Friday, September 05, 2008

Liberal Western Anglican Bishops Say Lambeth Conference Failed to Resolve Communion's Problems

Calls for Moratoria Won't be Heeded

News Analysis

By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
9/4/2008

The recently concluded Lambeth Conference which calls for diversity and inclusivity by ultra-liberal Western bishops will not heal the wounds in the Anglican Communion, and will do nothing to stop the inevitable schism they have caused. In a pointed editorial entitled "The Turning Point That Wasn't", John Bryson Chane, the Bishop of Washington described the once-in-a-decade gathering of bishops from around the Anglican Communion in two words, "optimistic and troublesome."

"This Lambeth Conference could have been a positive turning point for the Anglican Communion, but instead the powers that be chose to seek a middle way that is neither 'the middle' nor 'the way.' It will therefore be up to bishops from around the Communion who have continuing partner and companion relationships to work toward a more holistic view of the church."

Chane ripped the Archbishop of Canterbury saying Dr. Williams sought what he believed was a middle way that unfortunately continues to marginalize the Canadian and American churches. "Once again, more emphasis was placed on the sexuality issue as being the 'line drawn in the sand' that threatens Anglican unity, with little attention paid to the invasion of primates and bishops from other provinces who continue to wreak havoc in some dioceses within the Episcopal Church."

Chane failed to say that the sexual innovations he and his ilk are forcing on the Anglican Communion is the actual cause of the slow moving schism.

Wrote Chane, "The Archbishop of Canterbury has called for sacrifices to be made to keep the garment of the Communion together. And for the American and Canadian churches, that clearly means sacrificing once again the full participation of gay and lesbian persons in the life of our church. I for one will not ask for any more sacrifices to be made by persons in our church who have been made outcasts because of their sexual orientation."

His views were shared by the revisionist Bishop of Massachusetts, Tom Shaw who told "The Boston Globe" that he will continue to ordain gays which he called "pastorally important" and will also consult on same-sex weddings. He said that local priests will continue to bless same-sex marriages, although Shaw said that those priests are doing so on their own and that he hadn't authorized anybody to do anything.

As for whether he would follow up on his earlier intention to push for ending the moratorium on gay bishops and allowing church recognition of same-sex marriage when the Episcopal Church meets at its General Convention next year, Shaw said he would now wait until he meets with all the American bishops next month to decide how he will proceed.

Everyone knows how that will go. There will be no retreat from the present position of The Episcopal Church on homogenital behavior.

Shaw played the cultural card saying that the "context" of African and U.S. views determined the outcome at Lambeth. Not true of course, but it makes a great sound bite.

The Bishop of Los Angeles, J. Jon Bruno was blunt in his appraisal of Lambeth when he said, "I can only say that inclusion is a reality in our diocese and will continue to be. For people who think that this is going to lead us to disenfranchise any gay or lesbian person, they are sadly mistaken." In so many words, Bruno said you can forget Moratoria on same-sex blessings. "With fear and trepidation for some of us, it's important we remember it isn't even a report. It is a reflection."

The Bishop of California, Marc Andrus said his diocese would continue to bless same sex "marriages" and he praised those people who came to Canterbury from many places to tell their stories as lesbian, gay, bisexual or transgendered people, as part of the Listening Process called for by Lambeth '98, the Windsor Document, the Primates, and the Archbishop of Canterbury.

He went a step further saying that LGBT people came to a place "where it was commonly heard that there were significant negative places of negative energy aimed at them is something to honor." So many negatives that only a Californian could come up with. The truth is there was no "negative energy", rather there were negative statements about a deadly behavior that has no place in the lives of Christians or the Church.

Archbishop Rowan Williams in his final presidential address, given just after we received the reflections document, noted that, there will be some who cannot abide by these moratoria, and in this they signal that there are steps to deeper unity they cannot take; or it may be that they conceive of deeper unity in other ways.

Said Andrus, "I take this to be a profound and generous idea. In not abiding by the moratorium on same-sex blessings, I take it as incumbent on me and on us in the Diocese to actively labor to both understand the position of those to whom that moratorium is important, and to convey the reality of our life together to the world. I must redouble my efforts at inhabiting a deeper unity." The "deeper unity" will apparently not stop the continued need by his priests to inhabit sodomy and offer rites for those inclined to participate in such sexual activity.

The Bishop of New Westminster, Michael Ingham in Vancouver, said the Windsor Continuing Group (WCG) and the ABC revealed rigidity and lacked wisdom. He said Williams nuanced his remarks about sexuality in his final address showing that it is not possible to find a common way.

More recently, Ingham said that it is impossible to go back in reference to the moratoria whose diocese voted to allow same-sex blessings in 2002. He reacted strongly to the WCG's proposals, describing it as "an old-world institutional response to a new-world reality in which people are being set free from hatred and violence."

Bishop Ingham called the WCG proposals "punitive in tone, setting out penalties and the like, instead of inviting us into deeper communion with one another through mutual understanding in the body of Christ." He added that the suggestion of a pastoral forum "institutionalizes external incursions into the life of our churches."

Archbishop Fred Hiltz, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, said he wasn't surprised with the Lambeth Conference's call for a moratorium on actions that have led to divisions over sexuality. He said that bishops needed to be honest that this has been "a huge, huge challenge to implement."

Hiltz said that the moratorium and other recommendations are matters for the Canadian House of Bishops and the Council of General Synod - the church's governing body between General Synods - to discuss. One cannot, for a moment imagine the Anglican Church of Canada would suddenly reverse itself., Iit would make a mockery of their idea of full inclusion of gays and lesbians to all levels of the church.

