bill Love 16 and some years ago. He was a good man, with a gentle spirit. The little I’ve seen since then suggests to me that he has not changed much. He is quite conservative on many matters, but I would suggest that he will indeed be among you as a reconciler.
“I no longer proceed from the assumption that when a word, especially one as serious as “gospel” is used that both sides are necessarily talking about the same thing. His reluctance to answer, for my part, indicated that his definition of “gospel” and mine “gospel” were not the same and we both knew it.” Perhaps, just perhaps, Bob, your assumption is the matter? “We were maintaing a polite but destructive fiction.” This most certainly is what has been happening in the Anglican curches for most of the last century, with regard to the historic and (quite) modern differences between Calvinism… Read more »