Ingham would never subscribe to anything that would reverse such full inclusion. Ingham said that if the proposal for a moratorium on same-sex blessings is adopted, "it will put the Anglican Church of Canada in the position of having to support and defend irrational prejudice and bigotry in the eyes of our nation." (Canada legalized same-sex marriage in 2005.)

Hiltz said Canadian churches have proceeded with actions around same-sex blessings "only after a long, considered period of discussion from a whole pile of points of view - theological, liturgical, canonical and pastoral. There's a certain sense that emerges from that kind of conversation and some dioceses in our country are saying that they're discerning that there's some kind of gospel imperative to act. To say to those people, 'You have to put a moratorium', it's going to be a huge challenge."

Victoria Matthews, a member of the WCG and Bishop of the Diocese of Christchurch, New Zealand, said a retrospective moratorium is not something that can't be undone. "I don't think they actually mean 'can't,' I think they actually mean 'won't,'" she said. "It's not physically impossible to change that. I can understand if they say they don't want to."

Asking for a body's proposal for a "retrospective" moratorium on same-sex blessings means that dioceses such as Vancouver-based New Westminster "will be asked to reconsider and withdraw that right. It isn't just from here on there will be no new ones..." is not going to happen. "No, we would never go back and ask for his (Bishop Robinson's) resignation. That's not part of it," she said. "The word 'retrospective' has never been used in the consecration and election of a non-celibate gay bishop. It's never been part of our thinking, ever."

Bishop Matthews said the WCG's proposals would be presented to the primates, who will meet early next year, and to Anglican Consultative Council, which meets in May. Asked what would happen if the proposals are not accepted, she said, "That's fine; we do the very best we can to give a way forward, given that there's not a lot of wiggle room to move in that but we're doing our best."

Bishop Philip Poole, suffragan bishop of Toronto said the idea of a retrospective moratorium is like "attempting to put toothpaste back in the tube."

"Having made a decision at some point in the past has changed the way we live, and you can't say 'we'll just go back where we were,'" said Archbishop Caleb Lawrence, bishop of Moosonee and metropolitan (senior bishop) of Ontario.

Archbishop Terrence Buckle, Bishop of the Diocese of Yukon and metropolitan of the ecclesiastical province of British Columbia, said that while he agreed to the moratoria it was going to be "very difficult to hold... because of where we've come to at the present time and seeing people back up from where they're at is going to be very difficult for some people."

Bishop Greg Rickel of Olympia put his spin on Dr. Williams' words saying that for TEC the final Reflection Document was not legislative and was not voted upon. "This group has worked around the clock, literally. It was not ever proposed to be a document to solve things, not a legislative document, but a 'reflection' of what we were about, and where our minds are right now, to the best of their ability."

Mark Beckwith, Bishop of Newark, said he was troubled by the inevitable spin about the Reflections Report. He will be meeting with members of the Diocese he serves soon to explore what is next. "This document is not a report. We did not vote on it. It is a description of conversations. As one listening group member said, 'We were not poets. We did not interpret.'

Stephen Lane, Bishop of Maine, said he felt sadness and hope. He was troubled by the Archbishop of Canterbury's remarks on North America and reflects that there are many "sides" in the issues of the day - it is not a case of two being locked in conflict even though the ABC and the reflection paper seem to insist on this narrative. Attempts to resolve the conflict do not speak to their situations or their needs, he said.

Catherine Roskam, Suffragan Bishop of New York, said she believes the Archbishop of Canterbury left the door open to the work of full inclusion by the Anglican Church of Canada and the Episcopal Church in his final speech where he says, "Does this mean that we are all restricted by each other's views and preferences, incapable of arguing or changing? It was a problem familiar to St Paul, and you have already, in this Conference, heard something of how he dealt with it. But let me try to say how this affects our current difficulties. A fellow-Christian may believe they have a profound fresh insight. They seek to persuade others about it. A healthy church gives space for such exchanges. But the Christian with the new insight can't claim straight away that this is now what the Church of God believes or intends; and it quite rightly takes a long time before any novelty can begin to find a way into the public liturgy, even if it has been widely agreed."

George Councell, Bishop of New Jersey, said the bishops and Lambeth are not a body that can make decisions on their own. "This Lambeth Conference does not have the final word on several important matters that we have addressed. The Covenant process, for example, stretches out for years and years. And the observance of moratoria would, in The Episcopal Church, require the action of General Convention. "The Lambeth Conference itself and the archbishop of Canterbury, for all their efforts, were not able to come up with any new efforts at trying to put in place any instrument that could exercise discipline to correct the brokenness of the communion."

It is clear that what liberals want and have always wanted is time, time to play out and wear down opposition to pansexual acceptance. The "listening process" was designed precisely to hear the voices of aggrieved homosexuals and lesbians, the voices of ex-gays and healed homosexuals are marginalized.

As the orthodox bishop of Albany, William Love noted, "While I am a firm believer in the importance of listening, even to those that we disagree with, unfortunately when dealing as we currently are with what I have come to believe are theologically irreconcilable differences in the views passionately held by each side of the debate on issues of the authority of Holy Scripture and human sexuality, I seriously question the chance of reconciliation by those on either end of the theological spectrum, barring a Damascus Road experience by one side or the other."

He is right. It is very clear that liberal American and Canadian bishops will continue to do exactly as they please, no one can or will stop them, least of all the Archbishop of Canterbury or the Anglican Consultative Council. They are way too compromised. They sound uncertain trumpets.

GAFCON bishops should note these responses and realize that they have been given the wheel to a new Anglican ship. It will be up to them to lead orthodox Anglicans across the communion onto this ship and into a safe spiritual harbor.

END

No comments: