From Midwest Conservative Journal:
Friday, October 31st, 2008
There are two subjects I don’t like to cover here unless I absolutely have to. One of them is John Shelby Spong. I already know the answer to “Do you know what Spong just said?” The megalomaniacal old fraud said something stupid, anti-Christian and completely unsupportable by any honest person with even a smattering of theology, Church history or an ability to read.
The other is Gene Robinson. As everyone knows, Gene’ll knock your 2-year-old daughter to the ground in his zeal to tell a group of reporters and television cameras that he just wants to be the Episcopal Bishop of New Hampshire so I really don’t want to feed the habit of that publicity junkie. But it seems Robbie was in a chatty mood the other day:
Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson said he led a confidential retreat a few years ago for gay Roman Catholic priests.
About 75 Catholic clergy from around the U.S. participated without notifying their bishops or provincial leaders, Robinson said. In 2005, the Vatican issued a document affirming the church’s stance that men with “deep-seated” attraction to other men should not be ordained.
The retreat was held outside of New England, but Robinson would not say where.
Come on, Robbie. How are their bishops going to know where to send the wood for the auto-da-fes?
Robinson briefly discussed the retreat during a question-and-answer session after a viewing Saturday of a documentary featuring his life story called, “For The Bible Tells Me So,” according to The Laconia Daily Sun.
The film makes a link between sexism and anti-gay prejudice, contending that, “at its root, the hatred of gays is driven by a hatred and second-class status of women,” Robinson said.
The Roman Catholic Church hates women? Who knew? I guess that accounts for all the Hail Josephs those people are always saying. Some of us have a real theological problem with Rome’s Josepholatry, frankly. And I guess that’s why all Catholic saints are male. You know, like St. Christopher of Siena and St. Theodore of Lisieux.
Idiot.
“I had said to them, ‘It’s too dangerous for you to come out as gay to your superiors, but I believe that if you work for the ordination of women in your church, you will go a long way toward opening the door for the acceptance of gay priests,” Robinson said.
Robbie may have stumbled into an actual point there. Just before women were ordained in the Episcopal Church, the wife of the rector of my old joint was studying at the United Church of the Zeitgeist seminary across the street, evidently figuring that women’s ordination in the Episcopal Church was a done deal.
She joined my old place, eventually becoming associate rector. And I used to dread her sermons. She was the sort of preacher who thought that connecting with the congregation was way more important than actually communicating something useful about the Gospel.
She talked about herself a lot. And she was the sort of person who injected emotion into her words whether what she said called for it or not. She didn’t just buy lettuce at the supermarket yesterday, she bought LETTUCE at the SUPERMARKET YESTERDAY!!
This style and approach(and this woman was by no means unique) went a long way toward making the Episcopal Organization what it is today; a body where doctrine is not particularly important but how one feels about doctrine is. Women’s ordination did not start this process(the Episcopalians were well on their way prior to 1974) but it did benefit from it.
Because a serious case for it was never made. To its supporters, women’s ordination was so obviously correct that having to make a case for it suggested that people who disagreed with the idea had perfectly valid reasons for doing so. And such bigotry was not to be tolerated.
The same dynamic was in play when Robbie got his pointy hat. To Robbie’s supporters, no case needed to be made because it just felt right.
So anybody who demanded a justification(a serious one, not TEO’s spirit doing a new thing, God not knowing about committed same-sex relationships or any of the other absurd and borderline-blasphemous ones they’ve come up with over the years) had to be a bigot for resisting something so obviously correct.
With Gene Robinson, we see the triumph of emotion over Scripture in the Episcopal Organization because Robbie is all emotion. If you and the Word of God think that homosexual sex is a sin, you and the Word of God don’t merely disagree with Robbie. You hate him.
And he doesn’t have to justify himself to bigots.
Friday, October 31, 2008
Robinson led retreat for gay Catholic priests
This has been posted at TitusOneNine and Stand Firm. At SFIF, Jackie Bruchi comments on the linkage that Robinson makes between woman's ordination and gay ordination. ed.
10/28/2008
By Associated Press
October 29, 2008 9:59 PM
MANCHESTER -- Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson said he led a confidential retreat a few years ago for gay Roman Catholic priests.
Robinson, the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church and world Anglican Communion, said the Catholic priest group that organized the meeting had invited him to attend.
About 75 Catholic clergy from around the U.S. participated without notifying their bishops or provincial leaders, Robinson said. In 2005, the Vatican issued a document affirming the church's stance that men with "deep-seated" attraction to other men should not be ordained.
The retreat was held outside of New England, but Robinson would not say where.
Robinson briefly discussed the retreat during a question-and-answer session after a viewing Saturday of a documentary featuring his life story called, "For The Bible Tells Me So," according to The Laconia Daily Sun.
The film features Robinson's parents and other Christian parents discussing their faith and having a child come out as gay or lesbian.
The documentary was shown at Gilford's First United Methodist Church as part of the Open Doors Fellowship, which aims to make the church welcoming for gays and lesbians.
The film makes a link between sexism and anti-gay prejudice, contending that, "at its root, the hatred of gays is driven by a hatred and second-class status of women," Robinson said.
Robinson said he made a similar point in the priests' retreat.
"I had said to them, 'It's too dangerous for you to come out as gay to your superiors, but I believe that if you work for the ordination of women in your church, you will go a long way toward opening the door for the acceptance of gay priests," Robinson said.
10/28/2008
By Associated Press
October 29, 2008 9:59 PM
MANCHESTER -- Episcopal Bishop Gene Robinson said he led a confidential retreat a few years ago for gay Roman Catholic priests.
Robinson, the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church and world Anglican Communion, said the Catholic priest group that organized the meeting had invited him to attend.
About 75 Catholic clergy from around the U.S. participated without notifying their bishops or provincial leaders, Robinson said. In 2005, the Vatican issued a document affirming the church's stance that men with "deep-seated" attraction to other men should not be ordained.
The retreat was held outside of New England, but Robinson would not say where.
Robinson briefly discussed the retreat during a question-and-answer session after a viewing Saturday of a documentary featuring his life story called, "For The Bible Tells Me So," according to The Laconia Daily Sun.
The film features Robinson's parents and other Christian parents discussing their faith and having a child come out as gay or lesbian.
The documentary was shown at Gilford's First United Methodist Church as part of the Open Doors Fellowship, which aims to make the church welcoming for gays and lesbians.
The film makes a link between sexism and anti-gay prejudice, contending that, "at its root, the hatred of gays is driven by a hatred and second-class status of women," Robinson said.
Robinson said he made a similar point in the priests' retreat.
"I had said to them, 'It's too dangerous for you to come out as gay to your superiors, but I believe that if you work for the ordination of women in your church, you will go a long way toward opening the door for the acceptance of gay priests," Robinson said.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
An Emerging North American Province- by Bishop Bob Duncan
From Anglican Mainstream:
October 30th, 2008
From The Church of England Newspaper 31 October 2008
by Bishop Bob Duncan
The twin trajectories of The Episcopal Church and of the Anglican Church of Canada away from any Communion-requested restraint on matters of moral order and legal prosecution have made permanent a widespread separation of parishes from their historic geographical dioceses in the United States and Canada. Now these alienated parishes representing the moral (and theological) mainstream of global Anglicanism are being joined (or are about to be joined) by the majorities of four former Episcopal Church dioceses: San Joaquin in California, Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, Quincy in Illinois and Fort Worth in Texas. The reality of a significantly disintegrated North American Anglicanism now stretches from coast to coast and from the Arctic to the Rio Grande.
Given the ruthlessness with which those who have stood against the progressive agenda of TEC and the ACC have been treated – lately symbolized by the deposition of the Bishop of Pittsburgh – the possibility of achieving the Windsor Continuation Group’s goal of "holding" for eventual reunion is remote indeed.. Moreover, there is scarcely a parish or diocese that has endured the travail of separation (whether forced or chosen) that would not describe the North American Anglican scene as characterized by "two irreconcilable religions."
The conclusion of the Global Anglican Future Conference was that the time for the recognition of a new Anglican Province in North America had arrived. Not surprisingly in the months since the Jerusalem Conference – and encouraged by the Primates of the GAFCON Movement – the Common Cause Partnership in North America has moved to structure itself in just this way. The goal of describing by December 2008 a "recognizably Anglican provincial structure" has been adopted by the Lead Bishops Roundtable (Executive Committee). A Governance Task Force, chaired by a former chancellor of the Diocese of Virginia and composed of significant leadership from all the Common Cause Partners, is hard at work.
Across the Communion many have expressed deep concern about what the Archbishop of Canterbury has called "the inter-provincial model" emerging in present-day Anglicanism. This inter-provincial model is characterized by overlapping claims of jurisdiction ("border-crossing") within the U.S. and Canada by Anglican Provinces external to the U.S. and Canada. Is there a preferable alternative?
Were the Communion to bless – in some quarters enthusiastically and in some quarters reluctantly – the formation of a new "mainstream" North American Province the need for temporary rescue measures by mainstream Anglican Provinces like Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda, Southern Cone and Uganda would be ended. With the creation of the new North American Province at least one of the WCG’s chief challenges ("border crossing") would evaporate. In fact, the anomaly of a new mainstream Province of the Anglican Church in North America overlapping two rogue provinces, The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada, would prove far more stabilizing and manageable for the entire Communion than the present alternatives.
Nothing would immediately change about the 22 Anglican Provinces that are in broken or impaired Communion with TEC and the ACC – and the scandal of one North American Province not in Communion with two others would be obvious. Nevertheless, such a course of action would alone allow the Windsor Continuation Group and the historic Instruments of Communion to focus on address of the issues that precipitated the present crisis in the first place, narrowly defined as blessings of same-sex unions and ordination of bishops in sexual relationships outside of Holy Matrimony, or more broadly sketched as unwillingness to remain accountable to the Holy Scriptures, to the Christian moral consensus of 2000 years and to the Faith once for all delivered to the saints. Only then can communion and coherence be restored everywhere.
.
Bishop Bob Duncan
Moderator of the Common Cause Partnership
Episcopal Commissary for the Southern Cone
Sometime Bishop of Pittsburgh
October 30th, 2008
From The Church of England Newspaper 31 October 2008
by Bishop Bob Duncan
The twin trajectories of The Episcopal Church and of the Anglican Church of Canada away from any Communion-requested restraint on matters of moral order and legal prosecution have made permanent a widespread separation of parishes from their historic geographical dioceses in the United States and Canada. Now these alienated parishes representing the moral (and theological) mainstream of global Anglicanism are being joined (or are about to be joined) by the majorities of four former Episcopal Church dioceses: San Joaquin in California, Pittsburgh in Pennsylvania, Quincy in Illinois and Fort Worth in Texas. The reality of a significantly disintegrated North American Anglicanism now stretches from coast to coast and from the Arctic to the Rio Grande.
Given the ruthlessness with which those who have stood against the progressive agenda of TEC and the ACC have been treated – lately symbolized by the deposition of the Bishop of Pittsburgh – the possibility of achieving the Windsor Continuation Group’s goal of "holding" for eventual reunion is remote indeed.. Moreover, there is scarcely a parish or diocese that has endured the travail of separation (whether forced or chosen) that would not describe the North American Anglican scene as characterized by "two irreconcilable religions."
The conclusion of the Global Anglican Future Conference was that the time for the recognition of a new Anglican Province in North America had arrived. Not surprisingly in the months since the Jerusalem Conference – and encouraged by the Primates of the GAFCON Movement – the Common Cause Partnership in North America has moved to structure itself in just this way. The goal of describing by December 2008 a "recognizably Anglican provincial structure" has been adopted by the Lead Bishops Roundtable (Executive Committee). A Governance Task Force, chaired by a former chancellor of the Diocese of Virginia and composed of significant leadership from all the Common Cause Partners, is hard at work.
Across the Communion many have expressed deep concern about what the Archbishop of Canterbury has called "the inter-provincial model" emerging in present-day Anglicanism. This inter-provincial model is characterized by overlapping claims of jurisdiction ("border-crossing") within the U.S. and Canada by Anglican Provinces external to the U.S. and Canada. Is there a preferable alternative?
Were the Communion to bless – in some quarters enthusiastically and in some quarters reluctantly – the formation of a new "mainstream" North American Province the need for temporary rescue measures by mainstream Anglican Provinces like Kenya, Nigeria, Rwanda, Southern Cone and Uganda would be ended. With the creation of the new North American Province at least one of the WCG’s chief challenges ("border crossing") would evaporate. In fact, the anomaly of a new mainstream Province of the Anglican Church in North America overlapping two rogue provinces, The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada, would prove far more stabilizing and manageable for the entire Communion than the present alternatives.
Nothing would immediately change about the 22 Anglican Provinces that are in broken or impaired Communion with TEC and the ACC – and the scandal of one North American Province not in Communion with two others would be obvious. Nevertheless, such a course of action would alone allow the Windsor Continuation Group and the historic Instruments of Communion to focus on address of the issues that precipitated the present crisis in the first place, narrowly defined as blessings of same-sex unions and ordination of bishops in sexual relationships outside of Holy Matrimony, or more broadly sketched as unwillingness to remain accountable to the Holy Scriptures, to the Christian moral consensus of 2000 years and to the Faith once for all delivered to the saints. Only then can communion and coherence be restored everywhere.
.
Bishop Bob Duncan
Moderator of the Common Cause Partnership
Episcopal Commissary for the Southern Cone
Sometime Bishop of Pittsburgh
Christ Church San Antonio responds to TEC’s recent Actions
Posted by Kendall Harmon at TitusOneNine:
A STATEMENT TO THE PARISH
Concerning Actions Relating to The Episcopal Church
At its retreat last February, the Vestry discussed the numerous actions taken by The Episcopal Church (TEC) and many of its leaders that are contrary to traditional Christian faith, and which have marginalized TEC with many of its sister churches in the Anglican Communion. Building on a letter to the congregation from the Vestry dated July 26, 2006, a process of discernment was begun to explore how Christ Church can today best differentiate itself with its core values and beliefs from the theological innovations being pursued by TEC. Five options were identified that ranged from accepting the authority of TEC and submitting to its teachings and leadership, to making a full break with TEC and becoming an independent church with no denominational affiliation. The option which was chosen to pursue at this time, and which the Vestry has acted upon, is:
to disassociate from TEC’s false teachings without disconnecting from the Anglican Communion and the Diocese of West Texas.
During this time we have kept Bishop Lillibridge fully informed of our process. Vestry teams have met with him on three occasions, and we have had numerous email correspondence with him as well. With his knowledge and considering his counsel, at its meeting on October 21, 2008, the Vestry passed the following resolutions concerning Christ Church’s relationship to The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of West Texas:
1. AFFIRMED: that Christ Episcopal Church is apostolically connected to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ directly through the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury and our diocesan bishop, the Rt. Rev. Gary Lillibridge. This apostolic connection is not through the provincial structure of The Episcopal Church or its Presiding Bishop;
2. RESOLVED: to continue to participate fully in the life of the Diocese of West Texas and to pay its full diocesan apportionment;
3. RESOLVED: that Christ Episcopal Church disassociates itself
• from those actions of The Episcopal Church’s General Convention that impair The Episcopal Church’s relationships with other provinces of the Anglican Communion;
• from those statements and actions made by the Presiding Bishop and other leaders within The Episcopal Church that support positions that have not been tested or accepted by the Anglican Communion or the wider Christian community;
• from the failure of the Presiding Bishop and other bishops and leaders to live within the guidelines of the Windsor Report.
For his part, Bishop Lillibridge assured us that he is, and will continue:
• to be a “Windsor” bishop, affirming the Windsor Report;
• to support a diocesan policy that allows congregations and individuals to redirect their portion of TEC funds to other ministries outside the diocese;
• to support CEC’s relationships with the wider communion, such as with Uganda and Nigeria.
We believe that this statement and these actions allow our parish to affirm the historic Christian faith that we proclaim, yet reject the erroneous teachings that are accepted by many in TEC.
Unanimously Approved October 21, 2008
A STATEMENT TO THE PARISH
Concerning Actions Relating to The Episcopal Church
At its retreat last February, the Vestry discussed the numerous actions taken by The Episcopal Church (TEC) and many of its leaders that are contrary to traditional Christian faith, and which have marginalized TEC with many of its sister churches in the Anglican Communion. Building on a letter to the congregation from the Vestry dated July 26, 2006, a process of discernment was begun to explore how Christ Church can today best differentiate itself with its core values and beliefs from the theological innovations being pursued by TEC. Five options were identified that ranged from accepting the authority of TEC and submitting to its teachings and leadership, to making a full break with TEC and becoming an independent church with no denominational affiliation. The option which was chosen to pursue at this time, and which the Vestry has acted upon, is:
to disassociate from TEC’s false teachings without disconnecting from the Anglican Communion and the Diocese of West Texas.
During this time we have kept Bishop Lillibridge fully informed of our process. Vestry teams have met with him on three occasions, and we have had numerous email correspondence with him as well. With his knowledge and considering his counsel, at its meeting on October 21, 2008, the Vestry passed the following resolutions concerning Christ Church’s relationship to The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of West Texas:
1. AFFIRMED: that Christ Episcopal Church is apostolically connected to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ directly through the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury and our diocesan bishop, the Rt. Rev. Gary Lillibridge. This apostolic connection is not through the provincial structure of The Episcopal Church or its Presiding Bishop;
2. RESOLVED: to continue to participate fully in the life of the Diocese of West Texas and to pay its full diocesan apportionment;
3. RESOLVED: that Christ Episcopal Church disassociates itself
• from those actions of The Episcopal Church’s General Convention that impair The Episcopal Church’s relationships with other provinces of the Anglican Communion;
• from those statements and actions made by the Presiding Bishop and other leaders within The Episcopal Church that support positions that have not been tested or accepted by the Anglican Communion or the wider Christian community;
• from the failure of the Presiding Bishop and other bishops and leaders to live within the guidelines of the Windsor Report.
For his part, Bishop Lillibridge assured us that he is, and will continue:
• to be a “Windsor” bishop, affirming the Windsor Report;
• to support a diocesan policy that allows congregations and individuals to redirect their portion of TEC funds to other ministries outside the diocese;
• to support CEC’s relationships with the wider communion, such as with Uganda and Nigeria.
We believe that this statement and these actions allow our parish to affirm the historic Christian faith that we proclaim, yet reject the erroneous teachings that are accepted by many in TEC.
Unanimously Approved October 21, 2008
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
GOOD AND BAD
From the Midwest Conservative Journal:
Thursday, October 23, 2008
There's border-crossing and then there's border-crossing:
The Rt. Rev. David C. Jones, Bishop Suffragan of Virginia, has accepted an invitation to serve as a “consulting bishop” for the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh as it seeks to reorganize following the vote by the majority of clergy and lay deputies at diocesan convention to leave the denomination. The new position is effective immediately.
Kind of like what CANA is doing in Virginia. No, wait, that's the bad kind.
In a similar development, the Rt. Rev. Sam B. Hulsey, Bishop of Northwest Texas from 1980 to 1997, confirmed that he has participated in preliminary discussions about serving as the provisional bishop of Fort Worth in the event that the majority of delegates to the annual convention on Nov. 15 votes to leave The Episcopal Church. No formal offer to serve in that capacity had been made yet, he said.
Preliminary discussions with who, Sam? Kate?
“I believe my strongest gift is the gift of encouragement,” Bishop Jones said in a news release.
That and the ability to follow orders.
“Throughout my entire ordained ministry I have been a listener and a guide.
And I'm great at following orders.
I now offer that to the Episcopalians of Pittsburgh to use as they see fit in rebuilding their diocese. I do not come with any predetermined expectations.”
But I LOVE following orders.
Drawing on his work with congregations in the Diocese of Virginia that sought to reorganize after the majority voted to leave The Episcopal Church,
Kind of like CANA...no, wait, I confused the two again.
Bishop Jones will provide the diocesan standing committee in Pittsburgh with advice on administration, clergy deployment, and pastoral support for congregations.
He'll also be holding a seminar for all Pittsburgh clergy on following orders.
He will continue to serve as Bishop Suffragan of Virginia
Where CANA has...oh, for crying out loud, Johnson, get it right!
and will maintain his residence there.
And the objection to "African" bishops is what again?
He may on occasion be asked by the standing committee to perform sacramental acts in Pittsburgh.
In the Episcopal Organization, that's anything from confirmations to following orders.
posted by Christopher Johnson at MCJ
Thursday, October 23, 2008
There's border-crossing and then there's border-crossing:
The Rt. Rev. David C. Jones, Bishop Suffragan of Virginia, has accepted an invitation to serve as a “consulting bishop” for the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh as it seeks to reorganize following the vote by the majority of clergy and lay deputies at diocesan convention to leave the denomination. The new position is effective immediately.
Kind of like what CANA is doing in Virginia. No, wait, that's the bad kind.
In a similar development, the Rt. Rev. Sam B. Hulsey, Bishop of Northwest Texas from 1980 to 1997, confirmed that he has participated in preliminary discussions about serving as the provisional bishop of Fort Worth in the event that the majority of delegates to the annual convention on Nov. 15 votes to leave The Episcopal Church. No formal offer to serve in that capacity had been made yet, he said.
Preliminary discussions with who, Sam? Kate?
“I believe my strongest gift is the gift of encouragement,” Bishop Jones said in a news release.
That and the ability to follow orders.
“Throughout my entire ordained ministry I have been a listener and a guide.
And I'm great at following orders.
I now offer that to the Episcopalians of Pittsburgh to use as they see fit in rebuilding their diocese. I do not come with any predetermined expectations.”
But I LOVE following orders.
Drawing on his work with congregations in the Diocese of Virginia that sought to reorganize after the majority voted to leave The Episcopal Church,
Kind of like CANA...no, wait, I confused the two again.
Bishop Jones will provide the diocesan standing committee in Pittsburgh with advice on administration, clergy deployment, and pastoral support for congregations.
He'll also be holding a seminar for all Pittsburgh clergy on following orders.
He will continue to serve as Bishop Suffragan of Virginia
Where CANA has...oh, for crying out loud, Johnson, get it right!
and will maintain his residence there.
And the objection to "African" bishops is what again?
He may on occasion be asked by the standing committee to perform sacramental acts in Pittsburgh.
In the Episcopal Organization, that's anything from confirmations to following orders.
posted by Christopher Johnson at MCJ
ZIP-A-DEE-DOO-DAH, ZIP-A-DEE-AY!
The Diocese and Bishop of CNY lampooned on the Midwest Conservative Journal:
Thursday, October 16th, 2008
Today, our tour of the unbelievably splendid wonderfulness that is the Episcopal Organization takes us to Central New York where Bishop Gladstone “Skip” Adams celebrates how gosh-darned spiffy everything is these days in a somewhat unusual way:
In the development of the proposed 2009 Diocesan Budget, it became clear that the financial realities of today’s economy are creating challenges for our congregations in terms of assessment and investment revenue. Increased energy costs place additional pressures on already stretched budgets. these challenges obviously impact the financial resources available on the diocesan level for staff, programming and ministry.
The mission of the Diocesan Staff is to provide resources to commissions, committees and congregations so they can minister faithfully in their own communities. This will remain our commitment, however, an anticipated reduction in 2009 revenues has required me to make some difficult and painful decisions.
Gladstone “Skip” is going to take a pay cut? He’s cancelling CNY’s lawsuit? What are you, high? He’s firing diocesan staff.
It’s been pointed out here and there that conservative TEO dioceses aren’t doing that well either which is understandable. When a large ship is sinking, you need to get as far away from it as you possibly can or it will pull you under with it.
Thursday, October 16th, 2008
Today, our tour of the unbelievably splendid wonderfulness that is the Episcopal Organization takes us to Central New York where Bishop Gladstone “Skip” Adams celebrates how gosh-darned spiffy everything is these days in a somewhat unusual way:
In the development of the proposed 2009 Diocesan Budget, it became clear that the financial realities of today’s economy are creating challenges for our congregations in terms of assessment and investment revenue. Increased energy costs place additional pressures on already stretched budgets. these challenges obviously impact the financial resources available on the diocesan level for staff, programming and ministry.
The mission of the Diocesan Staff is to provide resources to commissions, committees and congregations so they can minister faithfully in their own communities. This will remain our commitment, however, an anticipated reduction in 2009 revenues has required me to make some difficult and painful decisions.
Gladstone “Skip” is going to take a pay cut? He’s cancelling CNY’s lawsuit? What are you, high? He’s firing diocesan staff.
It’s been pointed out here and there that conservative TEO dioceses aren’t doing that well either which is understandable. When a large ship is sinking, you need to get as far away from it as you possibly can or it will pull you under with it.
Financial Report from the Diocese of Newark
TREASURER'S REPORT
Mr. Richard Graham reported on the current status. Income and cash flow remained the biggest challenges for the Diocese this year when looking forward to FY 2009. There was currently a $633,000 deficit. Pledge income received was $366,000 below budget, an improvement over last month's income deficit of $395,000. Significant pledge income remained outstanding from 2007. Expenses were approximately $15,000 under budget.
The Council received $1.5 million in pledge income through September versus a budgeted amount of $1.875 million. Additional funds of approximately $260,000 were due to Council from investment sources that had not yet been recorded. Event and other income had been limited to date.
Pledge income for FY 2008 picked up in September. Income of $224,000 was 9% over the projected amount. YTD was still 20% behind projected year to date income (received = $1.5 million vs. projected $1.9 million). Over 5% of the outstanding pledges (against budgeted total) at the end of 2007 remained unpaid 9 months into this year. (NOTE: Prior year unpaid pledge amounts will continue to change as reconciliations are received and pledge data recalculated). Over 19% (22) of 2007 pledge reconciliation forms remained outstanding. Of the 22 outstanding reconciliations, eight were with congregations in transitions and three that faced serious financial situation. The Finance office continued to advise congregations of past due pledges and reconciliations through monthly statements, phone contact, etc.
Overall our expenses were $15,000 under budget. Most departments were at or under budget. We remained behind in projected pledge payments to the Episcopal Church for 2008 and 2007. The $406,000 that had been budgeted to expense by 30 September had not been paid. However since the expense was incurred it appeared on the financial statements under Outreach expenses. There had been no payments into the Lay Pension Plan this year. As of 30 September 2008 we were $127,000 behind. Our budgeted expense for 2008 was $170,000. In September payment was made to the EC against our 2007 pledge. To date, 74% of the FY 2008 budget to date was spent.
The 2009 budget process had begun and will be based on a forecast of lower income for 2009. Expenses will be looked at closely to ensure that the budget reflected the mission and priorities of the Diocese. Ways to reduce budgeted expenses where there were alternative approaches/flexibility available would be considered. A subcommittee of the Council will be reviewing the 2008 budgeted financial statement to provide advice on current year results and opportunities to improve in 2009.
The investment manager of TIAA-CREF will meet with the Trustees and a congregation next month on October 23. The representative would be available for presentations to districts and congregations the next day.
A plan of payment to the national church will be formulated to address meeting the diocesan commitment to the national church. A better discipline of payment was needed to begin a transfer from payments issued when funds became available to payment of first dollars of income.
From:
THE DIOCESE OF NEWARK
OUR DIOCESAN COUNCIL
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Mr. Richard Graham reported on the current status. Income and cash flow remained the biggest challenges for the Diocese this year when looking forward to FY 2009. There was currently a $633,000 deficit. Pledge income received was $366,000 below budget, an improvement over last month's income deficit of $395,000. Significant pledge income remained outstanding from 2007. Expenses were approximately $15,000 under budget.
The Council received $1.5 million in pledge income through September versus a budgeted amount of $1.875 million. Additional funds of approximately $260,000 were due to Council from investment sources that had not yet been recorded. Event and other income had been limited to date.
Pledge income for FY 2008 picked up in September. Income of $224,000 was 9% over the projected amount. YTD was still 20% behind projected year to date income (received = $1.5 million vs. projected $1.9 million). Over 5% of the outstanding pledges (against budgeted total) at the end of 2007 remained unpaid 9 months into this year. (NOTE: Prior year unpaid pledge amounts will continue to change as reconciliations are received and pledge data recalculated). Over 19% (22) of 2007 pledge reconciliation forms remained outstanding. Of the 22 outstanding reconciliations, eight were with congregations in transitions and three that faced serious financial situation. The Finance office continued to advise congregations of past due pledges and reconciliations through monthly statements, phone contact, etc.
Overall our expenses were $15,000 under budget. Most departments were at or under budget. We remained behind in projected pledge payments to the Episcopal Church for 2008 and 2007. The $406,000 that had been budgeted to expense by 30 September had not been paid. However since the expense was incurred it appeared on the financial statements under Outreach expenses. There had been no payments into the Lay Pension Plan this year. As of 30 September 2008 we were $127,000 behind. Our budgeted expense for 2008 was $170,000. In September payment was made to the EC against our 2007 pledge. To date, 74% of the FY 2008 budget to date was spent.
The 2009 budget process had begun and will be based on a forecast of lower income for 2009. Expenses will be looked at closely to ensure that the budget reflected the mission and priorities of the Diocese. Ways to reduce budgeted expenses where there were alternative approaches/flexibility available would be considered. A subcommittee of the Council will be reviewing the 2008 budgeted financial statement to provide advice on current year results and opportunities to improve in 2009.
The investment manager of TIAA-CREF will meet with the Trustees and a congregation next month on October 23. The representative would be available for presentations to districts and congregations the next day.
A plan of payment to the national church will be formulated to address meeting the diocesan commitment to the national church. A better discipline of payment was needed to begin a transfer from payments issued when funds became available to payment of first dollars of income.
From:
THE DIOCESE OF NEWARK
OUR DIOCESAN COUNCIL
Wednesday, October 8, 2008
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
THOUGHT CRIME AND THE PROSECUTION OF ROBERT DUNCAN
Commentary
By Canon Gary L'Hommedieu
www.virtueonline.org
10/25/08
"When the wicked rise, people hide themselves." (Proverbs 28:28 ESV)
***********************
The prosecution of thought crime has become commonplace in formerly democratic societies.
That we are unwilling to acknowledge the assaults not only on speech but on the thought that gives rise to it is evidence that we live in dangerous times -- so dangerous that we don't dare think it.
The deposition of Bishop Robert Duncan was not a particularly dangerous or violent act. Given the travesties of truth and justice that are becoming common in our society, it smacked of a certain pathetic mediocrity. It was a very small act by a very unexceptional group huddling together to protect its interests.
It did, however, set an important precedent. And it was possible only because similar precedents have been set not only in the church but even more in the society at large.
Robert Duncan was planning to lead his Diocese out of the Episcopal Church. Whether or not such a departure is possible is a matter that has not been legally tested. Duncan was deposed precisely to prevent such a test. The case was not based on its own merit. It was rather the manufacture of a precedent.
Public comments by ranking members of the Episcopal hierarchy -- most notably, "individuals can leave; dioceses and parishes cannot" -- may be quaint and pointed, but that does not give them the force of law nor the criterion of truth. And yet today the repetition of off-the-cuff legal axioms is the equivalent of what was once Common Law. If you can organize a majority (not even a legally constituted majority) to act on a bad law (or even no law) then it becomes a good law. It may as well now be written in stone.
That is only one of the legal and philosophical catastrophes of the Duncan case, and it isn't the worst.
It has been well publicized that the minority that opposed the deposition did so because Bishop Duncan had not yet "done the deed". He had not yet formally removed the Diocese of Pittsburgh from the Episcopal Church. The Diocesan Convention had not yet passed the resolution altering the "accession clause" in its constitution. That was to happen in a few weeks.
It was no secret that Pittsburgh had every intention of following through with its objective of separating from TEC and that Bishop Duncan was publically leading the charge. Still, the minority bishops, not all of whom sympathized with Duncan's theology, recognized an important distinction between planning to leave and actually leaving. Some who shared his theology would themselves have felt obligated to vote for deposition if the House of Bishops had waited a month or two.
To put it succinctly: Bishop Duncan had not yet challenged the canons, but he was thinking about it.
That may be a bit of hyperbole. Holding meetings and even press conferences, writing and moving legislation -- these are distinct actions. They are not mere "thoughts". Bishop Duncan wasn't "just thinking" about leaving. He was planning to leave and had taken the initial steps to do so.
"Thinking about leaving" would presumably be more private, restricted to a closed circle of associates, with evidences of thought limited to scrawls on newsprint not left for the custodian to tear down and discard. In other words, "thinking" apart from "doing" would by definition be a "hushed" affair.
Such "thinking" is necessarily "hushed" in more and more dioceses of the church in the US and Canada, where bishops publically forbid their clergy to discuss departure or to join well known organizations that are willing to consider a future outside the national church.
Thinking about leaving has become a deposable offense. Episcopal clergy must train themselves not to think about it. They must cultivate reflexes to deflect such thoughts, rendering them innocuous.
In 1973 who would have thought to suppress meetings to plan illegal ordinations in Philadelphia? And who would think today to prohibit membership in an organization like Integrity, a think tank for subverting the canons of the Episcopal Church, not to mention resolutions of the Lambeth Conference and the Primates' Meeting? Apparently not all lawless acts are created equal.
The dissenting bishops who voted against deposition knew instinctively that, while Duncan may have taken concrete steps toward violating the canons, to punish the intention as the act would have been to cross a certain line. It would have had the effect of criminalizing intentions. The precedent would be set next time to prosecute stated intentions, then implied intentions, and finally suspected intentions.
In other words, the Episcopal hierarchy found themselves in the shocking position of legislating thought crime. That was not what they had expected or intended, but it was the obvious and irreversible outcome of their deliberations.
They had already crossed a line.
Sometimes intentions matter and must be controlled. Other times attempts at control take on a life of their own apart from the best intentions.
Next summer the General Convention will pass legislation making Duncan's "irregular" deposition regular and rendering more obscure the distinction between thought and action, granting dictatorial powers to the executive. Strategies to control dissident actions before they take place will become standard. Characteristic of authoritarian societies, the pendulum will continue its swing from presumed innocence to presumed guilt. "Extraordinary powers" for the Presiding Bishop will become ordinary.
The greatest evils are not the crimes by which corrupt persons seek to aggrandize themselves. The greatest evils are the ones no one could have foreseen, the ones perpetrated by no one in particular, which come out of nowhere when a forbidden door is recklessly opened, when a certain line is crossed.
"It gets easier after the first time," hissed the malevolent Cromwell to the ambitious Richard Rich at their first secret meeting where Rich agreed to condemn Sir Thomas More in the interests of the king's business.
Demons have been let loose in our society based upon the need by some to control the imagined or anticipated actions of others. The example that comes to mind is the increasing regulation of "hate speech". The premise is to suppress the kind of utterance that gives rise to violent action. Laws against violence are not sufficient. Individuals must be mentally declawed before thought has a chance to germinate. And, of course, an increasingly centralized power must be given dispensation to enforce the law.
"Hate speech" is a modern name for what Orwell had christened "thought crime".
The fallacy of "hate speech" is that the enforcement of it does not result in a just or safe society. If violence is curbed, it is out of fear, not out of conformity to a just vision. Mute acquiescence stores up violence for another day.
"Hate speech" laws are not intended as a check on violence anyway. Statistical reports of violence against targeted groups (those now advocating special protection under "extraordinary" restrictions on speech) is at an historic low. Bigots have learned to mind their manners and show respect. But that is not enough. A formerly oppressed minority, now in the ascendency, must up the ante of control. "Hate speech" is a strategic attack on thought. Its objective is not domestic tranquility but political power.
A policy of fear is never in the interests of the people as a whole but always in the interests of power. Where power is an end in itself, freedom by definition is suspect.
We have gotten used to the subversive quality of thought and have long begun "correcting" our reflexes, first to avoid thinking altogether, and second not to notice when the "guilty" start disappearing. With the rise of the wicked we have gone into hiding.
The Bishops could not have skirted their own canons and deposed Robert Duncan without pretending the public danger was so great that due process must be suspended. The Fuehrer must be granted extra-constitutional powers and the people's thoughts subjected to scrutiny.
Try getting that genie back in the bottle.
---The Rev. Canon J. Gary L'Hommedieu is Canon for Pastoral Care at the Cathedral Church of St. Luke, Orlando, Florida, and a regular columnist for VirtueOnline
By Canon Gary L'Hommedieu
www.virtueonline.org
10/25/08
"When the wicked rise, people hide themselves." (Proverbs 28:28 ESV)
***********************
The prosecution of thought crime has become commonplace in formerly democratic societies.
That we are unwilling to acknowledge the assaults not only on speech but on the thought that gives rise to it is evidence that we live in dangerous times -- so dangerous that we don't dare think it.
The deposition of Bishop Robert Duncan was not a particularly dangerous or violent act. Given the travesties of truth and justice that are becoming common in our society, it smacked of a certain pathetic mediocrity. It was a very small act by a very unexceptional group huddling together to protect its interests.
It did, however, set an important precedent. And it was possible only because similar precedents have been set not only in the church but even more in the society at large.
Robert Duncan was planning to lead his Diocese out of the Episcopal Church. Whether or not such a departure is possible is a matter that has not been legally tested. Duncan was deposed precisely to prevent such a test. The case was not based on its own merit. It was rather the manufacture of a precedent.
Public comments by ranking members of the Episcopal hierarchy -- most notably, "individuals can leave; dioceses and parishes cannot" -- may be quaint and pointed, but that does not give them the force of law nor the criterion of truth. And yet today the repetition of off-the-cuff legal axioms is the equivalent of what was once Common Law. If you can organize a majority (not even a legally constituted majority) to act on a bad law (or even no law) then it becomes a good law. It may as well now be written in stone.
That is only one of the legal and philosophical catastrophes of the Duncan case, and it isn't the worst.
It has been well publicized that the minority that opposed the deposition did so because Bishop Duncan had not yet "done the deed". He had not yet formally removed the Diocese of Pittsburgh from the Episcopal Church. The Diocesan Convention had not yet passed the resolution altering the "accession clause" in its constitution. That was to happen in a few weeks.
It was no secret that Pittsburgh had every intention of following through with its objective of separating from TEC and that Bishop Duncan was publically leading the charge. Still, the minority bishops, not all of whom sympathized with Duncan's theology, recognized an important distinction between planning to leave and actually leaving. Some who shared his theology would themselves have felt obligated to vote for deposition if the House of Bishops had waited a month or two.
To put it succinctly: Bishop Duncan had not yet challenged the canons, but he was thinking about it.
That may be a bit of hyperbole. Holding meetings and even press conferences, writing and moving legislation -- these are distinct actions. They are not mere "thoughts". Bishop Duncan wasn't "just thinking" about leaving. He was planning to leave and had taken the initial steps to do so.
"Thinking about leaving" would presumably be more private, restricted to a closed circle of associates, with evidences of thought limited to scrawls on newsprint not left for the custodian to tear down and discard. In other words, "thinking" apart from "doing" would by definition be a "hushed" affair.
Such "thinking" is necessarily "hushed" in more and more dioceses of the church in the US and Canada, where bishops publically forbid their clergy to discuss departure or to join well known organizations that are willing to consider a future outside the national church.
Thinking about leaving has become a deposable offense. Episcopal clergy must train themselves not to think about it. They must cultivate reflexes to deflect such thoughts, rendering them innocuous.
In 1973 who would have thought to suppress meetings to plan illegal ordinations in Philadelphia? And who would think today to prohibit membership in an organization like Integrity, a think tank for subverting the canons of the Episcopal Church, not to mention resolutions of the Lambeth Conference and the Primates' Meeting? Apparently not all lawless acts are created equal.
The dissenting bishops who voted against deposition knew instinctively that, while Duncan may have taken concrete steps toward violating the canons, to punish the intention as the act would have been to cross a certain line. It would have had the effect of criminalizing intentions. The precedent would be set next time to prosecute stated intentions, then implied intentions, and finally suspected intentions.
In other words, the Episcopal hierarchy found themselves in the shocking position of legislating thought crime. That was not what they had expected or intended, but it was the obvious and irreversible outcome of their deliberations.
They had already crossed a line.
Sometimes intentions matter and must be controlled. Other times attempts at control take on a life of their own apart from the best intentions.
Next summer the General Convention will pass legislation making Duncan's "irregular" deposition regular and rendering more obscure the distinction between thought and action, granting dictatorial powers to the executive. Strategies to control dissident actions before they take place will become standard. Characteristic of authoritarian societies, the pendulum will continue its swing from presumed innocence to presumed guilt. "Extraordinary powers" for the Presiding Bishop will become ordinary.
The greatest evils are not the crimes by which corrupt persons seek to aggrandize themselves. The greatest evils are the ones no one could have foreseen, the ones perpetrated by no one in particular, which come out of nowhere when a forbidden door is recklessly opened, when a certain line is crossed.
"It gets easier after the first time," hissed the malevolent Cromwell to the ambitious Richard Rich at their first secret meeting where Rich agreed to condemn Sir Thomas More in the interests of the king's business.
Demons have been let loose in our society based upon the need by some to control the imagined or anticipated actions of others. The example that comes to mind is the increasing regulation of "hate speech". The premise is to suppress the kind of utterance that gives rise to violent action. Laws against violence are not sufficient. Individuals must be mentally declawed before thought has a chance to germinate. And, of course, an increasingly centralized power must be given dispensation to enforce the law.
"Hate speech" is a modern name for what Orwell had christened "thought crime".
The fallacy of "hate speech" is that the enforcement of it does not result in a just or safe society. If violence is curbed, it is out of fear, not out of conformity to a just vision. Mute acquiescence stores up violence for another day.
"Hate speech" laws are not intended as a check on violence anyway. Statistical reports of violence against targeted groups (those now advocating special protection under "extraordinary" restrictions on speech) is at an historic low. Bigots have learned to mind their manners and show respect. But that is not enough. A formerly oppressed minority, now in the ascendency, must up the ante of control. "Hate speech" is a strategic attack on thought. Its objective is not domestic tranquility but political power.
A policy of fear is never in the interests of the people as a whole but always in the interests of power. Where power is an end in itself, freedom by definition is suspect.
We have gotten used to the subversive quality of thought and have long begun "correcting" our reflexes, first to avoid thinking altogether, and second not to notice when the "guilty" start disappearing. With the rise of the wicked we have gone into hiding.
The Bishops could not have skirted their own canons and deposed Robert Duncan without pretending the public danger was so great that due process must be suspended. The Fuehrer must be granted extra-constitutional powers and the people's thoughts subjected to scrutiny.
Try getting that genie back in the bottle.
---The Rev. Canon J. Gary L'Hommedieu is Canon for Pastoral Care at the Cathedral Church of St. Luke, Orlando, Florida, and a regular columnist for VirtueOnline
St. Francis on the Hill church elects to leave Episcopal Church
By Diana Washington Valdez / El Paso Times
Article Launched: 10/27/2008 04:43:31 PM MDT
EL PASO - St. Francis-on-the-Hill in West El Paso has elected to leave the Episcopal Church of the U.S.A, according to an announcement by the Very Rev. Mark Goodman of the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande in Albuquerque.
The church also is leaving Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande.
The vestry of St. Francis-on-the-Hill in El Paso voted Oct. 21 to leave the Episcopal Church, with a majority in favor of the action, Goodman said.
"This decision comes after meetings between the congregation, the president of the standing committee and the assisting bishop of the Diocese of the Rio Grande, the Right Rev. William Frey," Goodman said.
"At those meetings, Bishop Frey and Canon Kelly made it clear to the congregation that, if they made the decision to leave the Episcopal Church, they could not take their property with them."
Last year, the Church of St. Clement in El Paso also left the Episcopal Church, citing doctrinal differences with the national Episcopal Church. Information: Goodman, (505) 328-6157.
EL PASO - St. Francis-on-the-Hill in West El Paso has elected to leave the Episcopal Church, according to an announcement by the Very Rev. Mark Goodman of the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande in Albuquerque.
The vestry of St. Francis-on-the-Hill in El Paso voted Oct. 21 to leave the Episcopal Church, with a majority in favor of the action, Goodman said.
"This decision comes after meetings between the congregation, the president of the standing
Advertisement
committee and the assisting bishop of the Diocese of the Rio Grande, the Right Rev. William Frey," Goodman said.
"At those meetings, Bishop Frey and Canon Kelly made it clear to the congregation that, if they made the decision to leave the Episcopal Church, they could not take their property with them."
A post on the St. Francis-on-the-Hill Web site Monday disputes the claim on the property.
"We have the title and deed to our property," Ron Munden, a St. Francis vestry member, said on the Web site. "Since the Episcopal Church passed a Canon, or church law, in the 1970's that said all Episcopal churches' properties were to be held in trust by the Diocese for the U.S. Episcopal Church, St. Francis on the Hill has denied this claim in official notices to the TEC. As early as 2004, we let it be known that our by-laws clearly outlined how and why we owned our own property. We built this church with money from our parishioners - not one dime came from the Episcopal Church or from the Diocese. This church and grounds belong to St. Francis on the Hill, and The Episcopal Church clearly knows of our unique situation here and our position on this matter."
Last year, the Church of St. Clement in El Paso also left the Episcopal Church, citing doctrinal differences with the national Episcopal Church. Information: http://www.stfrancisonthehill.org/
Article Launched: 10/27/2008 04:43:31 PM MDT
EL PASO - St. Francis-on-the-Hill in West El Paso has elected to leave the Episcopal Church of the U.S.A, according to an announcement by the Very Rev. Mark Goodman of the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande in Albuquerque.
The church also is leaving Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande.
The vestry of St. Francis-on-the-Hill in El Paso voted Oct. 21 to leave the Episcopal Church, with a majority in favor of the action, Goodman said.
"This decision comes after meetings between the congregation, the president of the standing committee and the assisting bishop of the Diocese of the Rio Grande, the Right Rev. William Frey," Goodman said.
"At those meetings, Bishop Frey and Canon Kelly made it clear to the congregation that, if they made the decision to leave the Episcopal Church, they could not take their property with them."
Last year, the Church of St. Clement in El Paso also left the Episcopal Church, citing doctrinal differences with the national Episcopal Church. Information: Goodman, (505) 328-6157.
EL PASO - St. Francis-on-the-Hill in West El Paso has elected to leave the Episcopal Church, according to an announcement by the Very Rev. Mark Goodman of the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande in Albuquerque.
The vestry of St. Francis-on-the-Hill in El Paso voted Oct. 21 to leave the Episcopal Church, with a majority in favor of the action, Goodman said.
"This decision comes after meetings between the congregation, the president of the standing
Advertisement
committee and the assisting bishop of the Diocese of the Rio Grande, the Right Rev. William Frey," Goodman said.
"At those meetings, Bishop Frey and Canon Kelly made it clear to the congregation that, if they made the decision to leave the Episcopal Church, they could not take their property with them."
A post on the St. Francis-on-the-Hill Web site Monday disputes the claim on the property.
"We have the title and deed to our property," Ron Munden, a St. Francis vestry member, said on the Web site. "Since the Episcopal Church passed a Canon, or church law, in the 1970's that said all Episcopal churches' properties were to be held in trust by the Diocese for the U.S. Episcopal Church, St. Francis on the Hill has denied this claim in official notices to the TEC. As early as 2004, we let it be known that our by-laws clearly outlined how and why we owned our own property. We built this church with money from our parishioners - not one dime came from the Episcopal Church or from the Diocese. This church and grounds belong to St. Francis on the Hill, and The Episcopal Church clearly knows of our unique situation here and our position on this matter."
Last year, the Church of St. Clement in El Paso also left the Episcopal Church, citing doctrinal differences with the national Episcopal Church. Information: http://www.stfrancisonthehill.org/
AMiA Theologian Challenges CAPA Chairman Over Nature of the Church
Posted by David Virtue on 2008/10/26 17:40:00 at VirtueOnline:
AMiA Theologian Challenges CAPA Chairman Over Nature of the Church
"Church must recover its identity or be divided," says bishop
News Analysis
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
10/26/2008
A theologian and former seminary Dean says that Archbishop Ian Ernest, chairman of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA), misunderstands the nature of the church when the prelate recently called upon the African church to put aside its differences and engage with its theological opponents within the Anglican Communion.
The Rt. Rev. Dr. John H. Rodgers addressed the Primate of the Church of the Province of the Indian Ocean and Bishop of Mauritius saying Ernst misunderstands the nature of the Church failing to see the difference between the Church Visible and the Church Invisible.
Ernest wrote that CAPA bishops should eschew a political solution to the divisions over doctrine and discipline and focus instead on church transformation through Christian witness. CAPA must resist becoming one interest group among many within the Anglican Communion, he said.
"The Church is going through trial times. This is nothing new, and it is certainly not the last time that our Communion faces challenges", Archbishop Ernest told a joint meeting of primates and standing committee of CAPA bishops in Nairobi recently.
"But what is new at this critical juncture is a process of profound change. Our deliberations at this meeting will not only affect our lives today, but will contribute to shape the future of the Anglican Communion worldwide.
"The Anglican Communion has been distressed by unilateral decisions taken by the North American churches which threaten the unity of our communion." Ernest said the violence of these arguments have so hardened positions that it raises serious concerns about its ability to resolve such differences.
Rodgers challenges this view. He criticizes the CAPA chairman saying that he has failed to understand the different meanings of the word "church" found in the 39 Articles of Religion.
"As I read the comments of Archbishop Ian Ernest, the Chairman of CAPA, I was once again struck by the failure of many of us to be clear when we use the term "Church", usually in reference to the Church Visible (Article 19). If we take Article 19 seriously and the other references to 'Church' throughout the 39 Articles, we need to ask what is the status of an institution or visible, organized group that lacks the marks listed in Article 19 and the implied mark of ecclesiastical discipline listed in the Homily for Whitsunday? If these are lacking then can it be said that to disassociate from such an institution is leaving the Church? Is it not rather that the Church is leaving the institution?"
Rodgers said the Anglican Communion must recover its historic identity, including all of the marks of the Church as set forth in the Jerusalem Declaration or be divided. "It happened at each of the great historic Councils, it happened at the Reformation of the 16th Century and it could happen in our day. The issues cannot be ignored.
"For CAPA to be concerned for the preservation and treasuring of these marks in the Anglican Communion is clearly not an act of becoming an interest group in the Church, but rather it is CAPA acting as and on behalf of the Church, as Anglicans have historically read the Scriptures. At some point, as the present drift from historic Anglican theology spreads abroad, it is surely right to work hard for that reform or recovery rather than a division. And we pray that CAPA will be one of the leaders in that godly work of recovery and reformation."
It is unclear at this point in time where all the African bishops stand in relationship to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Lambeth and GAFCON. Many CAPA bishops showed up at Lambeth this past summer even though archbishops and bishops from the larger African provinces like Nigeria, Uganda, Rwanda and Kenya did not. These latter countries represent the vast majority of Anglicans, some 44 million, in the Anglican Communion.
Clearly, as Western pan-Anglicanism slowly disintegrates with orthodox dioceses, parishes and individuals fleeing in the US, Canada and now the UK, with many of them coming under Primates in the Global South, there will be less incentive for Africans to stay or want to hold together the Anglican communion as it is presently constructed.
Furthermore, there is a growing chorus for Dr. Rowan Williams to resign, as homosexuality slowly becomes more enshrined with publically undisciplined acts occurring in the Church of England. These acts will only further alienate Global South leaders.
The Church of England is increasingly being hobbled over women bishops, the alienation of its Anglo-Catholic wing and increasingly rebellious homosexual acts involving same-sex unions and non-celibate pansexualists in the pulpit.
Furthermore, the Church of England is irrelevant to 98% of the British public. Their priests are barely able to muster a million of 60 million to turn out on a Sunday morning to worship in tens of thousands of England's rapidly dying churches.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has been described as being "over a barrel" by world-renowned evangelical theologian Dr. J. I. Packer, the patriarch of Anglicanism. He recently called for Dr. Williams to resign. A revisionist Canadian bishop deposed the much beloved theologian so Packer has personally felt the sting of a bishop who has no use for orthodox Anglicanism.
The question that is increasingly being asked by vigorous evangelical post-colonial global south leaders is how can they go on respecting a man and an institution that is not respected by its own people? Why is Dr. Williams' brand of Affirming Catholicism not drawing millions of disaffected nominal Anglicans? Why, indeed.
Why should CAPA bishops pay homage to an evangelically neutered occupant at Lambeth Palace?
Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan stated it well when he said in London recently that the great question for Anglicanism, not just Anglicanism in England, is "How can this tradition be coherent?" I am convinced that what kept the Church of England in its three streams of expression always true was the Book of Common Prayer. It was not that the Catholics broke themselves against the evangelicals. It was that the Catholics broke themselves against the boundaries of the Prayer Book. It was not that the Evangelicals were kept in order by the Catholics., Iit was the evangelicals were kept in the Catholic tradition by the Prayer Book and the same way with what I now call the Pentecostal stream.
"The question is for Anglicanism, will it cohere in the 21st century? The Prayer Book was the magisterium. It was that piece which kept us under the word and gave us our theological understandings. The Great Book Psalter was the common language. We have no common language any more nor do we have a secured theology. The great challenge for 21st century Anglicanism is "Can it cohere? Will it endure?"
Archbishop Ernest said he does not despair. He hopes love and unity will prevail to build the church of God. But that will not happen unless and until the nature of the church is addressed and truth prevails. Then and only then will we see true love and unity.
END
AMiA Theologian Challenges CAPA Chairman Over Nature of the Church
"Church must recover its identity or be divided," says bishop
News Analysis
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
10/26/2008
A theologian and former seminary Dean says that Archbishop Ian Ernest, chairman of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA), misunderstands the nature of the church when the prelate recently called upon the African church to put aside its differences and engage with its theological opponents within the Anglican Communion.
The Rt. Rev. Dr. John H. Rodgers addressed the Primate of the Church of the Province of the Indian Ocean and Bishop of Mauritius saying Ernst misunderstands the nature of the Church failing to see the difference between the Church Visible and the Church Invisible.
Ernest wrote that CAPA bishops should eschew a political solution to the divisions over doctrine and discipline and focus instead on church transformation through Christian witness. CAPA must resist becoming one interest group among many within the Anglican Communion, he said.
"The Church is going through trial times. This is nothing new, and it is certainly not the last time that our Communion faces challenges", Archbishop Ernest told a joint meeting of primates and standing committee of CAPA bishops in Nairobi recently.
"But what is new at this critical juncture is a process of profound change. Our deliberations at this meeting will not only affect our lives today, but will contribute to shape the future of the Anglican Communion worldwide.
"The Anglican Communion has been distressed by unilateral decisions taken by the North American churches which threaten the unity of our communion." Ernest said the violence of these arguments have so hardened positions that it raises serious concerns about its ability to resolve such differences.
Rodgers challenges this view. He criticizes the CAPA chairman saying that he has failed to understand the different meanings of the word "church" found in the 39 Articles of Religion.
"As I read the comments of Archbishop Ian Ernest, the Chairman of CAPA, I was once again struck by the failure of many of us to be clear when we use the term "Church", usually in reference to the Church Visible (Article 19). If we take Article 19 seriously and the other references to 'Church' throughout the 39 Articles, we need to ask what is the status of an institution or visible, organized group that lacks the marks listed in Article 19 and the implied mark of ecclesiastical discipline listed in the Homily for Whitsunday? If these are lacking then can it be said that to disassociate from such an institution is leaving the Church? Is it not rather that the Church is leaving the institution?"
Rodgers said the Anglican Communion must recover its historic identity, including all of the marks of the Church as set forth in the Jerusalem Declaration or be divided. "It happened at each of the great historic Councils, it happened at the Reformation of the 16th Century and it could happen in our day. The issues cannot be ignored.
"For CAPA to be concerned for the preservation and treasuring of these marks in the Anglican Communion is clearly not an act of becoming an interest group in the Church, but rather it is CAPA acting as and on behalf of the Church, as Anglicans have historically read the Scriptures. At some point, as the present drift from historic Anglican theology spreads abroad, it is surely right to work hard for that reform or recovery rather than a division. And we pray that CAPA will be one of the leaders in that godly work of recovery and reformation."
It is unclear at this point in time where all the African bishops stand in relationship to the Archbishop of Canterbury, Lambeth and GAFCON. Many CAPA bishops showed up at Lambeth this past summer even though archbishops and bishops from the larger African provinces like Nigeria, Uganda, Rwanda and Kenya did not. These latter countries represent the vast majority of Anglicans, some 44 million, in the Anglican Communion.
Clearly, as Western pan-Anglicanism slowly disintegrates with orthodox dioceses, parishes and individuals fleeing in the US, Canada and now the UK, with many of them coming under Primates in the Global South, there will be less incentive for Africans to stay or want to hold together the Anglican communion as it is presently constructed.
Furthermore, there is a growing chorus for Dr. Rowan Williams to resign, as homosexuality slowly becomes more enshrined with publically undisciplined acts occurring in the Church of England. These acts will only further alienate Global South leaders.
The Church of England is increasingly being hobbled over women bishops, the alienation of its Anglo-Catholic wing and increasingly rebellious homosexual acts involving same-sex unions and non-celibate pansexualists in the pulpit.
Furthermore, the Church of England is irrelevant to 98% of the British public. Their priests are barely able to muster a million of 60 million to turn out on a Sunday morning to worship in tens of thousands of England's rapidly dying churches.
The Archbishop of Canterbury has been described as being "over a barrel" by world-renowned evangelical theologian Dr. J. I. Packer, the patriarch of Anglicanism. He recently called for Dr. Williams to resign. A revisionist Canadian bishop deposed the much beloved theologian so Packer has personally felt the sting of a bishop who has no use for orthodox Anglicanism.
The question that is increasingly being asked by vigorous evangelical post-colonial global south leaders is how can they go on respecting a man and an institution that is not respected by its own people? Why is Dr. Williams' brand of Affirming Catholicism not drawing millions of disaffected nominal Anglicans? Why, indeed.
Why should CAPA bishops pay homage to an evangelically neutered occupant at Lambeth Palace?
Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan stated it well when he said in London recently that the great question for Anglicanism, not just Anglicanism in England, is "How can this tradition be coherent?" I am convinced that what kept the Church of England in its three streams of expression always true was the Book of Common Prayer. It was not that the Catholics broke themselves against the evangelicals. It was that the Catholics broke themselves against the boundaries of the Prayer Book. It was not that the Evangelicals were kept in order by the Catholics., Iit was the evangelicals were kept in the Catholic tradition by the Prayer Book and the same way with what I now call the Pentecostal stream.
"The question is for Anglicanism, will it cohere in the 21st century? The Prayer Book was the magisterium. It was that piece which kept us under the word and gave us our theological understandings. The Great Book Psalter was the common language. We have no common language any more nor do we have a secured theology. The great challenge for 21st century Anglicanism is "Can it cohere? Will it endure?"
Archbishop Ernest said he does not despair. He hopes love and unity will prevail to build the church of God. But that will not happen unless and until the nature of the church is addressed and truth prevails. Then and only then will we see true love and unity.
END
Saint Francis El Paso’s Press Release on the parish’s Decision
Posted by Kendall Harmon at TitusOneNine:
EL PASO, TX – (October 27, 2008) – The vestry of St. Francis on the Hill Episcopal Church, following a vote this week by members of its congregation, has separated from the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande and The Episcopal Church of the USA.
The action to officially separate from The Episcopal Church in the United States (TEC) comes in the wake of over four years of discussions and meetings between St. Francis’s church and The Episcopal Church, as well as with the TEC’s governing body for this Episcopal Church region, the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande. A number of other former Episcopal USA Churches in the U.S. have left the TEC in the past year, including the former St. Clement Episcopal Church in El Paso.
Ron Munden, a St. Francis vestry member who has been involved in the talks since they began, said the separation was mandated by the congregation and ratified by the vestry, “To preserve what the people of St. Francis feel is not only our constitutional freedom but our legal right to worship as true Christians, following the basic tenets and canons on which the original Episcopal Church of the USA was founded, in a church property that we own.”
The Episcopal Church has been in turmoil for a number of years, with what many Episcopalians see as a deviation from the Bible and changes of policies and church laws to fit current cultural moods, rather than holding fast to strong scriptural beliefs. The TEC in the U.S. is part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, which remains at odds with the TEC for a number of those changes and other differences. The rift came to a head in 2003, when the Episcopal Church of the USA consecrated an openly gay bishop and sanctioned same-sex marriages.
“Unfortunately, today in our Church,” said Munden, “many Episcopalians believe that the Church's leadership has wavered from the core values of Christ’s teachings, creating confusion and division among parishes, dioceses, and the Church hierarchy itself.” Munden added, “Many of the churches within the TEC hung on throughout 2008, thinking that the Church would change, or at least allow them to practice their faith in the traditional Anglican manner, which we believe is founded on scripture. It is apparent that is not going to happen, and The Episcopal Church in the USA has firmly stated they are doing what they think is right -- they are not changing. As a result, some churches and even whole dioceses are leaving. For us at St. Francis, we feel we cannot worship and pray in an environment that deviates from traditional church teachings, so we have broken away.”
The Rev. Dr. Felix Orji, Rector of St. Francis on the Hill, explained that his church has been concerned for some time that the Episcopal Church has strayed from such core doctrines as, “The uniqueness of Christ as God and the only Savior of the World, the authority and primacy of Scripture, and the death of Jesus Christ as the only path to salvation.” Fr, Orji also said, “What we have seen over the past three years is a concerted, planned effort by the TEC to ‘go someplace’ that is not in line with our thinking here. The Episcopal Church is in serious transition, and frankly, we believe that no matter how the TEC tries to explain it away, their beliefs today are vastly opposed to long-accepted teachings of the Bible.” Father Orji noted that the controversies surrounding the changes taking place in The Episcopal Church have caused a major decline in church membership. In 1965, the Episcopal Church in the U.S. had 3.5 million members. Today, that’s down to 2.4 million. “We even know of a number of dioceses that are leaving the TEC. What I have feared for some time is becoming a reality,” Fr. Orji said. “The Episcopal Church as we once knew it has changed so drastically to appeal to modern social and cultural trends that it is now unacceptable to many of its core membership.” He added, “If they are striving to become a popular church for today’s trends and culture, they may very well achieve that. But it will be a much smaller church. The Episcopal Church of the USA today has little resemblance remaining to the foundations of the original Episcopal Church in the Anglican Communion.”
St. Francis on the Hill church leaders say The Episcopal Church of the USA and the Rio Grande Diocese may try to claim a right on the St. Francis church and property. “We have the title and deed to our property,” said Munden. Since the Episcopal Church passed a Canon, or church law, in the 1970’s that said all Episcopal churches’ properties were to be held in trust by the Diocese for the U.S. Episcopal Church, St. Francis on the Hill has denied this claim in official notices to the TEC. “As early as 2004, we let it be known that our by-laws clearly outlined how and why we owned our own property,” said Munden. “We built this church with money from our parishioners – not one dime came from the Episcopal Church or from the Diocese. This church and grounds belong to St. Francis on the Hill, and The Episcopal Church clearly knows of our unique situation here and our position on this matter.”
Fr. Orji said that his congregation has a great sense of relief now that the transition away from the Episcopal Church has taken place. “This has been a long ordeal,” said the minister. “After years of debate, communications to and from the Church and Diocese, and waiting, this controversy is finally over. The membership has elected to follow a path they believe in, and the fact that we have taken those positive steps is comforting to us all. I think collectively, as an independent Church, we are more peaceful.” Fr. Orji added that the fight may not be over for the Episcopal Church, but it is for his congregation. “We made our choice. We are a church that will now worship and carry on our ministries without encumbrance. The TEC may not view it that way, but we hope they do. It is time for all of us to get away from politics that don’t belong in our church and back to the real meaning of Christianity and Christ’s teachings.”
EL PASO, TX – (October 27, 2008) – The vestry of St. Francis on the Hill Episcopal Church, following a vote this week by members of its congregation, has separated from the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande and The Episcopal Church of the USA.
The action to officially separate from The Episcopal Church in the United States (TEC) comes in the wake of over four years of discussions and meetings between St. Francis’s church and The Episcopal Church, as well as with the TEC’s governing body for this Episcopal Church region, the Episcopal Diocese of the Rio Grande. A number of other former Episcopal USA Churches in the U.S. have left the TEC in the past year, including the former St. Clement Episcopal Church in El Paso.
Ron Munden, a St. Francis vestry member who has been involved in the talks since they began, said the separation was mandated by the congregation and ratified by the vestry, “To preserve what the people of St. Francis feel is not only our constitutional freedom but our legal right to worship as true Christians, following the basic tenets and canons on which the original Episcopal Church of the USA was founded, in a church property that we own.”
The Episcopal Church has been in turmoil for a number of years, with what many Episcopalians see as a deviation from the Bible and changes of policies and church laws to fit current cultural moods, rather than holding fast to strong scriptural beliefs. The TEC in the U.S. is part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, which remains at odds with the TEC for a number of those changes and other differences. The rift came to a head in 2003, when the Episcopal Church of the USA consecrated an openly gay bishop and sanctioned same-sex marriages.
“Unfortunately, today in our Church,” said Munden, “many Episcopalians believe that the Church's leadership has wavered from the core values of Christ’s teachings, creating confusion and division among parishes, dioceses, and the Church hierarchy itself.” Munden added, “Many of the churches within the TEC hung on throughout 2008, thinking that the Church would change, or at least allow them to practice their faith in the traditional Anglican manner, which we believe is founded on scripture. It is apparent that is not going to happen, and The Episcopal Church in the USA has firmly stated they are doing what they think is right -- they are not changing. As a result, some churches and even whole dioceses are leaving. For us at St. Francis, we feel we cannot worship and pray in an environment that deviates from traditional church teachings, so we have broken away.”
The Rev. Dr. Felix Orji, Rector of St. Francis on the Hill, explained that his church has been concerned for some time that the Episcopal Church has strayed from such core doctrines as, “The uniqueness of Christ as God and the only Savior of the World, the authority and primacy of Scripture, and the death of Jesus Christ as the only path to salvation.” Fr, Orji also said, “What we have seen over the past three years is a concerted, planned effort by the TEC to ‘go someplace’ that is not in line with our thinking here. The Episcopal Church is in serious transition, and frankly, we believe that no matter how the TEC tries to explain it away, their beliefs today are vastly opposed to long-accepted teachings of the Bible.” Father Orji noted that the controversies surrounding the changes taking place in The Episcopal Church have caused a major decline in church membership. In 1965, the Episcopal Church in the U.S. had 3.5 million members. Today, that’s down to 2.4 million. “We even know of a number of dioceses that are leaving the TEC. What I have feared for some time is becoming a reality,” Fr. Orji said. “The Episcopal Church as we once knew it has changed so drastically to appeal to modern social and cultural trends that it is now unacceptable to many of its core membership.” He added, “If they are striving to become a popular church for today’s trends and culture, they may very well achieve that. But it will be a much smaller church. The Episcopal Church of the USA today has little resemblance remaining to the foundations of the original Episcopal Church in the Anglican Communion.”
St. Francis on the Hill church leaders say The Episcopal Church of the USA and the Rio Grande Diocese may try to claim a right on the St. Francis church and property. “We have the title and deed to our property,” said Munden. Since the Episcopal Church passed a Canon, or church law, in the 1970’s that said all Episcopal churches’ properties were to be held in trust by the Diocese for the U.S. Episcopal Church, St. Francis on the Hill has denied this claim in official notices to the TEC. “As early as 2004, we let it be known that our by-laws clearly outlined how and why we owned our own property,” said Munden. “We built this church with money from our parishioners – not one dime came from the Episcopal Church or from the Diocese. This church and grounds belong to St. Francis on the Hill, and The Episcopal Church clearly knows of our unique situation here and our position on this matter.”
Fr. Orji said that his congregation has a great sense of relief now that the transition away from the Episcopal Church has taken place. “This has been a long ordeal,” said the minister. “After years of debate, communications to and from the Church and Diocese, and waiting, this controversy is finally over. The membership has elected to follow a path they believe in, and the fact that we have taken those positive steps is comforting to us all. I think collectively, as an independent Church, we are more peaceful.” Fr. Orji added that the fight may not be over for the Episcopal Church, but it is for his congregation. “We made our choice. We are a church that will now worship and carry on our ministries without encumbrance. The TEC may not view it that way, but we hope they do. It is time for all of us to get away from politics that don’t belong in our church and back to the real meaning of Christianity and Christ’s teachings.”
Monday, October 27, 2008
California vote to depose priests may backfire for Episcopal Church
Church of England Newspaper 10.24.08 p 6. October 23, 2008
Posted by George Conger:
The loyalist faction of the Diocese of San Joaquin has charged 52 clergymen of the diocese with having “abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church” and has asked provisional Bishop Jerry Lamb to depose them, unless they “recant” their sins and “return to the Episcopal Church” within six months.
The Oct 17 statement was issued by the Standing Committee of the “Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin,” a provisional body created by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori after the Diocese of San Joaquin voted to secede last year.
However, legal analysts note that by charging the 52 clergymen with “abandonment”, the provisional diocese has dealt itself a potentially fatal blow in its litigation with Bishop John-David Schofield and the “Anglican” diocese, as it may constitute an admission that the group led by Bishop Lamb is not a lawfully constituted entity.
In the provisional diocese’s press statement, the standing committee asserted the 52 clergymen had violated the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church by their “support of attempts to remove the diocese from the Episcopal Church, and their repudiation of the ecclesiastical authority of the Episcopal Church” and Bishop Lamb.
It believed that “individuals may voluntarily leave the church. Parishes and diocese are integral parts of the church, and may not leave without the express consent of the governing bodies of the church”—a point contested by the breakaway group, and also not found in the Episcopal Church’s constitution and canons.
However, legal analyst and canonical scholar A.S. Haley notes that “by charging these 52 clergy with ‘abandonment’, the pseudo-diocese of San Joaquin is making a legal admission that these same clergy were canonically part of its makeup over the past eleven months.”
This may prove fatal to the Bishop Lamb group’s legal challenge to the diocese, Haley said, as it is an admission that “when the pseudo-diocese held its special convention last March 29, those 52 [clergy] then counted towards the determination of whether a quorum of its clergy were in fact present to transact lawful business, such as the approval of the Rt. Rev. Jerry A. Lamb as provisional bishop, and authorizing him to commence litigation against the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield.”
Under the rules of the diocese, a quorum to conduct business at a convention must include one-third of all the clergy. At the convention that voted for secession in Dec 2007, 82 clergy, including most of the 52 charged with abandonment were present. At the special convention called by Bishop Schori on March 29, 2008, only 21 clergy were present—28 were required for a valid quorum.
Mr. Haley noted that the absence of a valid quorum meant that “the business transacted on March 29 was null and void. Bishop Lamb was not validly approved as Provisional Bishop; the ‘standing committee’ that was purportedly elected was not validly chosen, and currently has no valid authority to charge any clergy with ‘abandonment’, and neither Bishop Lamb nor his “diocese” is a proper party plaintiff in the current lawsuit.”
If the diocese had argued the 52 secessionist clergy were no longer members of the diocese for purposes of a quorum, so that the rump group of 21 comprised a lawful quorum, “that would have deprived them of their ability to depose those clergy,” Mr. Haley noted.
By seeking to punish the 52 secessionist clergy, the provisional diocese led by Bishop Lamb, may well have scuppered its legal claim to the breakaway diocese’s property, Mr. Haley suggested.
Posted by George Conger:
The loyalist faction of the Diocese of San Joaquin has charged 52 clergymen of the diocese with having “abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church” and has asked provisional Bishop Jerry Lamb to depose them, unless they “recant” their sins and “return to the Episcopal Church” within six months.
The Oct 17 statement was issued by the Standing Committee of the “Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin,” a provisional body created by Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori after the Diocese of San Joaquin voted to secede last year.
However, legal analysts note that by charging the 52 clergymen with “abandonment”, the provisional diocese has dealt itself a potentially fatal blow in its litigation with Bishop John-David Schofield and the “Anglican” diocese, as it may constitute an admission that the group led by Bishop Lamb is not a lawfully constituted entity.
In the provisional diocese’s press statement, the standing committee asserted the 52 clergymen had violated the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church by their “support of attempts to remove the diocese from the Episcopal Church, and their repudiation of the ecclesiastical authority of the Episcopal Church” and Bishop Lamb.
It believed that “individuals may voluntarily leave the church. Parishes and diocese are integral parts of the church, and may not leave without the express consent of the governing bodies of the church”—a point contested by the breakaway group, and also not found in the Episcopal Church’s constitution and canons.
However, legal analyst and canonical scholar A.S. Haley notes that “by charging these 52 clergy with ‘abandonment’, the pseudo-diocese of San Joaquin is making a legal admission that these same clergy were canonically part of its makeup over the past eleven months.”
This may prove fatal to the Bishop Lamb group’s legal challenge to the diocese, Haley said, as it is an admission that “when the pseudo-diocese held its special convention last March 29, those 52 [clergy] then counted towards the determination of whether a quorum of its clergy were in fact present to transact lawful business, such as the approval of the Rt. Rev. Jerry A. Lamb as provisional bishop, and authorizing him to commence litigation against the Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield.”
Under the rules of the diocese, a quorum to conduct business at a convention must include one-third of all the clergy. At the convention that voted for secession in Dec 2007, 82 clergy, including most of the 52 charged with abandonment were present. At the special convention called by Bishop Schori on March 29, 2008, only 21 clergy were present—28 were required for a valid quorum.
Mr. Haley noted that the absence of a valid quorum meant that “the business transacted on March 29 was null and void. Bishop Lamb was not validly approved as Provisional Bishop; the ‘standing committee’ that was purportedly elected was not validly chosen, and currently has no valid authority to charge any clergy with ‘abandonment’, and neither Bishop Lamb nor his “diocese” is a proper party plaintiff in the current lawsuit.”
If the diocese had argued the 52 secessionist clergy were no longer members of the diocese for purposes of a quorum, so that the rump group of 21 comprised a lawful quorum, “that would have deprived them of their ability to depose those clergy,” Mr. Haley noted.
By seeking to punish the 52 secessionist clergy, the provisional diocese led by Bishop Lamb, may well have scuppered its legal claim to the breakaway diocese’s property, Mr. Haley suggested.
Back and Forth in San Joaquin
From VirtueOnline:
The Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin Issues Notice of Abandonment to Former Clergy
The Rt. Rev. Jerry A. Lamb, Bishop
The Rev. Canon Mark H. Hall, Canon to the Ordinary
* The Rt. Rev. Jerry Lamb, Bishop; jerrylamb@diosanjoaquin.org; 209.952.0006
* The Rev. Canon Mark Hall, Canon to the Ordinary; markhall@diosanjoaquin.org; 209.952.0006
* Michael Glass, Esq., Chancellor; mglass@diosanjoaquin.org; 415.454.8485
* Nancy Key, Communications Director; communications@diosanjoaquin.org; 559.269.9013
* Diocesan Website: www.diosanjoaquin.org
OCTOBER 17, 2008
Episcopal Diocese charges clergy with abandonment of communion
The Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin today determined that sixteen deacons and thirty-six priests had abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church. Findings against each of the fifty-two clergy were based on specific violations of the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church related to their support of attempts to remove the diocese from the Episcopal Church, and their repudiation of the ecclesiastical authority of the Episcopal Church and the diocese.
Should the bishop concur with these findings, the clergy will be inhibited and not allowed to function as an Episcopal priest or deacon, or be employed by an Episcopal congregation. Episcopal Church law provides clergy six months to recant and return to the Episcopal Church. Clergy who do not recant will be removed from the ministry of the Episcopal Church.
"This action," explained the Rt. Rev. Jerry Lamb, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, "does not imply a moral judgment of an individual clergy person. It speaks only about the person's relationship to the Episcopal Church. I recognize that these people may have many wonderful gifts for ministry, and perhaps these talents could be used in another Christian denomination."
The Episcopal Church asserts that only individuals may voluntarily leave the church. Parishes and diocese are integral parts of the church, and may not leave without the express consent of the governing bodies of the church. All clergy who are ordained in the church take a vow to "conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church," and to obey their bishop and other ministers who may have authority over them and their work.
Clergy charged with Abandonment of the Communion are listed on the page following.
Clergy Charged with Abandonment of Communion of the Episcopal Church
October 17, 2008
The Rev. Judith Battershell, Ridgecrest
The Rev. David Brown, Woodlake
The Rev. Madeline Burton Ahwahnee
The Rev. Wes Clare, Tehachapi
The Rev. Donald Cleave, San Diego
The Rev. John Combs, Los Banos
The Rev. Dale Cox, Springville
The Rev. Karl Dietze, Bakersfield
The Rev. William R. Eastman, Modesto
The Rev. Jack Estes, Bakersfield
The Rev. Jack Faucett, Bakersfield
The Rev. Canon David M. Foster, Stockton
The Rev. Thomas Foster, Modesto
The Rev. William Gandenberger, Clovis
The Rev. Erin Giles, Manteca
The Rev. Howard Giles, Manteca
The Rev. Laurel Greene, Fresno
The Rev. Woodrow Gubuan, Stockton
The Rev. Robert Hilliard, Livingston
The Rev. Richard L. James, Visalia
The Rev. Buck Jones, Atwater
The Rev. Michael Jun, Bakersfield
The Rev. Gordon Kamai, Oakhurst
The Rev. Linda Klug, Bishop
The Rev. Wolfgang Krismanits, Sonora
The Rev. Robert Latour, Porterville
The Rev. Cathy Leach, Three Rivers
The Rev. Frances Levy, Visalia
The Rev. Tom Maggitti, Modesto
The Rev. Jeannee Marker, Avenal
The Rev. Van McCalister, Tulare
The Rev. Michael McClenaghan, Modesto
The Rev. Arlen Neckels, Valley Springs
The Rev. Stephen G. Nicholls, Delano
The Rev. Ronald Parry, Merced
The Rev. Tancredo Pastores, Jr., Visalia
The Rev. Carlos Raines, Clovis
The Rev. John Reibe, Bakersfield
The Rev. Robert R. Richard, Bakersfield
The Rev. Kenneth Richards, Clovis
The Rev. Roger Riggsby, Sutter Creek
The Rev. Jerry Roberts, Copperopolis
The Rev. Donald Seeks, Reedley
The Rev. James L. Snell, Fresno
The Rev. Kay Sprague, Bishop
The Rev. James Stout, Copperopolis
The Rev. Mary Swann, Sonora
The Rev. Charles Threewit, Palmdale
The Rev. Robert Tobias, Oakdale
The Rev. John Paul Wadlin, Ridgecrest
The Rev. Andrew Watson, Reedley
The Rev. Jane Williams, Sanger
*****
Diocese of San Joaquin (Anglican) Issues Response to Lamb
Fresno, California
October 17, 2008
Anglican Holy Orders Valid in California and World Wide
On December 8, 2007, the Diocese of San Joaquin, by overwhelming majority vote (90%), became affiliated with the Province of the Southern Cone, a constituent national church in the worldwide Anglican Communion. The vast majority of the priests and deacons serving in the Diocese of San Joaquin, representing over 40 churches, chose to remain with Bishop John-David Schofield and the Diocese of San Joaquin and their Holy Orders were officially recognized by the Ecclesiastical Authority of the Province of the Southern Cone. Accordingly, those priests and deacons have been accepted as ordained Anglican Clergy across the world wide Anglican Communion.
The Episcopal Church no longer has any jurisdiction over the Anglican Clergy of the Diocese of San Joaquin, and any actions taken by The Episcopal Church concerning their ecclesiastical status within the worldwide Anglican Communion is of no force or effect.
Bishop Jerry Lamb publically acknowledges this fact in his October 10th Friday Reflection by stating that his purported inhibition of Anglican Clergy in San Joaquin “implies no moral judgment of an individual clergy person. It speaks only about the person’s relationship to the Episcopal Church.
The person can of course function in another church that may recognize their ordination.”
+John-David Schofield
Anglican Bishop of San Joaquin
---------------
The Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin Issues Notice of Abandonment to Former Clergy
The Rt. Rev. Jerry A. Lamb, Bishop
The Rev. Canon Mark H. Hall, Canon to the Ordinary
* The Rt. Rev. Jerry Lamb, Bishop; jerrylamb@diosanjoaquin.org; 209.952.0006
* The Rev. Canon Mark Hall, Canon to the Ordinary; markhall@diosanjoaquin.org; 209.952.0006
* Michael Glass, Esq., Chancellor; mglass@diosanjoaquin.org; 415.454.8485
* Nancy Key, Communications Director; communications@diosanjoaquin.org; 559.269.9013
* Diocesan Website: www.diosanjoaquin.org
OCTOBER 17, 2008
Episcopal Diocese charges clergy with abandonment of communion
The Standing Committee of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin today determined that sixteen deacons and thirty-six priests had abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church. Findings against each of the fifty-two clergy were based on specific violations of the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church related to their support of attempts to remove the diocese from the Episcopal Church, and their repudiation of the ecclesiastical authority of the Episcopal Church and the diocese.
Should the bishop concur with these findings, the clergy will be inhibited and not allowed to function as an Episcopal priest or deacon, or be employed by an Episcopal congregation. Episcopal Church law provides clergy six months to recant and return to the Episcopal Church. Clergy who do not recant will be removed from the ministry of the Episcopal Church.
"This action," explained the Rt. Rev. Jerry Lamb, Bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin, "does not imply a moral judgment of an individual clergy person. It speaks only about the person's relationship to the Episcopal Church. I recognize that these people may have many wonderful gifts for ministry, and perhaps these talents could be used in another Christian denomination."
The Episcopal Church asserts that only individuals may voluntarily leave the church. Parishes and diocese are integral parts of the church, and may not leave without the express consent of the governing bodies of the church. All clergy who are ordained in the church take a vow to "conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church," and to obey their bishop and other ministers who may have authority over them and their work.
Clergy charged with Abandonment of the Communion are listed on the page following.
Clergy Charged with Abandonment of Communion of the Episcopal Church
October 17, 2008
The Rev. Judith Battershell, Ridgecrest
The Rev. David Brown, Woodlake
The Rev. Madeline Burton Ahwahnee
The Rev. Wes Clare, Tehachapi
The Rev. Donald Cleave, San Diego
The Rev. John Combs, Los Banos
The Rev. Dale Cox, Springville
The Rev. Karl Dietze, Bakersfield
The Rev. William R. Eastman, Modesto
The Rev. Jack Estes, Bakersfield
The Rev. Jack Faucett, Bakersfield
The Rev. Canon David M. Foster, Stockton
The Rev. Thomas Foster, Modesto
The Rev. William Gandenberger, Clovis
The Rev. Erin Giles, Manteca
The Rev. Howard Giles, Manteca
The Rev. Laurel Greene, Fresno
The Rev. Woodrow Gubuan, Stockton
The Rev. Robert Hilliard, Livingston
The Rev. Richard L. James, Visalia
The Rev. Buck Jones, Atwater
The Rev. Michael Jun, Bakersfield
The Rev. Gordon Kamai, Oakhurst
The Rev. Linda Klug, Bishop
The Rev. Wolfgang Krismanits, Sonora
The Rev. Robert Latour, Porterville
The Rev. Cathy Leach, Three Rivers
The Rev. Frances Levy, Visalia
The Rev. Tom Maggitti, Modesto
The Rev. Jeannee Marker, Avenal
The Rev. Van McCalister, Tulare
The Rev. Michael McClenaghan, Modesto
The Rev. Arlen Neckels, Valley Springs
The Rev. Stephen G. Nicholls, Delano
The Rev. Ronald Parry, Merced
The Rev. Tancredo Pastores, Jr., Visalia
The Rev. Carlos Raines, Clovis
The Rev. John Reibe, Bakersfield
The Rev. Robert R. Richard, Bakersfield
The Rev. Kenneth Richards, Clovis
The Rev. Roger Riggsby, Sutter Creek
The Rev. Jerry Roberts, Copperopolis
The Rev. Donald Seeks, Reedley
The Rev. James L. Snell, Fresno
The Rev. Kay Sprague, Bishop
The Rev. James Stout, Copperopolis
The Rev. Mary Swann, Sonora
The Rev. Charles Threewit, Palmdale
The Rev. Robert Tobias, Oakdale
The Rev. John Paul Wadlin, Ridgecrest
The Rev. Andrew Watson, Reedley
The Rev. Jane Williams, Sanger
*****
Diocese of San Joaquin (Anglican) Issues Response to Lamb
Fresno, California
October 17, 2008
Anglican Holy Orders Valid in California and World Wide
On December 8, 2007, the Diocese of San Joaquin, by overwhelming majority vote (90%), became affiliated with the Province of the Southern Cone, a constituent national church in the worldwide Anglican Communion. The vast majority of the priests and deacons serving in the Diocese of San Joaquin, representing over 40 churches, chose to remain with Bishop John-David Schofield and the Diocese of San Joaquin and their Holy Orders were officially recognized by the Ecclesiastical Authority of the Province of the Southern Cone. Accordingly, those priests and deacons have been accepted as ordained Anglican Clergy across the world wide Anglican Communion.
The Episcopal Church no longer has any jurisdiction over the Anglican Clergy of the Diocese of San Joaquin, and any actions taken by The Episcopal Church concerning their ecclesiastical status within the worldwide Anglican Communion is of no force or effect.
Bishop Jerry Lamb publically acknowledges this fact in his October 10th Friday Reflection by stating that his purported inhibition of Anglican Clergy in San Joaquin “implies no moral judgment of an individual clergy person. It speaks only about the person’s relationship to the Episcopal Church.
The person can of course function in another church that may recognize their ordination.”
+John-David Schofield
Anglican Bishop of San Joaquin
---------------
DIOCESE OF CENTRAL NEW YORK: Dwindling Finances Force Staff Layoffs
This is a more complete version of a story posted last week. You can see a full story on the ordination of Jeffrey Altman and Bishop Adams's sad statements in another post below. ed.
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
10/17/2008
Citing declining income, the Bishop of the Diocese of Central New York, Gladstone "Skip" Adams has announced staff layoffs in a letter to his clergy, wardens and standing.
"It is clear that the financial realities of today's economy are creating challenges for our congregations in terms of assessment and investment revenue. Increased energy costs place additional pressures on already stretched budgets. These challenges obviously impact the financial resources available on the Diocesan level for staff, programming, and ministry," he wrote.
The diocese recently filed a lawsuit against the Church of the Good Shepherd in Binghamton, New York, in an effort to seize the church building, the parish hall, and the rectory. This is the third church Adams has moved to seize since 2006, and the second church he has actually sued.
One other church, St. Andrew's Church in nearby Vestal, New York, surrendered its property to the bishop rather than face a lawsuit. That church building was taken over by the Episcopal diocese shortly before Christmas of 2007 and is now vacant and for sale. The congregation is worshiping elsewhere and thriving.
St. Andrew's, Syracuse, the first church Adams sued has also moved out of their buildings and those buildings are up for sale. In addition, that church, an (AMIA) congregation has spawned Westside Anglican Fellowship (WAF) a (CANA) congregation. WAF will install their first priest-in-charge next Sunday. CANA Bishop David Bena will ordain and install Dr. Jeffrey Altman, Professor of Psychology at Roberts Wesleyan College at the Westside Anglican Fellowship.
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
10/17/2008
Citing declining income, the Bishop of the Diocese of Central New York, Gladstone "Skip" Adams has announced staff layoffs in a letter to his clergy, wardens and standing.
"It is clear that the financial realities of today's economy are creating challenges for our congregations in terms of assessment and investment revenue. Increased energy costs place additional pressures on already stretched budgets. These challenges obviously impact the financial resources available on the Diocesan level for staff, programming, and ministry," he wrote.
The diocese recently filed a lawsuit against the Church of the Good Shepherd in Binghamton, New York, in an effort to seize the church building, the parish hall, and the rectory. This is the third church Adams has moved to seize since 2006, and the second church he has actually sued.
One other church, St. Andrew's Church in nearby Vestal, New York, surrendered its property to the bishop rather than face a lawsuit. That church building was taken over by the Episcopal diocese shortly before Christmas of 2007 and is now vacant and for sale. The congregation is worshiping elsewhere and thriving.
St. Andrew's, Syracuse, the first church Adams sued has also moved out of their buildings and those buildings are up for sale. In addition, that church, an (AMIA) congregation has spawned Westside Anglican Fellowship (WAF) a (CANA) congregation. WAF will install their first priest-in-charge next Sunday. CANA Bishop David Bena will ordain and install Dr. Jeffrey Altman, Professor of Psychology at Roberts Wesleyan College at the Westside Anglican Fellowship.
EL PASO, TX: St. Francis On The Hill Votes To Leave TEC
A second story on the first parish that I served following seminary. The earlier story was posted last week. ed.
Parish Will Fight For Property
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
10/22/2008
The 150-family evangelical church of St. Francis on the Hill has voted unanimously to formally leave the Episcopal Church.
Their attorney, Richard Munsinger, immediately filed a motion for summary judgment in the District Court of El Paso seeking a decision on title to the property, which is owned by the parish situated in Northwest El Paso.
The Rev. Dr. Felix Orji, the Nigerian-born rector of the parish, told VOL late last night that his vestry voted overwhelmingly to take the parish out of The Episcopal Church having waited two years for The Episcopal Church to repent and for the Diocese of the Rio Grande to leave TEC. "They have refused to repent of their heterodoxy, and to repent of their homosexual positions," he told VOL.
"On November 19, 2006, the congregation voted by 90% to begin the process of leaving TEC. There has been no repentance, now we must go. The Episcopal Church has not changed by deposing Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan and it is clear to us the Diocese of the Rio Grande is not thinking of leaving TEC."
Orji said he will come under the ecclesiastical authority of CANA, a Nigerian Anglican Province church plant in North America and Bishop Martyn Minns, but his parish has not yet voted on what it will do.
"We have started losing members. People are leaving, they are tired of waiting. So the vestry decided to act on the mandate, the congregation gave two years ago. The vestry was mandated to monitor and make a decision on behalf of the parish. We held four town hall meetings to find out what people thought and an overwhelming majority voted to leave TEC. The full vestry voted unanimously in favor of going."
Orji said he talked with Rio Grande Bishop Pro Tempore William Frey who told him that parishioners could leave the church, but they could not take the property. Ownership will now be decided in court.
Orji said the ongoing persecution of orthodox Christians in The Episcopal Church is reprehensible. "The issue is that Scripture (the Bible) is no longer considered authoritative, that is the fundamental issue."
The Nigerian priest is no stranger to controversy. He was a priest for six years at St. John's, Shaughnessy, in Vancouver, BC, working with orthodox rector the Rev. David Short, in the revisionist Diocese of New Westminster under Bishop Michael Ingham. Ingham recently deposed Short.
END
Parish Will Fight For Property
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
10/22/2008
The 150-family evangelical church of St. Francis on the Hill has voted unanimously to formally leave the Episcopal Church.
Their attorney, Richard Munsinger, immediately filed a motion for summary judgment in the District Court of El Paso seeking a decision on title to the property, which is owned by the parish situated in Northwest El Paso.
The Rev. Dr. Felix Orji, the Nigerian-born rector of the parish, told VOL late last night that his vestry voted overwhelmingly to take the parish out of The Episcopal Church having waited two years for The Episcopal Church to repent and for the Diocese of the Rio Grande to leave TEC. "They have refused to repent of their heterodoxy, and to repent of their homosexual positions," he told VOL.
"On November 19, 2006, the congregation voted by 90% to begin the process of leaving TEC. There has been no repentance, now we must go. The Episcopal Church has not changed by deposing Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan and it is clear to us the Diocese of the Rio Grande is not thinking of leaving TEC."
Orji said he will come under the ecclesiastical authority of CANA, a Nigerian Anglican Province church plant in North America and Bishop Martyn Minns, but his parish has not yet voted on what it will do.
"We have started losing members. People are leaving, they are tired of waiting. So the vestry decided to act on the mandate, the congregation gave two years ago. The vestry was mandated to monitor and make a decision on behalf of the parish. We held four town hall meetings to find out what people thought and an overwhelming majority voted to leave TEC. The full vestry voted unanimously in favor of going."
Orji said he talked with Rio Grande Bishop Pro Tempore William Frey who told him that parishioners could leave the church, but they could not take the property. Ownership will now be decided in court.
Orji said the ongoing persecution of orthodox Christians in The Episcopal Church is reprehensible. "The issue is that Scripture (the Bible) is no longer considered authoritative, that is the fundamental issue."
The Nigerian priest is no stranger to controversy. He was a priest for six years at St. John's, Shaughnessy, in Vancouver, BC, working with orthodox rector the Rev. David Short, in the revisionist Diocese of New Westminster under Bishop Michael Ingham. Ingham recently deposed Short.
END
CANA Ordination in Syracuse
It was a beautiful service. The story says that the church has 25 members, but I can say that the only time there have been as few as 25 worshippers when I have led worship there was for a service this summer. I believe that their average attendance on Sundays is higher than what is stated in this article.
Bishop Adams is reported to have said that the two CANA churches in CNY and two other churches that have left the DCNY are a minority of pecusa. Actually, we are not associated with pecusa and while our numbers are smaller than pecusa at present, we are growing while pecusa is losing a thousand members a week. Bishop Adams fails to embrace in his perspective that there are reasons that make a thousand members leave pecusa every week. For us who have left, embracing heresy and walking apart from the Anglican Communion are not ways of faithfulness to God. We do not believe God is accepting of the "diverse theological perspectives" that pecusa embraces; God has said as much in His Holy Scriptures. If Adams could try for once to stop acting on feelings and attempt to do some thinking maybe he could be part of the solution for pecusa rather than continuing to contribute to the crisis in Anglicanism.
It is a shame that a bishop of the church does not know where he is headed or where he is leading his people. If he embraced the Scriptures rather than "diverse theological perspectives" he would have a firm understanding of where he is headed and where he is leading his people. By the grace of God, he might even wake up, turn around, and lead his people into righteousness. And now, onto the story... ed.
From the Syracuse Post-Standard:
Ordination spotlights church rift
Group that broke from Episcopal Diocese ordains a priest today in Geddes.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
By Renée K. Gadoua
Staff writer
Jeffrey Altman will be ordained an Anglican priest today in a ceremony that reflects Central New York's role in the nationwide growth of a separate Anglican church in the United States.
Altman will lead Sunday services at Westside Anglican Fellowship, a Geddes congregation of about 25 people who began worshipping together after their former congregation, St. Andrew's Episcopal Church in Syracuse, split from the local Episcopal Diocese. They meet at Syracuse Vineyard Church.
It is one of dozens of breakaway congregations that have started Anglican communities in the five years since the U.S. Episcopal Church consecrated an openly gay bishop. Four groups from three churches in the Episcopal Diocese of Central New York have split from the 2.2 million-member national Episcopal Church.
The Episcopal Church is the U.S. branch of the 80 million-member worldwide Anglican Communion.
The breakaway groups have aligned themselves with orthodox Anglican branches, most of them in Africa.
Earlier this month, the Diocese of Pittsburgh left the Episcopal Church. The Diocese of San Joaquin, Calif., has also done so, and at least two more dioceses expect to vote to leave the denomination.
Most of the groups leaving the denomination oppose the ordination of V. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire, who recently entered into a civil union with his partner of 20 years. These groups consider homosexuality to be incompatible with Scripture.
But Altman, a psychology professor at Roberts Wesleyan College in Rochester, said the split from the Episcopal Church runs deeper than the hot topics of opposition to ordaining a gay bishop or opposition to ordaining women.
"They are symptomatic of the larger problem, which is really one of the true foundation upon which the church rests," he said. "Where does truth come from? Do we make it up or should Scripture guide us?"
Altman, 62, is married. He and his wife, also a college professor, have an adult daughter and a new grandson.
He said his path to ordination began with a pull to become an Episcopal priest in his 20s, but "other events intervened."
For about 30 years he worshipped with the United Methodist Church. "I enjoyed it, but at heart I'm an Anglican in the broadest sense," he said.
He earned a bachelor's degree from Roberts Wesleyan College, a master's of divinity degree from Asbury Theological Seminary in Kentucky and a doctorate from the University of Rochester.
Altman was ordained a deacon in May by Bishop David Bena, who will preside at today's ordination. Bena is the former assistant bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Albany; he is now a bishop in the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, an Anglican missionary effort in the United States sponsored by the Church of Nigeria.
Raymond Dague, a Syracuse lawyer who is a former member of St. Andrew's Church in Syracuse and a lay leader at Westside Anglican Fellowship, said today's service is a turning point for the congregation.
"It's big for us," he said. "He's (Altman) a good guy and a good fit for us."
Dague is also assistant chancellor to the Episcopal Diocese of Albany.
Syracuse Bishop Gladstone "Skip" Adams, spiritual leader of 93 parishes from the Pennsylvania border to the St. Lawrence River and from Utica to Waterloo, agreed that the developments at Westside Anglican Fellowship reflect the shift in the American Episcopal Church.
"I give them my best wishes and blessings as they seek to be faithful in the way they feel they need to be," Adams said Friday.
But he said he's sad that three congregations - St. Andrew's in Syracuse, St. Andrew's in Vestal and Church of the Good Shepherd in Binghamton - have left the diocese and the denomination. He also noted the dissenters locally and in the United States represent a minority of the U.S. Episcopalian Church.
In addition to Westside Anglican Fellowship, another group from the former St. Andrew's in Syracuse, St. Andrew's Anglican Church, has aligned itself with the Anglican Church of Rwanda and continues to worship.
"I continue to believe from my perspective there is no need for people to be leaving," Adams said. "We as a church are very embracing and open to many and diverse theological perspectives."
Altman said he and the congregation bear no ill will toward the local or national Episcopal Church.
"My expectation is we're on a journey together and none of us really knows where it's going to come out," he said. "We're just doing what we feel it is right to do."
Bishop Adams is reported to have said that the two CANA churches in CNY and two other churches that have left the DCNY are a minority of pecusa. Actually, we are not associated with pecusa and while our numbers are smaller than pecusa at present, we are growing while pecusa is losing a thousand members a week. Bishop Adams fails to embrace in his perspective that there are reasons that make a thousand members leave pecusa every week. For us who have left, embracing heresy and walking apart from the Anglican Communion are not ways of faithfulness to God. We do not believe God is accepting of the "diverse theological perspectives" that pecusa embraces; God has said as much in His Holy Scriptures. If Adams could try for once to stop acting on feelings and attempt to do some thinking maybe he could be part of the solution for pecusa rather than continuing to contribute to the crisis in Anglicanism.
It is a shame that a bishop of the church does not know where he is headed or where he is leading his people. If he embraced the Scriptures rather than "diverse theological perspectives" he would have a firm understanding of where he is headed and where he is leading his people. By the grace of God, he might even wake up, turn around, and lead his people into righteousness. And now, onto the story... ed.
From the Syracuse Post-Standard:
Ordination spotlights church rift
Group that broke from Episcopal Diocese ordains a priest today in Geddes.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
By Renée K. Gadoua
Staff writer
Jeffrey Altman will be ordained an Anglican priest today in a ceremony that reflects Central New York's role in the nationwide growth of a separate Anglican church in the United States.
Altman will lead Sunday services at Westside Anglican Fellowship, a Geddes congregation of about 25 people who began worshipping together after their former congregation, St. Andrew's Episcopal Church in Syracuse, split from the local Episcopal Diocese. They meet at Syracuse Vineyard Church.
It is one of dozens of breakaway congregations that have started Anglican communities in the five years since the U.S. Episcopal Church consecrated an openly gay bishop. Four groups from three churches in the Episcopal Diocese of Central New York have split from the 2.2 million-member national Episcopal Church.
The Episcopal Church is the U.S. branch of the 80 million-member worldwide Anglican Communion.
The breakaway groups have aligned themselves with orthodox Anglican branches, most of them in Africa.
Earlier this month, the Diocese of Pittsburgh left the Episcopal Church. The Diocese of San Joaquin, Calif., has also done so, and at least two more dioceses expect to vote to leave the denomination.
Most of the groups leaving the denomination oppose the ordination of V. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire, who recently entered into a civil union with his partner of 20 years. These groups consider homosexuality to be incompatible with Scripture.
But Altman, a psychology professor at Roberts Wesleyan College in Rochester, said the split from the Episcopal Church runs deeper than the hot topics of opposition to ordaining a gay bishop or opposition to ordaining women.
"They are symptomatic of the larger problem, which is really one of the true foundation upon which the church rests," he said. "Where does truth come from? Do we make it up or should Scripture guide us?"
Altman, 62, is married. He and his wife, also a college professor, have an adult daughter and a new grandson.
He said his path to ordination began with a pull to become an Episcopal priest in his 20s, but "other events intervened."
For about 30 years he worshipped with the United Methodist Church. "I enjoyed it, but at heart I'm an Anglican in the broadest sense," he said.
He earned a bachelor's degree from Roberts Wesleyan College, a master's of divinity degree from Asbury Theological Seminary in Kentucky and a doctorate from the University of Rochester.
Altman was ordained a deacon in May by Bishop David Bena, who will preside at today's ordination. Bena is the former assistant bishop of the Episcopal Diocese of Albany; he is now a bishop in the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, an Anglican missionary effort in the United States sponsored by the Church of Nigeria.
Raymond Dague, a Syracuse lawyer who is a former member of St. Andrew's Church in Syracuse and a lay leader at Westside Anglican Fellowship, said today's service is a turning point for the congregation.
"It's big for us," he said. "He's (Altman) a good guy and a good fit for us."
Dague is also assistant chancellor to the Episcopal Diocese of Albany.
Syracuse Bishop Gladstone "Skip" Adams, spiritual leader of 93 parishes from the Pennsylvania border to the St. Lawrence River and from Utica to Waterloo, agreed that the developments at Westside Anglican Fellowship reflect the shift in the American Episcopal Church.
"I give them my best wishes and blessings as they seek to be faithful in the way they feel they need to be," Adams said Friday.
But he said he's sad that three congregations - St. Andrew's in Syracuse, St. Andrew's in Vestal and Church of the Good Shepherd in Binghamton - have left the diocese and the denomination. He also noted the dissenters locally and in the United States represent a minority of the U.S. Episcopalian Church.
In addition to Westside Anglican Fellowship, another group from the former St. Andrew's in Syracuse, St. Andrew's Anglican Church, has aligned itself with the Anglican Church of Rwanda and continues to worship.
"I continue to believe from my perspective there is no need for people to be leaving," Adams said. "We as a church are very embracing and open to many and diverse theological perspectives."
Altman said he and the congregation bear no ill will toward the local or national Episcopal Church.
"My expectation is we're on a journey together and none of us really knows where it's going to come out," he said. "We're just doing what we feel it is right to do."
Episcopal legal bills result in deficit
October 23, 2008
by Daniel Burke
Religion News Service
The Episcopal Church has spent nearly $2 million on legal expenses this year, more than four times its budgeted amount, and will run a deficit of $2.5 million in 2009, according to the church's news service.
The denomination's Executive Council, meeting in Helena, Mont., this week (Oct. 20-24), budgeted $450,000 for legal expenses in 2008 but spent $1.97 million, according to Episcopal News Service. The well-heeled denomination is engaged in a number of costly legal battles with conservatives who've left the Episcopal Church but seek to retain parish property.
Also, the stock market decline has decreased the value of the Episcopal Church's endowment funds by 30 percent, said church treasurer Kurt Barnes.
The church anticipates $54.6 million in revenue for 2009 and about $57 million in expenses, according to ENS. The church ran surpluses of $1.2 million in 2007 and $2 million in 2008, the news service reported.
by Daniel Burke
Religion News Service
The Episcopal Church has spent nearly $2 million on legal expenses this year, more than four times its budgeted amount, and will run a deficit of $2.5 million in 2009, according to the church's news service.
The denomination's Executive Council, meeting in Helena, Mont., this week (Oct. 20-24), budgeted $450,000 for legal expenses in 2008 but spent $1.97 million, according to Episcopal News Service. The well-heeled denomination is engaged in a number of costly legal battles with conservatives who've left the Episcopal Church but seek to retain parish property.
Also, the stock market decline has decreased the value of the Episcopal Church's endowment funds by 30 percent, said church treasurer Kurt Barnes.
The church anticipates $54.6 million in revenue for 2009 and about $57 million in expenses, according to ENS. The church ran surpluses of $1.2 million in 2007 and $2 million in 2008, the news service reported.
Thursday, October 23, 2008
Lambeth 2008, What Happened And Why
Posted at The Christian Challenge via TitusOneNine:
The Hollow Men:
We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
……………
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.
T.S. Eliot The Hollow Men (1925)
Special Report/Analysis By George Conger
“MORALITY, LIKE ART, means drawing a line someplace,” Oscar Wilde once observed. Anglican bishops historically wield the pen, drawing the line between error and truth, between right and wrong doctrine.
Yet at some point in the mid-20th century, the bishops of the church began to abdicate this responsibility - even before the American Church reformed its ordinal in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, removing the injunction to bishops that they “banish and drive away from the Church all erroneous and strange doctrine contrary to God’s Word.”
Where once the church celebrated Anglican comprehensiveness, it now celebrated diversity. Confessionalism morphed into conversation, as those charged with guarding the faith suffered a loss of nerve. The church, like the universities, the arts, literature and other repositories of high culture in the West, was trampled underfoot by the long march of the left through the institutions.
THE 2008 LAMBETH CONFERENCE of Anglican bishops in Canterbury July 16-August 3 was a milestone in this march of relativism. While nothing extraordinary happened - no fist fights or beatific visions - a number of prelates came away from Lambeth realizing the Anglican Communion no longer worked. Its structures were not a place for holy men, but for hollow men: bishops who knew in their hollow hearts they were stuffed with straw, trapped in a purposeless whirl of apathy and spiritual torpor called “dialogue.” The Anglican Communion had finally broken, coming to an end “not with a bang but a whimper.”
While past Lambeth Conferences have endeavored to speak clearly on matters of common concern as a guide to the global church, Lambeth 2008 was designed to, and did, decline to draw the line between the irreconcilable claims of the left and right. Gene Robinson’s cry that “God is doing a new thing,” and that the affirmation of his election as Bishop of New Hampshire showed that “God has once again brought an Easter out of Good Friday,” was left to stand alongside the claims of traditionalists like Fort Worth Bishop Jack Iker, who argued that the standard the church must use in moving forward with change was the rule of Vincent of Lerins: a once-for-all received faith, witnessed everywhere and by all. Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est.
While the liberal juggernaut has ground through The Episcopal Church (TEC) over the past generation, carrying prayer book revision and women’s ordination with it across the 38-province Anglican Communion, Vincent’s 5th century rule had been consistently applied to questions of sexual ethics. At the 13th Lambeth Conference in 1998, bishops of the Communion affirmed by a 7 to 1 margin the church’s traditional teaching on human sexuality, as informed by Scripture and the church’s unbroken teaching of 2,000 years.
The onus lies with those who seek change to convince the church of the need for it, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, explained after Lambeth ‘98. Listening to proponents of change acknowledges their honorable motives, he told the clergy of the Diocese of Central Florida in 2003, but entering into a conversation with them does not validate their arguments.
“Saints should always be judged guilty until they are proved innocent,” George Orwell once wrote of Gandhi, and the same standard applies in the development of doctrine, Lord Carey argued. However, the 14th Lambeth Conference under the presidency of Archbishop Rowan Williams said goodbye to all that.
AT LAMBETH ‘08, Dr. Williams lost the confidence of his fellow archbishops, and left the Communion millions in debt, and on the same trajectory as before the Conference began. Left and right have rejected his pleas for restraint, vitiating the renewed call in Canterbury for moratoria on gay bishops and blessings and cross-border episcopal actions, pending putative rescue by an Anglican Covenant at some uncertain date. New layers of bureaucracy suggested at Lambeth (e.g. a “Pastoral Forum” and “Faith and Order Commission”) remain to be developed at a time when many saw stronger measures to restore order as overdue. Meanwhile, Roman Catholic and Orthodox representatives announced the effective end of talks aimed at corporate reunion and the recognition of Anglican orders.
Philosophically, the Lambeth Conference witnessed the retirement of the historic Anglican guides of Scripture, Tradition and reason in divining truth. Scripture was subordinated to experience and culture, reason rejected in favor of political power, and Tradition debased into equal parts antiquarianism and haberdashery.
“English politeness,” the Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, said in June at the conservative Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON), was one of the defining marks of Anglicanism. But while the tone at this Lambeth was also polite - the bishops did not hurl anathemas at one another or pronounce sentences of excommunication - the Conference saw the same end as if they had denounced each other as heretics. Not all bishops of the Anglican Communion were able to worship around a common altar and share the sacraments, causing one African bishop to ask, “When we can’t share Holy Communion, how can we be an Anglican Communion?”
While Rowan Williams succeeded in preserving its façade during the three-week assembly, his efforts could not prevent Anglicanism’s ecclesial foundations from crumbling away. The form will continue, but the substance of “official” Anglicanism, like Shelley’s Ozymandias, has turned to dust and “nothing beside remains.”
Who Is Rowan Williams?
As has been noted previously in these pages, the international councils of the 80 million-member Anglican Communion are, politically speaking, weak. Its councils - the Lambeth Conference (the once-a-decade meeting of Anglican bishops first held in 1867); the Primates’ Meeting (the gathering of leaders of the Communion’s 38 provinces); and the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC—the representative body of lay, clergy and episcopal delegates appointed by the provinces that meets every three years) - have no juridical or legislative powers. Said to wield moral authority, they can speak, but cannot compel or bind any of the Communion’s churches.
Coupled with this weakness, however, is a centralization of authority in the person of one man - the Archbishop of Canterbury, Anglicanism’s fourth “instrument of communion.” While Dr. Williams has maintained that he has little power, as Cantuar he has an unchecked authority to summon the Primates’ Meetings, preside over the ACC, and issue the invitations and set the agenda for the Lambeth Conferences. In the modern era these international gatherings have taken on the character of the incumbent of St. Augustine’s Throne.
In a panel discussion hosted by the BBC on August 3, Ruth Gledhill, religion correspondent of The Times, observed that Lambeth ‘88 was “on the fence,” displaying a tentative, hesitant character very much like that of Archbishop Robert Runcie. Lambeth ‘98, which overwhelmingly adopted orthodox sexuality resolution 1.10, was driven by a “muscular Evangelical Christianity” that mirrored the mindset of Archbishop George Carey. Lambeth ‘08 had been Dr. Williams’ “show” and resembled nothing so much as a “graduate seminar”- with the Archbishop the professor surrounded by his student/bishops. The aims, agenda and ends of the Lambeth Conferences flowed from the ideals brought to the gathering by the Archbishops of Canterbury.
SINCE HIS ENTHRONEMENT in 2003, Dr. Williams has left his mark on Anglicanism. A skilled theologian and ecclesiastical politician, he began his career as a theological tutor, passing on to lecturer in Divinity at Cambridge University. From there, he progressed at age 36 to Oxford to become the Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity. Elected Bishop of Monmouth in the Church of Wales in 1992, he became Archbishop of Wales in 2000, and made it to the top of the greasy pole in 2003, when he was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury – without ever having held a parochial cure.
Dr. Williams is a consistent thinker. Since his enthronement he has not deviated from the intellectual and theological principles that have guided his academic writings. Paramount among these is the belief that truth is unknowable. Certainty lies only with those who lack critical self-awareness: “For the fundamentalist, the will of God is clearly ascertainable for all situations, either through the plain words of scripture (as received in a particular but unacknowledged convention of reading) or with the aid of supernatural direct prompting: Christian revelation is there to offer clear and important information – how to be right,” he asserted in his 1994 book Open to Judgment (OTJ, p. 221).
When God does illumine us, “when God’s light breaks on my darkness,” he stated, “the first thing I know is that I don’t know – and never did” (OTJ, p. 120).
This denial of certainty is what the reign of Christ over us means: “Christ’s is the kingship of a riddler, the one who makes us strangers to what we think we know” (OTJ, p.131).
For Dr. Williams, theology does not reveal God; it reveals that there is no revelation, no single knowable truth. He who claims possession of the truth, and uses it to exclude others from the fellowship of the church, shows by his very actions that the truth is not in him.
In practical terms, this means the church should not be quick to draw lines. “Heresy is possible,” Dr. Williams concedes, “but before we throw the word around, we need to remember that orthodoxy is common life before it’s common doctrine” (OTJ, p. 264). Hence the mission of the church is to stay together, united by this common life while it seeks the (centuries) long pursuit of common doctrine.
Since his appointment in 2003, Dr. Williams has surrounded himself with a small circle of advisers and aides who have been tasked with putting the Archbishop’s theories into action. The first international “crisis” of his tenure saw the introduction of a model of operations that has been used ever since, finding its fulfillment in Lambeth 2008.
The Memo
After the Episcopal General Convention confirmed the election of divorced, actively homosexual cleric Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, Dr. Williams called an emergency Primates’ Meeting for October 15-16, 2003, at Lambeth Palace in London. The meeting was also called in reaction to the implementation that year of same-sex blessings in the Canadian Diocese of New Westminster.
WEEKS EARLIER, at a meeting of the International Anglican Doctrinal and Theological Commission [IADTC] at Virginia Theological Seminary on September 8, 2003, a copy of an internal briefing document on the Primates’ Meeting, prepared by Dr. Williams’ advisors, was inadvertently leaked to the Very Rev. Paul Zahl, IADTC member and then dean of the Cathedral Church of the Advent in Birmingham, Alabama.
“I was given by mistake two classified documents,” Dean Zahl told The Church of England Newspaper in 2003. “One was a proposed schedule for the Primates’ Meeting; a blow by blow…for the entire meeting…And the other was a very carefully typed one-and-one-half page memo which was a very strongly worded recommendation as to how to deal with ‘the conservative Americans’ and the ‘conservatives’.”
The agenda for the Primates’ Meeting had been “carefully scripted,” he said. The “schedule had four or possibly five discussion points, but in each case a ‘conservative’ was to be linked with a ‘liberal’ to give equal time.” Every “no” was to be paired with a “yes,” Zahl said.
The meeting was designed not to achieve any sort of consensus or “executive decision,” but “was a typical sort of Anglican ‘process’ situation where you take the fangs out of any position by always making it into a ‘conversation’,” Dean Zahl said.
The second document, a memorandum to Dr. Williams, argued that “the conservatives and the Americans will try to get their way by making a lot of fuss, but we must resist at all costs listening to that.”
The strategy memo saw “four potential outcomes.” The first was “some kind of parallel jurisdiction” in North America, which the memo said “would be disastrous.”
The remaining three outcomes were variations upon the theme of study, dialogue and delay: “none of them [sought] discipline or Godly admonition,” and all proposed “staving off any kind of decision,” Dean Zahl said.
A spokesman for the ACC staff, which hosted the meeting, later confirmed the authenticity of the documents - which were retrieved from Dean Zahl - but declined to name their author or speak to their content.
WHEN THE PRIMATES CONVENED in London a little over a month later, leaders seeking harsher penalties for The Episcopal Church (TEC) were persuaded instead to join in a stern warning that proceeding with Robinson’s consecration would have devastating consequences for the Communion, and a call for a panel to suggest ways to restore order in what became the 2004 Windsor Report. Within a couple of weeks, Episcopal Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold - who had agreed to the London communiqué – consecrated Robinson anyway.
But the strategy of delay and dialogue first recommended to Dr. Williams for the October 2003 Primates’ Meeting has been consistently and effectively applied to all subsequent international Anglican gatherings, with the Archbishop acting at key points to steer the course of events away from the possible discipline of North American rebels. The same strategy was applied at Lambeth 2008.
How Did We Get Here:
The Run-Up To Lambeth ‘08
In 2004, Dr. Williams began preparations for the 2008 gathering, chartering a Lambeth Conference Design Group (LCDG) to prepare the program and agenda. From the time that ACC-13 met in Nottingham in June 2005, Williams began signaling an end to the approach of past conferences, which pivoted more on resolutions and reports. He instead favored a seminar/personal encounter model that he claimed would not “avoid the big issues,” but focus mainly on allowing bishops to “meet Jesus afresh,” rebuild trust relationships, and be “empowered and equipped” for mission.
Responses to the change in structure for Lambeth were slow in coming, but at length some conservative Global South leaders publicly rejected the idea that the Conference would not directly confront and seek to resolve the real issues buffeting the Communion, particularly given the huge expense of the meeting. “A Lambeth Conference that will not be able to guide the church in a way that [it] will embrace” and “comply with” is “not worth attending,” Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola said in January 2007.
THE ISSUE among conservative Anglican leaders would not be just the Lambeth program, however, but its participants.
A September 2006 report, Road to Lambeth, commissioned by the primates of the Council of Anglican Provinces in Africa (CAPA), urged African bishops not to “attend any Lambeth Conference to which the violators of the [1998] Lambeth Resolution [on human sexuality] are also invited as participants or observers.”
The Church of Uganda moved first. In December 2006, it endorsed the call to boycott Lambeth if Bishop Robinson and the bishops who consecrated him were present.
Of the 43 bishops who laid hands on Gene Robinson in 2003, 17 potentially could be invited to Lambeth: Bishops Joe Burnett of Nebraska; Chilton Knudsen, Maine; Martin Barahona, El Salvador; Michael Ingham, New Westminster, Canada; Bruce Stavert, Quebec, Canada; John Chane, Washington, D.C.; George Counsell, New Jersey; James Jelinek, Minnesota; Thomas C. Ely, Vermont; M. Thomas Shaw, Massachusetts; Andrew Smith, Connecticut; Orris G. Walker Jr., Long Island; Wilfredo Ramos-Orench, Central Ecuador; Suffragan Bishops Roy Cederholm and Gayle Harris of Massachusetts, James Curry of Connecticut, and Catherine Roskam of New York.
The 2004 Windsor Report had urged Dr. Williams not to give these bishops a role in Communion councils; it stated in paragraph 134 that “those who took part as consecrators of Gene Robinson should be invited to consider in all conscience whether they should withdraw themselves from representative functions in the Anglican Communion. We urge this in order to create the space necessary to enable the healing of the Communion.” However, little was done to enforce this recommendation.
Speaking in regard to Lambeth in January 2007, Archbishop Akinola said his province would wait and see whether TEC honored the Windsor Report requests by instituting a ban on the further blessing of same-sex unions (which it had not done at General Convention 2006) and by expressing its “regret” for breaching Anglican “bonds of affection” in the Robinson affair. (General Convention voiced regret for the “strain” on relations, and – only under pressure late in the meeting – agreed to withhold consent for further practicing homosexual bishops).
ON MAY 22, 2007, Williams was about to leave for a three-month sabbatical, and still awaited were key Canadian and TEC meetings in June and September, respectively, that were slated to respond to the primates’ latest round of requests that the provinces come into line on sexuality teaching. But it was on that day that Dr. Williams made his move, issuing invitations to Lambeth to some 880 bishops, including to Robinson’s consecrators and all North American bishops who had permitted same-sex blessings except Robinson.
Only nine invitations were held back: those to Bishop Robinson; the Bishop of Harare, Nolbert Kunonga (who faced travel restrictions to Europe due to his collaboration with Zimbabwe strongman Robert Mugabe); Recife Bishop Robinson Cavalcanti, a conservative who realigned with the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone after being deposed by leaders of the (TEC-planted) Brazilian province; and faithful U.S. bishops consecrated by overseas provinces to minister to Anglicans who had left TEC over theological differences, namely, Bishop Charles Murphy of the Rwandan-backed Anglican Mission in the Americas, and Bishop Martyn Minns of the Nigerian-supported Convocation of Anglicans in North America, and their four suffragans.
Speaking to reporters in London May 22, ACC General Secretary, Canon Kenneth Kearon, said Gene Robinson was excluded due to the “widespread objections in many parts of the Communion to his consecration and…ministry,” while the faithful foreign-backed American bishops would not be invited because their consecrations were “irregular” and Lambeth does not “recognize their ministry.”
In a letter accompanying the Conference invitations, Dr. Williams said he hoped Lambeth would be “a place where we can try and get more clarity about the limits of our diversity and the means of deepening our Communion, so we can speak together with conviction and clarity to the world.” However, it would not be “a formal synod or council of the bishops of the Communion,” he said.
The Archbishop contended that there was no taint in participating in the Conference alongside the Robinson consecrators. Attendance did not commit a bishop to accept “the position of others as necessarily a legitimate expression of Anglican doctrine and discipline,” he said.
(Later, at Lambeth, he defended his decision to invite the Robinson consecrators by claiming that some of them had “expressed sorrow and asked for forgiveness,” and that TEC through its House of Bishops had “asked for forgiveness”; if so, such comments have not been publicized. He also said that “just over 50 percent” of primates thought the HOB responded adequately to inquiries regarding its homosexuality policies in September 2007, though late last year he said the HOB had “not satisfied many in the Communion” on the matter of same-sex blessings.)
After the Lambeth invitations went out, first the Rwandan province (in June 2007) and then Nigeria (in January 2008) said their bishops would not attend the Conference if their U.S. bishops were not invited, and if the 17 Robinson consecrators were present.
Archbishop Akinola instead announced a Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) in Jerusalem in June. Nigeria, Rwanda, Kenya and Australia’s largest diocese, Sydney, announced decisions to send bishops to GAFCON over Lambeth. GAFCON would not be a rival to Lambeth, Akinola explained, but would address the issues Lambeth sought to avoid. Some 1,200 persons from around the world, including nearly 300 bishops representing most of the world’s active Anglicans, participated in GAFCON. They launched an international movement there to reclaim the Communion for the historic faith, based on a statement and theological accord that would stand in stark contrast to what came out of Canterbury in early August.
AS LAMBETH GOT UNDERWAY on the University of Kent campus, then, a quarter of the Communion’s active bishops were absent for reasons of conscience, a reality lamented in Canterbury.
A total of 617 bishops were registered from the Communion’s 722 dioceses, 5 missionary districts, and 2 ecclesial jurisdictions (Macao and the Falklands/British Antarctic Territories).
The largest bloc of prelates in attendance came from The Episcopal Church, which sent 127 bishops, followed by the Church of England, with 113 bishops. Rounding out the top five in numbers of bishops present were Australia, 39; Canada, 37; and Southern Africa, 27, with these five provinces sending over 55 percent of all bishops present.
Of the prelates identified as absent, 214 bishops from 10 provinces made an affirmative decision not to accept Dr. Williams’ invitation, backing the Road to Lambeth boycott: Australia, 7; Southern Cone, 1 (Frank Lyons-Bolivia); Episcopal Church, 1 (James Adams-Western Kansas); Church of England, 3 (Michael Nazir-Ali-Rochester, Wallace Benn-Lewes, Pete Broadbent-Willesden); Uganda, 30; Nigeria, 137; Kenya, 25; Rwanda, 8; South East Asia, 1; and Jerusalem and the Middle East, 1.
From Africa’s 324 dioceses, 200 diocesan bishops (61 percent) were identified as having declined Williams’ invitation.
The Pakistani-born Bishop Nazir-Ali said his “difficulty” in attending Lambeth arose from “Eucharistic fellowship with and teaching the common faith alongside those who have ordained a person to be bishop whose style of life is contrary” to biblical and church teaching. It would be “difficult to be around a common table” in fellowship “with people who have gone against the common” mind and received teachings of the church, he said. His fellow C of E bishop, Wallace Benn, cited similar reasons for his absence.
While Canon Kearon claimed that at least 680 bishops participated in Lambeth, this total included Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Orthodox, retired Anglican bishops and other episcopally ordained guests. The exact number of serving Anglican bishops that were present remains unknown; however, no more than 602 Anglican bishops appeared in the group photo taken at the Conference midpoint. (For more on this, see “Lambeth, Numbers, And Legitimacy” in the “Focus” section.)
A Controlled Conference
As the bishops and their spouses (who participated in a parallel conference in the university’s sports hall) arrived on the Kent University campus – a somewhat decaying 1960s-era complex designed by a prison architect – other differences between Lambeth ‘08 and past Conferences quickly became apparent.
Security, scheduling and secrecy were new themes. Whereas at past Lambeth Conferences most of the bishops’ deliberations were open to public scrutiny, at the 2008 assembly all but a handful of events were off limits to the public, including the media. Chain link fences some eight feet high had been placed around the key venues, and guards posted at intervals across the campus to control access.
The guards – armed Kent police, uniformed university security guards, and yellow-sashed conference stewards - were a constant, and at times, obtrusive presence. To enter the press car park, a reporter had to pass through two chained fences, showing his press and parking passes, as well as passes for anyone else in the car.
Initially, Conference officials declined to provide reporters with a list of bishops present.
“The names of the bishops attending Lambeth would not be revealed as this was secret,” reported The Church of England Newspaper. “The reason for the secrecy was a secret, though explanations of privacy…and security concerns were offered.”
After pressure from reporters, officials finally issued a list only of those bishops at the Conference who gave permission to have their names released. (Only later was sufficient data available to arrive at the earlier-cited registration totals.)
Moreover, as almost all Lambeth sessions were closed to the media for the first time, little firsthand observation of the proceedings was possible.
“A request by The Times to attend the (bishops’) session on media training, entitled ‘Never say no to the press,’ was met with a ‘no’ from Conference organizers,” CEN wryly observed.
IN PAST CONFERENCES, study materials were prepared and released months ahead of time, and bishops were assigned to committees that would work on specific issues. Bishops were encouraged to contact one another before the start of the Conference to review the study materials and begin work.
At this Conference, a Lambeth Reader was distributed to the bishops with their registration packets, but no public copies of the document were made available. Nor was advance word given to the bishops of the names of their fellow group members. The secrecy extended to senior bishops of the Church of England, who were not briefed on the Conference until three weeks before its start.
The Lambeth Reader’s tone struck a discordant note with some, singling out the boycotting bishops for opprobrium. They were charged with shirking their “collegial responsibility” at a time of conflict, and weakening the Body of Christ.
However, the Lambeth Reader was left unread by most bishops, as it soon became apparent its papers had no bearing on the life and work of the meeting – and no time was programmed into the Conference for reading or reflection.
As at past Lambeth gatherings, an exhibition hall/marketplace for vendors was set aside. At the ‘98 Conference these were mostly clerical tailors, booksellers and purveyors of ecclesiastical accoutrements, but this time the bulk of vendors were representatives of special interest groups - with members of the homosexual lobby predominating. A coalition of “LGBT” (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) groups also published a daily newspaper, Lambeth Witness, which was made available all over the campus. Bishop Robinson was permitted in the marketplace, but it seemed over time that the restricted setting drew the media-savvy prelate to the friendlier climes of London.
IN HIS WELCOMING ADDRESS – closed to the press - Dr. Williams told the bishops and their spouses that the 14th Lambeth Conference would not seek to settle the conflict within the Communion, but would focus on building relationships. These friendships would not overcome the divisions, but “it is certain that without the building of relationships the challenges will never be resolved,” he said according to bishops present.
DR. WILLIAMS then outlined the structure of the meeting. The first three days would consist of a retreat, during which he would deliver five lectures to the bishops at Canterbury Cathedral, interspersed with periods of meditation and reflection. Members of the public could then attend the opening Eucharist on the first Sunday, and the bishops would begin work on the following Monday. Their day would be divided into sessions beginning at 7:30 with worship and Bible study and going most nights until the late evening. The schedule also would include a day trip to London to participate in a march in support of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) before dining at Lambeth Palace and heading for Buckingham Palace for the customary tea party with the Queen.
The bishops were split into Bible study groups of 8 brought together based on geographical and gender considerations. Using materials prepared by Prof. Gerald West of the University of Kwa-Zulu, Natal (South Africa), the bishops were asked to work through portions of John’s Gospel and discuss questions prepared by Dr. West.
The Bible study groups would then re-form after a tea break into indaba groups of approximately 40 bishops and guests each; 75 ecumenical guests ranging from the Salvation Army to an eight-man team from the Roman Catholic Church were included in all Conference deliberations. Indaba, a Zulu word, the bishops were told, was a consensus-building process by which African villagers would discuss issues in an egalitarian town-hall fashion.
In the afternoons and early evenings, before and after the closed worship services, the bishops would attend plenary sessions or self-select sessions. The latter sessions, closed to outsiders, would address issues of parochial concern, from climate change to Catholicism, with several sessions scheduled simultaneously each business day.
A few open plenary sessions were scheduled in the evenings in a marquee - a blue tent that could accommodate roughly 1,000 people - while the day closed with evening prayer. Conspicuously absent from the Lambeth ‘08 script was free time for bishops to caucus by province or region, entertain, or get away from the grim environs of the University of Kent.
The Retreat
During the cathedral retreat, the talks given by Dr. Williams on the theme of “God’s Mission and a Bishop’s Discipleship” appeared to have been well received by a cross-section of bishops. Lexington (KY) Bishop Stacy Sauls said the central argument of the talks had been that “our episcopal ministry is a revealing of Jesus” and that bishops were a “symbol of unity” for the church.
But they carried Dr. Williams’ ideas about revelation and truth. Those on the left and right who had “written off” their theological opponents were in danger of losing the charism of episcopacy, for no single party or person was in sole possession of the truth, the Archbishop reportedly argued. Anglican bishops must stay together in fellowship, he said.
Be prepared to find “the imperative of Jesus in everyone and anyone in the Communion,” Dr. Williams asserted, for it is not “huge numbers or massive resources that guarantee truth.”
Truth is found in paying “unsparing attention to Christ in one another,” and through a “common discipline and shape of prayer” articulated in the post-BCP Anglican world through a common faithfulness and inner prayer life.
The Opening Week
The spirit of pan-Anglican bonhomie fostered by the closed three-day retreat did not survive the opening Eucharist on Sunday, July 20, as, like those absent from the meeting, some bishops present were unable receive communion with their colleagues.
In a break with past Lambeth Conferences, the bishops did not process into Canterbury Cathedral grouped together by province, but in an undifferentiated mass, with only the primates a distinctive body amongst the bishops. LCDG member, the Rev Ian Douglas, professor of World Mission at Episcopal Divinity School, stated that the change stemmed from a desire to further the fellowship gained during the retreat and avoid the “triumphalistic” processions of former years. It had nothing to do with the boycott, he said, rejecting assertions that a mob of bishops would disguise the absence of a significant number of their brethren.
PREACHING at the invitation of Dr. Williams, the Bishop of Colombo, Duleep de Chickera, called for the bishops to be agents of social and political change, and for the Communion to “resuscitate the challenge of unity in diversity.”
“In Christ we are all equal,” the Ceylonese bishop said; there is “space for all” within the Communion regardless of “color, race, gender or sexual orientation.”
The Communion must exercise its “prophetic voice” and be the “voice of the voiceless,” calling into “accountability those who abuse power,” the prelate stated.
The bishops wore choir dress, and only Dr. Williams and his suffragans and chaplains wore Eucharistic vestments, avoiding potential controversy by making clear to traditionalists that none of the women bishops was concelebrating the Eucharist.
While the rood screen prevented a clear view of the bishops during the service, and the television cameras turned away to film the choir while the host was distributed, three primates and eight bishops confirmed to The Christian Challenge that they had abstained from receiving the host due to the presence of the Robinson consecrators. However, each asked not to be named, as their actions were not political statements, but matters dictated by conscience.
Following the service, Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori told reporters that the “glorious” gathering was symbolic of the “inclusive” nature of Anglicanism. Presiding Bishop Gregory Venables of the Southern Cone - one of the minority of GAFCON-aligned bishops that opted to attend Lambeth - said the service highlighted everything that was wrong with the Communion: a social justice sermon that lauded works and social regeneration, but ignored personal regeneration and broken Eucharistic fellowship.
THE BISHOPS then returned to the university campus for Dr. Williams’ presidential address, given in closed session. The Archbishop acknowledged that the Communion was “in the middle of one of the most severe challenges,” but said the “options before us are not irreparable schism or forced assimilation.” The way forward was through an Anglican Covenant - the pact proposed by the Windsor Report to help ensure unity in basic beliefs and mutual accountability among historically autonomous Anglican provinces. This would allow “an Anglicanism whose diversity is limited not by centralized control but by consent – consent based on a serious common assessment of the implications of local change.”
Fears that the indaba process would be used to stifle dissent and avoid action were misplaced, he maintained. “Quite a few people have said that the new ways we’re suggesting of doing our business are an attempt to avoid tough decisions and have the effect of replacing substance with process. To such people, I’d simply say, ‘How effective have the old methods really been?’”
“We need renewal, and this is the moment for it,” Dr. Williams said, charging the bishops to use the indaba method to “help shape fresh, more honest and more constructive ways of being a conference – and being a communion.”
FOR EVERY indaba session, the bishops were given a theme, aim, and focus question. Session 5, on July 25, for example, opened with the theme of “Serving together—the bishop and other churches.” For this, the bishops were asked to “explore specifically what contributions bishops can make to developing ‘joint action for mission’ working ecumenically.” Then each bishop was given up to two minutes to respond to the question, “Working specifically with other churches, how can you as a bishop, further the mission we share together in your work?”
South African Archbishop Thabo Makgoba - one of Lambeth’s organizers - conceded that the division of the bishops into groups of 40 to discuss specific issues in the space of two hours did not appear to allow enough time for a full airing of views. “Mathematically, it won’t make a lot of sense,” he said. But he maintained that, “The whole conference is an indaba. Indaba starts with the walk from your room.”
Central Pennsylvania Bishop Nathan Baxter lauded the small group encounters, saying that “bishops listening together” had set a respectful tone for the gathering and fostered personal relationships.
By contrast, another American bishop wrote his diocese during the Conference that the indaba process was “asinine.” He said: “Many of the Africans are saying, ‘This isn’t indaba at all! First of all, we are not a village, and we don’t know each other. And secondly, we are not attempting to solve a problem; we are talking in small groups about minor issues of little consequence’.”
Even the Archbishop of York, the Ugandan-born Dr. John Sentamu, asked, “If indaba is such a great idea, why is Africa in such a mess?”
While most bishops said they enjoyed the fellowship of the smaller 8-member Bible studies, there was unease in some quarters with the agenda being promoted through the study materials. “We’re being manipulated” into saying that “all will be well if we only keep talking,” said Archbishop Venables.
“I hoped we would be able to talk about the very serious things. We tried to but were unable to,” he said. The indaba sessions had “helped, but there wasn’t enough trust” among the bishops to make it work. The “level of conflict, fear, mistrust, [and] frustration hasn’t allowed it.”
Matters were not helped when it emerged that the American Church had given its bishops a sheet of “talking points” to use in the group sessions to try to promote liberal attitudes toward gay clergy.
The Conference Begins To Unravel
While the Eucharist boycott hinted that all was not well, the first open clash in the Conference came on July 22, when the Episcopal Church of the Sudan released a statement calling for TEC to repent and immediately cease its advocacy of gay bishops and blessings.
Rebuffed in his attempt to release the statement through the Conference press office, Dr. Daniel Deng, Archbishop of Juba and Primate of the Sudan, walked into the press room that afternoon and gave an impromptu briefing, calling for Gene Robinson to step aside to save the Communion.
THREE ROMAN CATHOLIC cardinals also rained on Dr. Williams’ parade, offering progressively harsher assessments of the state of Anglicanism and its relations with Rome.
One of the three, the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, urged Anglicans to put their house in order, and decide what they believe.
Citing the disputes over women’s ordination, he said that, “if Anglicans themselves disagree over this development, and find yourselves unable fully to recognize each other’s ministry, how could we?”
Dialogue between Anglicans and Roman Catholics now appeared pointless due to the ecclesiological anarchy spreading across the Communion. “If we are to make progress through dialogue, we must be able to reach a solemn and binding agreement with our dialogue partners. And we want to see a deepening, not a lessening, of communion in their own ecclesial life,” Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor said.
Another of the Catholic delegation, Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, urged Anglicans on July 31 to embark on a new “Oxford Movement” to revitalize the church, and warned that the apparent laxity over gay clergy and moves by the Church of England to introduce women bishops had effectively ended the quest for Roman recognition of the validity of Anglican orders.
Kasper hinted as well that the Vatican might begin direct talks with GAFCON and other conservative Anglican movements. While “troubled and saddened” by the potential fragmentation of the Anglican Communion, he said, Rome had a duty to ask, should Anglicanism come apart, “who will our dialogue partner be? Should we, and how can we, appropriately and honestly engage in conversations also with those who share Catholic perspectives on the points currently in dispute, and who disagree with some developments within the Anglican Communion or particular Anglican provinces? What do you expect in this situation from the Church of Rome, which in the words of Ignatius of Antioch is to preside over the Church in love?”
The Moscow Patriarchate was blunt in its critique. The introduction of women and homosexual bishops would exclude “even the theoretical possibility of the Orthodox churches acknowledging the apostolic succession” of Anglican bishops, Bishop Hilarion of Vienna told Dr. Williams on July 28.
YET ANOTHER PUNCH came on August 1, when Ugandan Archbishop Henry Orombi wrote a letter to The Times (at the newspaper’s invitation), saying that Dr. Williams’ decision to invite to Lambeth the bishops who consecrated Robinson or have sanctioned same-sex blessings was a “further betrayal” that had convinced the “stunned” Ugandan bishops to skip the Conference.
While there are four “instruments” of unity in the Communion, “de facto, there is only one - the Archbishop of Canterbury.” These instruments had “utterly failed” the church, Orombi charged.
Noting that even the Pope is elected by his peers, he said that, “The spiritual leadership of a global communion of independent and autonomous provinces should not be reduced to one man appointed by a secular government.” This, he said, was “a remnant of British colonialism, and it is not serving us well.”
FOLLOWING UPON Orombi’s comments was a call by two senior English bishops, Michael Scott-Joynt of Winchester and Michael Langrish of Exeter, for Williams to negotiate an “orderly separation” of liberals and conservatives while it might still be possible to remain in “some kind of fellowship.”
The anxiety over the direction of the Communion was also reflected in several late night meetings of the conservative Global South primates at Lambeth (most of them not aligned with GAFCON). United in their identification of the problem, the primates were divided as to how to respond, with Dr. Mouneer Anis of Jerusalem and the Middle East and Archbishop John Chew of Southeast Asia counseling forbearance towards Dr. Williams and his policy of delay, while Archbishop Venables and the African primates (believed to have included the archbishops of Sudan, Tanzania and West Africa) urged action.
Their hopes of forging a united front at Lambeth failed, however. While one meeting of the Global South bishops and their supporters from the West took place, and some regional groupings of conservative bishops issued their own statements, they were unable as a body to gather any momentum to promote an alternative to the Conference agenda.
Many bishops spoke of their frustration with the meeting’s secrecy, often asking the media to let them know what was happening at Lambeth, as they did not know. The tight schedule also hindered pre-planned action, as the only time to meet came late at night.
The “Bombshell”
It was only in its last week that Lambeth turned to more pivotal issues.
Hearings were held on the process toward adopting the Anglican Covenant, now in its second draft by the Covenant Design Group, led by West Indies Archbishop Drexel Gomez. Still apparent during Lambeth was that some liberals chafe at the idea of any theological constraints or discipline, while some conservatives worry that the covenant as it stands will not deliver in either respect. Another issue is that the covenant is not an immediate remedy for the Communion. Estimates in Canterbury were that it might be a decade before most provinces have adopted the covenant, though Archbishop Gomez more recently asserted a time frame of three to five years. But for Dr. Williams, a key advantage of the covenant process is that it will shift the onus of deciding who is in or out of the Communion away from his office and onto the provinces, which must choose whether or not to adopt the pact.
More diverting were proposals during Lambeth’s last week from the Windsor Continuation Group (WCG), a panel tasked by Dr. Williams with addressing outstanding questions arising from the Windsor Report, which recommended ways to repair relationships damaged by unilateral pro-gay actions in the North American provinces. Chaired by the retired primate of Jerusalem and the Middle East, Bishop Clive Handford, the WCG took up the question of what was necessary to hold things together in the period leading up to the covenant’s establishment.
Rumored in advance to contain a “bombshell,” the suggestions from the WCG instead included mainly a reassertion of the Windsor-requested moratoria, and a “Pastoral Forum” that many thought resembled the failed Panel of Reference; it would try to respond quickly to conflict situations in the Communion, and encourage compliance with the moratoria. Among a few new twists, though, was the WCG’s suggestion that the Pastoral Forum gather together and hold “in trust” all of the now-foreign-supported parishes and dioceses that have fled their liberal North American provinces - pending reunion of the refugees with those same provinces.
In the case of the covenant and WCG proposals, the Lambeth bishops were only briefed on the work of the committees. While the prelates could offer comments and suggestions, they were not given the authority to develop the relevant documents.
The Culmination
The committee work and the Lambeth group sessions all fed into a final document composed as the meeting was underway.
On August 3, the conference released a closing statement that noted the broad desire for, but difficulty of upholding, a “season of gracious restraint” marked by abstentions from the consecration and blessing of partnered homosexuals, and foreign incursions into the jurisdictions of the North American provinces.
Written as a “Reflections” paper, the 42-page statement was produced by a committee led by Archbishop Roger Herft of Perth. The paper is described as a “narrative” of the meeting, and attempts to summarize the bishops’ discussions on the various issues addressed; it is not a consensus statement of Lambeth’s vision for the Communion or its position on disputed matters. The bishops were asked, not whether they agreed with the document, but “whether they could see their voices” amidst the various reflections it contains.
In addition to the sexuality issue, the Reflections document spoke to concerns over the environment, war, violence to women and children, disease, and hunger, with the bishops particularly endorsing the MDGs. The paper called for a laundry list of social, economic and political reforms - from peace in Korea to an end to the Mugabe regime.
IN THE CLOSING press conference, Dr. Williams said Lambeth had proven that the bishops could speak to each other respectfully and prayerfully, and had a “strong commitment to remain unified.” And the MDG walk showed that, even in “its current rather wobbly state,” the Communion was capable of being a witness for change in the world, he said.
In his final presidential address, Archbishop Williams pledged to seek within two months a “clear and detailed” plan for the new Pastoral Forum. While that committee did its work and the covenant process advanced, he emphasized the need to avoid provocations. He maintained that there was “wide agreement” on the moratoria, but upset some liberals in specifically warning that the Communion would continue in “grave peril” if the North American provinces did not desist from their pro-gay practices.
“The pieces are on the board” for the resolution of the Anglican conflict, he asserted. “And in the months ahead it will be important to invite those absent from Lambeth to be involved in these next stages.” Notably, after refusing calls to convene a Primates’ Meeting before Lambeth, the Archbishop said he would bring the primates together in early 2009.
Dr. Williams also acknowledged that unlike the ’98 Conference, which ended with a one million-pound surplus, the 2008 Conference had run into debt. According to an internal Conference document distributed to registered bishops, the budget for the meeting was 4.4 million pounds, and 1.2 million for the Spouses’ Conference, excluding the costs of travel to Canterbury. On August 11, the Board of Governors of the Church Commissioners of the Church of England extended an emergency loan of 600,000 pounds to help cover the estimated 1.2 million-pound shortfall. Inevitably, the small but wealthy Episcopal Church was asked for assistance as well.
Was It Worth It?
Defined in his terms, the Lambeth Conference was a success for Dr. Williams. Between July 16 and August 3 the Anglican Communion did not break apart. The strategy of setting left against right in pursuit of dialogue for the sake of delay, as articulated in the revelatory 2003 memo, proved effective.
Many bishops agreed, writing with relief that the Communion was safe and that this time around, the Pastoral Forum, the Windsor Continuation Group, and the Anglican Covenant would make all the difference.
Others – on both the left and the right - questioned the Archbishop’s criteria for success.
“The miracle hasn’t happened,” Archbishop Venables said on his last day at Lambeth. While it was not announced during Lambeth, a “division [remains] over what it means to be a Christian, what it means to be a church,” he said. “So far we have held it together by appealing to diversity,” but that was not enough, as the point had been reached where conscience dictated that the church take a stand.
The idea of a moratorium was “attractive,” but it was clear that the “North Americans will not stop doing what they are doing, and they have said so,” he noted. “And I’m not going to stop now” in supporting North American faithful, said the prelate, who has taken one former TEC diocese under his wing, with possibly three more to follow this fall. “There is no safe place for them.”
“Liberalism is now totalitarianism,” he maintained. “There is no place for those who don’t agree.”
Lambeth 2008 did not “get to the root of the process problem. We talk but nothing is decided,” he said. There are “no ground rules to define the Anglican Church,” and we now have “no way of avoiding the division.”
When Venables met later in August with fellow members of the Primates’ Council of GAFCON – now called the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans - the leaders, while not rejecting the Windsor or covenant processes outright, said it was clear that some in the Communion would keep sanctioning sinful practices, and that Lambeth offered nothing new to address the situation; hence, the FCA’s efforts to reform and renew the Communion would go forward.
WRITING IN his diocesan newspaper upon his return to Washington, leading liberal Bishop John Chane was not sanguine about the Communion’s future prospects, either, and defended his decision not to honor the moratoria.
In his attempts to be non-partial, Dr. Williams had favored the right, Bishop Chane charged. “There was far too much recognition of those who chose not to participate in this Lambeth Conference and far too little recognition of those bishops who chose to come,” he contended. Moreover, homosexuals continued to be a scapegoat for the Communion’s troubles. “Blaming the least among us continues to divert our attention away from the issues that threaten the very existence of humankind and the environmental health of our planet,” he wrote.
“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,” Chane said. “The Anglican Communion must face the hard truth that when we scapegoat and victimize one group of people in the church, all of us become victims of our own prejudice and sinfulness.”
Chane was publicly joined in his “no retreat” posture by Los Angeles Bishop Jon Bruno, California Bishop Marc Andrus, New Jersey Bishop Mark Beckwith, and Massachusetts Bishop M. Thomas Shaw. Also indicating the unlikelihood of a rollback was Archbishop Fred Hiltz of the Anglican Church of Canada, where one diocese already performs same-sex blessings, and four others want to implement them.
For her part, Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori contended in a post-Lambeth webcast that TEC for some time has been observing the “season of gracious restraint,” and that only the General Convention could do anything about these issues.
But she added that, “We were very clear (that), for an overwhelming majority of the bishops of this church…the well being and adequate and appropriate pastoral care of gay and lesbian members of [TEC] is a significant mission issue for us,” and that individual bishops “have always made their own decisions within the canonical responsibilities of their dioceses.”
THAT THERE will be no real change in business as usual, Lambeth notwithstanding, was further made clear on September 18, when Bishop Jefferts Schori presided over a House of Bishops’ meeting that voted to depose conservative Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan.
Acting only five days after being formally notified that the matter would be considered at the HOB meeting in Salt Lake City, U.S. prelates agreed that Duncan had “abandoned the communion” of TEC by holding that his diocese may realign with another part of the Anglican Communion – to which TEC still claims to belong. The Pittsburgh diocese was not due to vote on realignment until October 4.
The move to defrock this leading U.S. defender of the historic faith effectively ended the “season of gracious restraint,” and repudiated Dr. Williams’ authority. As well, it had, at this writing, sparked an international backlash that had half a dozen senior Church of England bishops siding with Duncan, and former Southern Cone Primate Colin Bazley spearheading a call for Williams to suspend TEC from the Communion and support a new North American province.
DR. WILLIAMS’ one opportunity, perhaps until 2018, to convince the bishops that the Communion was more than an antiquarian institution, that it stood for something more than nostalgia, was lost in a swirl of debt, dissension and busy work. While no formal statements on human sexuality were overturned or issued, the move towards making all points of view valid - of countenancing the equivalency of sociology, experience, and psychology with Scripture, Tradition and reason - marked the end of an era.
While the via negativa, the unknowability of God, may have triumphed in a graduate seminar, as a model for leading the church it does not suffice. Dr. Williams’ belief in the absence of a single truth - or the potential for truth to be found in conflict - coupled with the Communion’s weak political structures, has brought the Communion to this point.
END
THE REV. GEORGE CONGER is chief correspondent for The Church of England Newspaper, and over the past ten years has written widely for a variety of newspapers, magazines and journals on the Anglican Communion and religious and political affairs. Educated at Duke, Yale and Oxford Universities, he is an honorary canon of St. Matthews Cathedral in Dallas, and chaplain to Treasure Coast Hospice in Fort Pierce, Florida.
The Hollow Men:
We are the hollow men
We are the stuffed men
Leaning together
Headpiece filled with straw. Alas!
Our dried voices, when
We whisper together
Are quiet and meaningless
As wind in dry grass
……………
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang but a whimper.
T.S. Eliot The Hollow Men (1925)
Special Report/Analysis By George Conger
“MORALITY, LIKE ART, means drawing a line someplace,” Oscar Wilde once observed. Anglican bishops historically wield the pen, drawing the line between error and truth, between right and wrong doctrine.
Yet at some point in the mid-20th century, the bishops of the church began to abdicate this responsibility - even before the American Church reformed its ordinal in the 1979 Book of Common Prayer, removing the injunction to bishops that they “banish and drive away from the Church all erroneous and strange doctrine contrary to God’s Word.”
Where once the church celebrated Anglican comprehensiveness, it now celebrated diversity. Confessionalism morphed into conversation, as those charged with guarding the faith suffered a loss of nerve. The church, like the universities, the arts, literature and other repositories of high culture in the West, was trampled underfoot by the long march of the left through the institutions.
THE 2008 LAMBETH CONFERENCE of Anglican bishops in Canterbury July 16-August 3 was a milestone in this march of relativism. While nothing extraordinary happened - no fist fights or beatific visions - a number of prelates came away from Lambeth realizing the Anglican Communion no longer worked. Its structures were not a place for holy men, but for hollow men: bishops who knew in their hollow hearts they were stuffed with straw, trapped in a purposeless whirl of apathy and spiritual torpor called “dialogue.” The Anglican Communion had finally broken, coming to an end “not with a bang but a whimper.”
While past Lambeth Conferences have endeavored to speak clearly on matters of common concern as a guide to the global church, Lambeth 2008 was designed to, and did, decline to draw the line between the irreconcilable claims of the left and right. Gene Robinson’s cry that “God is doing a new thing,” and that the affirmation of his election as Bishop of New Hampshire showed that “God has once again brought an Easter out of Good Friday,” was left to stand alongside the claims of traditionalists like Fort Worth Bishop Jack Iker, who argued that the standard the church must use in moving forward with change was the rule of Vincent of Lerins: a once-for-all received faith, witnessed everywhere and by all. Quod ubique, quod semper, quod ab omnibus creditum est.
While the liberal juggernaut has ground through The Episcopal Church (TEC) over the past generation, carrying prayer book revision and women’s ordination with it across the 38-province Anglican Communion, Vincent’s 5th century rule had been consistently applied to questions of sexual ethics. At the 13th Lambeth Conference in 1998, bishops of the Communion affirmed by a 7 to 1 margin the church’s traditional teaching on human sexuality, as informed by Scripture and the church’s unbroken teaching of 2,000 years.
The onus lies with those who seek change to convince the church of the need for it, the former Archbishop of Canterbury, George Carey, explained after Lambeth ‘98. Listening to proponents of change acknowledges their honorable motives, he told the clergy of the Diocese of Central Florida in 2003, but entering into a conversation with them does not validate their arguments.
“Saints should always be judged guilty until they are proved innocent,” George Orwell once wrote of Gandhi, and the same standard applies in the development of doctrine, Lord Carey argued. However, the 14th Lambeth Conference under the presidency of Archbishop Rowan Williams said goodbye to all that.
AT LAMBETH ‘08, Dr. Williams lost the confidence of his fellow archbishops, and left the Communion millions in debt, and on the same trajectory as before the Conference began. Left and right have rejected his pleas for restraint, vitiating the renewed call in Canterbury for moratoria on gay bishops and blessings and cross-border episcopal actions, pending putative rescue by an Anglican Covenant at some uncertain date. New layers of bureaucracy suggested at Lambeth (e.g. a “Pastoral Forum” and “Faith and Order Commission”) remain to be developed at a time when many saw stronger measures to restore order as overdue. Meanwhile, Roman Catholic and Orthodox representatives announced the effective end of talks aimed at corporate reunion and the recognition of Anglican orders.
Philosophically, the Lambeth Conference witnessed the retirement of the historic Anglican guides of Scripture, Tradition and reason in divining truth. Scripture was subordinated to experience and culture, reason rejected in favor of political power, and Tradition debased into equal parts antiquarianism and haberdashery.
“English politeness,” the Bishop of Rochester, Michael Nazir-Ali, said in June at the conservative Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON), was one of the defining marks of Anglicanism. But while the tone at this Lambeth was also polite - the bishops did not hurl anathemas at one another or pronounce sentences of excommunication - the Conference saw the same end as if they had denounced each other as heretics. Not all bishops of the Anglican Communion were able to worship around a common altar and share the sacraments, causing one African bishop to ask, “When we can’t share Holy Communion, how can we be an Anglican Communion?”
While Rowan Williams succeeded in preserving its façade during the three-week assembly, his efforts could not prevent Anglicanism’s ecclesial foundations from crumbling away. The form will continue, but the substance of “official” Anglicanism, like Shelley’s Ozymandias, has turned to dust and “nothing beside remains.”
Who Is Rowan Williams?
As has been noted previously in these pages, the international councils of the 80 million-member Anglican Communion are, politically speaking, weak. Its councils - the Lambeth Conference (the once-a-decade meeting of Anglican bishops first held in 1867); the Primates’ Meeting (the gathering of leaders of the Communion’s 38 provinces); and the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC—the representative body of lay, clergy and episcopal delegates appointed by the provinces that meets every three years) - have no juridical or legislative powers. Said to wield moral authority, they can speak, but cannot compel or bind any of the Communion’s churches.
Coupled with this weakness, however, is a centralization of authority in the person of one man - the Archbishop of Canterbury, Anglicanism’s fourth “instrument of communion.” While Dr. Williams has maintained that he has little power, as Cantuar he has an unchecked authority to summon the Primates’ Meetings, preside over the ACC, and issue the invitations and set the agenda for the Lambeth Conferences. In the modern era these international gatherings have taken on the character of the incumbent of St. Augustine’s Throne.
In a panel discussion hosted by the BBC on August 3, Ruth Gledhill, religion correspondent of The Times, observed that Lambeth ‘88 was “on the fence,” displaying a tentative, hesitant character very much like that of Archbishop Robert Runcie. Lambeth ‘98, which overwhelmingly adopted orthodox sexuality resolution 1.10, was driven by a “muscular Evangelical Christianity” that mirrored the mindset of Archbishop George Carey. Lambeth ‘08 had been Dr. Williams’ “show” and resembled nothing so much as a “graduate seminar”- with the Archbishop the professor surrounded by his student/bishops. The aims, agenda and ends of the Lambeth Conferences flowed from the ideals brought to the gathering by the Archbishops of Canterbury.
SINCE HIS ENTHRONEMENT in 2003, Dr. Williams has left his mark on Anglicanism. A skilled theologian and ecclesiastical politician, he began his career as a theological tutor, passing on to lecturer in Divinity at Cambridge University. From there, he progressed at age 36 to Oxford to become the Lady Margaret Professor of Divinity. Elected Bishop of Monmouth in the Church of Wales in 1992, he became Archbishop of Wales in 2000, and made it to the top of the greasy pole in 2003, when he was appointed Archbishop of Canterbury – without ever having held a parochial cure.
Dr. Williams is a consistent thinker. Since his enthronement he has not deviated from the intellectual and theological principles that have guided his academic writings. Paramount among these is the belief that truth is unknowable. Certainty lies only with those who lack critical self-awareness: “For the fundamentalist, the will of God is clearly ascertainable for all situations, either through the plain words of scripture (as received in a particular but unacknowledged convention of reading) or with the aid of supernatural direct prompting: Christian revelation is there to offer clear and important information – how to be right,” he asserted in his 1994 book Open to Judgment (OTJ, p. 221).
When God does illumine us, “when God’s light breaks on my darkness,” he stated, “the first thing I know is that I don’t know – and never did” (OTJ, p. 120).
This denial of certainty is what the reign of Christ over us means: “Christ’s is the kingship of a riddler, the one who makes us strangers to what we think we know” (OTJ, p.131).
For Dr. Williams, theology does not reveal God; it reveals that there is no revelation, no single knowable truth. He who claims possession of the truth, and uses it to exclude others from the fellowship of the church, shows by his very actions that the truth is not in him.
In practical terms, this means the church should not be quick to draw lines. “Heresy is possible,” Dr. Williams concedes, “but before we throw the word around, we need to remember that orthodoxy is common life before it’s common doctrine” (OTJ, p. 264). Hence the mission of the church is to stay together, united by this common life while it seeks the (centuries) long pursuit of common doctrine.
Since his appointment in 2003, Dr. Williams has surrounded himself with a small circle of advisers and aides who have been tasked with putting the Archbishop’s theories into action. The first international “crisis” of his tenure saw the introduction of a model of operations that has been used ever since, finding its fulfillment in Lambeth 2008.
The Memo
After the Episcopal General Convention confirmed the election of divorced, actively homosexual cleric Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, Dr. Williams called an emergency Primates’ Meeting for October 15-16, 2003, at Lambeth Palace in London. The meeting was also called in reaction to the implementation that year of same-sex blessings in the Canadian Diocese of New Westminster.
WEEKS EARLIER, at a meeting of the International Anglican Doctrinal and Theological Commission [IADTC] at Virginia Theological Seminary on September 8, 2003, a copy of an internal briefing document on the Primates’ Meeting, prepared by Dr. Williams’ advisors, was inadvertently leaked to the Very Rev. Paul Zahl, IADTC member and then dean of the Cathedral Church of the Advent in Birmingham, Alabama.
“I was given by mistake two classified documents,” Dean Zahl told The Church of England Newspaper in 2003. “One was a proposed schedule for the Primates’ Meeting; a blow by blow…for the entire meeting…And the other was a very carefully typed one-and-one-half page memo which was a very strongly worded recommendation as to how to deal with ‘the conservative Americans’ and the ‘conservatives’.”
The agenda for the Primates’ Meeting had been “carefully scripted,” he said. The “schedule had four or possibly five discussion points, but in each case a ‘conservative’ was to be linked with a ‘liberal’ to give equal time.” Every “no” was to be paired with a “yes,” Zahl said.
The meeting was designed not to achieve any sort of consensus or “executive decision,” but “was a typical sort of Anglican ‘process’ situation where you take the fangs out of any position by always making it into a ‘conversation’,” Dean Zahl said.
The second document, a memorandum to Dr. Williams, argued that “the conservatives and the Americans will try to get their way by making a lot of fuss, but we must resist at all costs listening to that.”
The strategy memo saw “four potential outcomes.” The first was “some kind of parallel jurisdiction” in North America, which the memo said “would be disastrous.”
The remaining three outcomes were variations upon the theme of study, dialogue and delay: “none of them [sought] discipline or Godly admonition,” and all proposed “staving off any kind of decision,” Dean Zahl said.
A spokesman for the ACC staff, which hosted the meeting, later confirmed the authenticity of the documents - which were retrieved from Dean Zahl - but declined to name their author or speak to their content.
WHEN THE PRIMATES CONVENED in London a little over a month later, leaders seeking harsher penalties for The Episcopal Church (TEC) were persuaded instead to join in a stern warning that proceeding with Robinson’s consecration would have devastating consequences for the Communion, and a call for a panel to suggest ways to restore order in what became the 2004 Windsor Report. Within a couple of weeks, Episcopal Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold - who had agreed to the London communiqué – consecrated Robinson anyway.
But the strategy of delay and dialogue first recommended to Dr. Williams for the October 2003 Primates’ Meeting has been consistently and effectively applied to all subsequent international Anglican gatherings, with the Archbishop acting at key points to steer the course of events away from the possible discipline of North American rebels. The same strategy was applied at Lambeth 2008.
How Did We Get Here:
The Run-Up To Lambeth ‘08
In 2004, Dr. Williams began preparations for the 2008 gathering, chartering a Lambeth Conference Design Group (LCDG) to prepare the program and agenda. From the time that ACC-13 met in Nottingham in June 2005, Williams began signaling an end to the approach of past conferences, which pivoted more on resolutions and reports. He instead favored a seminar/personal encounter model that he claimed would not “avoid the big issues,” but focus mainly on allowing bishops to “meet Jesus afresh,” rebuild trust relationships, and be “empowered and equipped” for mission.
Responses to the change in structure for Lambeth were slow in coming, but at length some conservative Global South leaders publicly rejected the idea that the Conference would not directly confront and seek to resolve the real issues buffeting the Communion, particularly given the huge expense of the meeting. “A Lambeth Conference that will not be able to guide the church in a way that [it] will embrace” and “comply with” is “not worth attending,” Nigerian Archbishop Peter Akinola said in January 2007.
THE ISSUE among conservative Anglican leaders would not be just the Lambeth program, however, but its participants.
A September 2006 report, Road to Lambeth, commissioned by the primates of the Council of Anglican Provinces in Africa (CAPA), urged African bishops not to “attend any Lambeth Conference to which the violators of the [1998] Lambeth Resolution [on human sexuality] are also invited as participants or observers.”
The Church of Uganda moved first. In December 2006, it endorsed the call to boycott Lambeth if Bishop Robinson and the bishops who consecrated him were present.
Of the 43 bishops who laid hands on Gene Robinson in 2003, 17 potentially could be invited to Lambeth: Bishops Joe Burnett of Nebraska; Chilton Knudsen, Maine; Martin Barahona, El Salvador; Michael Ingham, New Westminster, Canada; Bruce Stavert, Quebec, Canada; John Chane, Washington, D.C.; George Counsell, New Jersey; James Jelinek, Minnesota; Thomas C. Ely, Vermont; M. Thomas Shaw, Massachusetts; Andrew Smith, Connecticut; Orris G. Walker Jr., Long Island; Wilfredo Ramos-Orench, Central Ecuador; Suffragan Bishops Roy Cederholm and Gayle Harris of Massachusetts, James Curry of Connecticut, and Catherine Roskam of New York.
The 2004 Windsor Report had urged Dr. Williams not to give these bishops a role in Communion councils; it stated in paragraph 134 that “those who took part as consecrators of Gene Robinson should be invited to consider in all conscience whether they should withdraw themselves from representative functions in the Anglican Communion. We urge this in order to create the space necessary to enable the healing of the Communion.” However, little was done to enforce this recommendation.
Speaking in regard to Lambeth in January 2007, Archbishop Akinola said his province would wait and see whether TEC honored the Windsor Report requests by instituting a ban on the further blessing of same-sex unions (which it had not done at General Convention 2006) and by expressing its “regret” for breaching Anglican “bonds of affection” in the Robinson affair. (General Convention voiced regret for the “strain” on relations, and – only under pressure late in the meeting – agreed to withhold consent for further practicing homosexual bishops).
ON MAY 22, 2007, Williams was about to leave for a three-month sabbatical, and still awaited were key Canadian and TEC meetings in June and September, respectively, that were slated to respond to the primates’ latest round of requests that the provinces come into line on sexuality teaching. But it was on that day that Dr. Williams made his move, issuing invitations to Lambeth to some 880 bishops, including to Robinson’s consecrators and all North American bishops who had permitted same-sex blessings except Robinson.
Only nine invitations were held back: those to Bishop Robinson; the Bishop of Harare, Nolbert Kunonga (who faced travel restrictions to Europe due to his collaboration with Zimbabwe strongman Robert Mugabe); Recife Bishop Robinson Cavalcanti, a conservative who realigned with the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone after being deposed by leaders of the (TEC-planted) Brazilian province; and faithful U.S. bishops consecrated by overseas provinces to minister to Anglicans who had left TEC over theological differences, namely, Bishop Charles Murphy of the Rwandan-backed Anglican Mission in the Americas, and Bishop Martyn Minns of the Nigerian-supported Convocation of Anglicans in North America, and their four suffragans.
Speaking to reporters in London May 22, ACC General Secretary, Canon Kenneth Kearon, said Gene Robinson was excluded due to the “widespread objections in many parts of the Communion to his consecration and…ministry,” while the faithful foreign-backed American bishops would not be invited because their consecrations were “irregular” and Lambeth does not “recognize their ministry.”
In a letter accompanying the Conference invitations, Dr. Williams said he hoped Lambeth would be “a place where we can try and get more clarity about the limits of our diversity and the means of deepening our Communion, so we can speak together with conviction and clarity to the world.” However, it would not be “a formal synod or council of the bishops of the Communion,” he said.
The Archbishop contended that there was no taint in participating in the Conference alongside the Robinson consecrators. Attendance did not commit a bishop to accept “the position of others as necessarily a legitimate expression of Anglican doctrine and discipline,” he said.
(Later, at Lambeth, he defended his decision to invite the Robinson consecrators by claiming that some of them had “expressed sorrow and asked for forgiveness,” and that TEC through its House of Bishops had “asked for forgiveness”; if so, such comments have not been publicized. He also said that “just over 50 percent” of primates thought the HOB responded adequately to inquiries regarding its homosexuality policies in September 2007, though late last year he said the HOB had “not satisfied many in the Communion” on the matter of same-sex blessings.)
After the Lambeth invitations went out, first the Rwandan province (in June 2007) and then Nigeria (in January 2008) said their bishops would not attend the Conference if their U.S. bishops were not invited, and if the 17 Robinson consecrators were present.
Archbishop Akinola instead announced a Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) in Jerusalem in June. Nigeria, Rwanda, Kenya and Australia’s largest diocese, Sydney, announced decisions to send bishops to GAFCON over Lambeth. GAFCON would not be a rival to Lambeth, Akinola explained, but would address the issues Lambeth sought to avoid. Some 1,200 persons from around the world, including nearly 300 bishops representing most of the world’s active Anglicans, participated in GAFCON. They launched an international movement there to reclaim the Communion for the historic faith, based on a statement and theological accord that would stand in stark contrast to what came out of Canterbury in early August.
AS LAMBETH GOT UNDERWAY on the University of Kent campus, then, a quarter of the Communion’s active bishops were absent for reasons of conscience, a reality lamented in Canterbury.
A total of 617 bishops were registered from the Communion’s 722 dioceses, 5 missionary districts, and 2 ecclesial jurisdictions (Macao and the Falklands/British Antarctic Territories).
The largest bloc of prelates in attendance came from The Episcopal Church, which sent 127 bishops, followed by the Church of England, with 113 bishops. Rounding out the top five in numbers of bishops present were Australia, 39; Canada, 37; and Southern Africa, 27, with these five provinces sending over 55 percent of all bishops present.
Of the prelates identified as absent, 214 bishops from 10 provinces made an affirmative decision not to accept Dr. Williams’ invitation, backing the Road to Lambeth boycott: Australia, 7; Southern Cone, 1 (Frank Lyons-Bolivia); Episcopal Church, 1 (James Adams-Western Kansas); Church of England, 3 (Michael Nazir-Ali-Rochester, Wallace Benn-Lewes, Pete Broadbent-Willesden); Uganda, 30; Nigeria, 137; Kenya, 25; Rwanda, 8; South East Asia, 1; and Jerusalem and the Middle East, 1.
From Africa’s 324 dioceses, 200 diocesan bishops (61 percent) were identified as having declined Williams’ invitation.
The Pakistani-born Bishop Nazir-Ali said his “difficulty” in attending Lambeth arose from “Eucharistic fellowship with and teaching the common faith alongside those who have ordained a person to be bishop whose style of life is contrary” to biblical and church teaching. It would be “difficult to be around a common table” in fellowship “with people who have gone against the common” mind and received teachings of the church, he said. His fellow C of E bishop, Wallace Benn, cited similar reasons for his absence.
While Canon Kearon claimed that at least 680 bishops participated in Lambeth, this total included Roman Catholic, Lutheran, Orthodox, retired Anglican bishops and other episcopally ordained guests. The exact number of serving Anglican bishops that were present remains unknown; however, no more than 602 Anglican bishops appeared in the group photo taken at the Conference midpoint. (For more on this, see “Lambeth, Numbers, And Legitimacy” in the “Focus” section.)
A Controlled Conference
As the bishops and their spouses (who participated in a parallel conference in the university’s sports hall) arrived on the Kent University campus – a somewhat decaying 1960s-era complex designed by a prison architect – other differences between Lambeth ‘08 and past Conferences quickly became apparent.
Security, scheduling and secrecy were new themes. Whereas at past Lambeth Conferences most of the bishops’ deliberations were open to public scrutiny, at the 2008 assembly all but a handful of events were off limits to the public, including the media. Chain link fences some eight feet high had been placed around the key venues, and guards posted at intervals across the campus to control access.
The guards – armed Kent police, uniformed university security guards, and yellow-sashed conference stewards - were a constant, and at times, obtrusive presence. To enter the press car park, a reporter had to pass through two chained fences, showing his press and parking passes, as well as passes for anyone else in the car.
Initially, Conference officials declined to provide reporters with a list of bishops present.
“The names of the bishops attending Lambeth would not be revealed as this was secret,” reported The Church of England Newspaper. “The reason for the secrecy was a secret, though explanations of privacy…and security concerns were offered.”
After pressure from reporters, officials finally issued a list only of those bishops at the Conference who gave permission to have their names released. (Only later was sufficient data available to arrive at the earlier-cited registration totals.)
Moreover, as almost all Lambeth sessions were closed to the media for the first time, little firsthand observation of the proceedings was possible.
“A request by The Times to attend the (bishops’) session on media training, entitled ‘Never say no to the press,’ was met with a ‘no’ from Conference organizers,” CEN wryly observed.
IN PAST CONFERENCES, study materials were prepared and released months ahead of time, and bishops were assigned to committees that would work on specific issues. Bishops were encouraged to contact one another before the start of the Conference to review the study materials and begin work.
At this Conference, a Lambeth Reader was distributed to the bishops with their registration packets, but no public copies of the document were made available. Nor was advance word given to the bishops of the names of their fellow group members. The secrecy extended to senior bishops of the Church of England, who were not briefed on the Conference until three weeks before its start.
The Lambeth Reader’s tone struck a discordant note with some, singling out the boycotting bishops for opprobrium. They were charged with shirking their “collegial responsibility” at a time of conflict, and weakening the Body of Christ.
However, the Lambeth Reader was left unread by most bishops, as it soon became apparent its papers had no bearing on the life and work of the meeting – and no time was programmed into the Conference for reading or reflection.
As at past Lambeth gatherings, an exhibition hall/marketplace for vendors was set aside. At the ‘98 Conference these were mostly clerical tailors, booksellers and purveyors of ecclesiastical accoutrements, but this time the bulk of vendors were representatives of special interest groups - with members of the homosexual lobby predominating. A coalition of “LGBT” (lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender) groups also published a daily newspaper, Lambeth Witness, which was made available all over the campus. Bishop Robinson was permitted in the marketplace, but it seemed over time that the restricted setting drew the media-savvy prelate to the friendlier climes of London.
IN HIS WELCOMING ADDRESS – closed to the press - Dr. Williams told the bishops and their spouses that the 14th Lambeth Conference would not seek to settle the conflict within the Communion, but would focus on building relationships. These friendships would not overcome the divisions, but “it is certain that without the building of relationships the challenges will never be resolved,” he said according to bishops present.
DR. WILLIAMS then outlined the structure of the meeting. The first three days would consist of a retreat, during which he would deliver five lectures to the bishops at Canterbury Cathedral, interspersed with periods of meditation and reflection. Members of the public could then attend the opening Eucharist on the first Sunday, and the bishops would begin work on the following Monday. Their day would be divided into sessions beginning at 7:30 with worship and Bible study and going most nights until the late evening. The schedule also would include a day trip to London to participate in a march in support of the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) before dining at Lambeth Palace and heading for Buckingham Palace for the customary tea party with the Queen.
The bishops were split into Bible study groups of 8 brought together based on geographical and gender considerations. Using materials prepared by Prof. Gerald West of the University of Kwa-Zulu, Natal (South Africa), the bishops were asked to work through portions of John’s Gospel and discuss questions prepared by Dr. West.
The Bible study groups would then re-form after a tea break into indaba groups of approximately 40 bishops and guests each; 75 ecumenical guests ranging from the Salvation Army to an eight-man team from the Roman Catholic Church were included in all Conference deliberations. Indaba, a Zulu word, the bishops were told, was a consensus-building process by which African villagers would discuss issues in an egalitarian town-hall fashion.
In the afternoons and early evenings, before and after the closed worship services, the bishops would attend plenary sessions or self-select sessions. The latter sessions, closed to outsiders, would address issues of parochial concern, from climate change to Catholicism, with several sessions scheduled simultaneously each business day.
A few open plenary sessions were scheduled in the evenings in a marquee - a blue tent that could accommodate roughly 1,000 people - while the day closed with evening prayer. Conspicuously absent from the Lambeth ‘08 script was free time for bishops to caucus by province or region, entertain, or get away from the grim environs of the University of Kent.
The Retreat
During the cathedral retreat, the talks given by Dr. Williams on the theme of “God’s Mission and a Bishop’s Discipleship” appeared to have been well received by a cross-section of bishops. Lexington (KY) Bishop Stacy Sauls said the central argument of the talks had been that “our episcopal ministry is a revealing of Jesus” and that bishops were a “symbol of unity” for the church.
But they carried Dr. Williams’ ideas about revelation and truth. Those on the left and right who had “written off” their theological opponents were in danger of losing the charism of episcopacy, for no single party or person was in sole possession of the truth, the Archbishop reportedly argued. Anglican bishops must stay together in fellowship, he said.
Be prepared to find “the imperative of Jesus in everyone and anyone in the Communion,” Dr. Williams asserted, for it is not “huge numbers or massive resources that guarantee truth.”
Truth is found in paying “unsparing attention to Christ in one another,” and through a “common discipline and shape of prayer” articulated in the post-BCP Anglican world through a common faithfulness and inner prayer life.
The Opening Week
The spirit of pan-Anglican bonhomie fostered by the closed three-day retreat did not survive the opening Eucharist on Sunday, July 20, as, like those absent from the meeting, some bishops present were unable receive communion with their colleagues.
In a break with past Lambeth Conferences, the bishops did not process into Canterbury Cathedral grouped together by province, but in an undifferentiated mass, with only the primates a distinctive body amongst the bishops. LCDG member, the Rev Ian Douglas, professor of World Mission at Episcopal Divinity School, stated that the change stemmed from a desire to further the fellowship gained during the retreat and avoid the “triumphalistic” processions of former years. It had nothing to do with the boycott, he said, rejecting assertions that a mob of bishops would disguise the absence of a significant number of their brethren.
PREACHING at the invitation of Dr. Williams, the Bishop of Colombo, Duleep de Chickera, called for the bishops to be agents of social and political change, and for the Communion to “resuscitate the challenge of unity in diversity.”
“In Christ we are all equal,” the Ceylonese bishop said; there is “space for all” within the Communion regardless of “color, race, gender or sexual orientation.”
The Communion must exercise its “prophetic voice” and be the “voice of the voiceless,” calling into “accountability those who abuse power,” the prelate stated.
The bishops wore choir dress, and only Dr. Williams and his suffragans and chaplains wore Eucharistic vestments, avoiding potential controversy by making clear to traditionalists that none of the women bishops was concelebrating the Eucharist.
While the rood screen prevented a clear view of the bishops during the service, and the television cameras turned away to film the choir while the host was distributed, three primates and eight bishops confirmed to The Christian Challenge that they had abstained from receiving the host due to the presence of the Robinson consecrators. However, each asked not to be named, as their actions were not political statements, but matters dictated by conscience.
Following the service, Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori told reporters that the “glorious” gathering was symbolic of the “inclusive” nature of Anglicanism. Presiding Bishop Gregory Venables of the Southern Cone - one of the minority of GAFCON-aligned bishops that opted to attend Lambeth - said the service highlighted everything that was wrong with the Communion: a social justice sermon that lauded works and social regeneration, but ignored personal regeneration and broken Eucharistic fellowship.
THE BISHOPS then returned to the university campus for Dr. Williams’ presidential address, given in closed session. The Archbishop acknowledged that the Communion was “in the middle of one of the most severe challenges,” but said the “options before us are not irreparable schism or forced assimilation.” The way forward was through an Anglican Covenant - the pact proposed by the Windsor Report to help ensure unity in basic beliefs and mutual accountability among historically autonomous Anglican provinces. This would allow “an Anglicanism whose diversity is limited not by centralized control but by consent – consent based on a serious common assessment of the implications of local change.”
Fears that the indaba process would be used to stifle dissent and avoid action were misplaced, he maintained. “Quite a few people have said that the new ways we’re suggesting of doing our business are an attempt to avoid tough decisions and have the effect of replacing substance with process. To such people, I’d simply say, ‘How effective have the old methods really been?’”
“We need renewal, and this is the moment for it,” Dr. Williams said, charging the bishops to use the indaba method to “help shape fresh, more honest and more constructive ways of being a conference – and being a communion.”
FOR EVERY indaba session, the bishops were given a theme, aim, and focus question. Session 5, on July 25, for example, opened with the theme of “Serving together—the bishop and other churches.” For this, the bishops were asked to “explore specifically what contributions bishops can make to developing ‘joint action for mission’ working ecumenically.” Then each bishop was given up to two minutes to respond to the question, “Working specifically with other churches, how can you as a bishop, further the mission we share together in your work?”
South African Archbishop Thabo Makgoba - one of Lambeth’s organizers - conceded that the division of the bishops into groups of 40 to discuss specific issues in the space of two hours did not appear to allow enough time for a full airing of views. “Mathematically, it won’t make a lot of sense,” he said. But he maintained that, “The whole conference is an indaba. Indaba starts with the walk from your room.”
Central Pennsylvania Bishop Nathan Baxter lauded the small group encounters, saying that “bishops listening together” had set a respectful tone for the gathering and fostered personal relationships.
By contrast, another American bishop wrote his diocese during the Conference that the indaba process was “asinine.” He said: “Many of the Africans are saying, ‘This isn’t indaba at all! First of all, we are not a village, and we don’t know each other. And secondly, we are not attempting to solve a problem; we are talking in small groups about minor issues of little consequence’.”
Even the Archbishop of York, the Ugandan-born Dr. John Sentamu, asked, “If indaba is such a great idea, why is Africa in such a mess?”
While most bishops said they enjoyed the fellowship of the smaller 8-member Bible studies, there was unease in some quarters with the agenda being promoted through the study materials. “We’re being manipulated” into saying that “all will be well if we only keep talking,” said Archbishop Venables.
“I hoped we would be able to talk about the very serious things. We tried to but were unable to,” he said. The indaba sessions had “helped, but there wasn’t enough trust” among the bishops to make it work. The “level of conflict, fear, mistrust, [and] frustration hasn’t allowed it.”
Matters were not helped when it emerged that the American Church had given its bishops a sheet of “talking points” to use in the group sessions to try to promote liberal attitudes toward gay clergy.
The Conference Begins To Unravel
While the Eucharist boycott hinted that all was not well, the first open clash in the Conference came on July 22, when the Episcopal Church of the Sudan released a statement calling for TEC to repent and immediately cease its advocacy of gay bishops and blessings.
Rebuffed in his attempt to release the statement through the Conference press office, Dr. Daniel Deng, Archbishop of Juba and Primate of the Sudan, walked into the press room that afternoon and gave an impromptu briefing, calling for Gene Robinson to step aside to save the Communion.
THREE ROMAN CATHOLIC cardinals also rained on Dr. Williams’ parade, offering progressively harsher assessments of the state of Anglicanism and its relations with Rome.
One of the three, the Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, urged Anglicans to put their house in order, and decide what they believe.
Citing the disputes over women’s ordination, he said that, “if Anglicans themselves disagree over this development, and find yourselves unable fully to recognize each other’s ministry, how could we?”
Dialogue between Anglicans and Roman Catholics now appeared pointless due to the ecclesiological anarchy spreading across the Communion. “If we are to make progress through dialogue, we must be able to reach a solemn and binding agreement with our dialogue partners. And we want to see a deepening, not a lessening, of communion in their own ecclesial life,” Cardinal Murphy-O’Connor said.
Another of the Catholic delegation, Cardinal Walter Kasper, president of the Pontifical Council for Promoting Christian Unity, urged Anglicans on July 31 to embark on a new “Oxford Movement” to revitalize the church, and warned that the apparent laxity over gay clergy and moves by the Church of England to introduce women bishops had effectively ended the quest for Roman recognition of the validity of Anglican orders.
Kasper hinted as well that the Vatican might begin direct talks with GAFCON and other conservative Anglican movements. While “troubled and saddened” by the potential fragmentation of the Anglican Communion, he said, Rome had a duty to ask, should Anglicanism come apart, “who will our dialogue partner be? Should we, and how can we, appropriately and honestly engage in conversations also with those who share Catholic perspectives on the points currently in dispute, and who disagree with some developments within the Anglican Communion or particular Anglican provinces? What do you expect in this situation from the Church of Rome, which in the words of Ignatius of Antioch is to preside over the Church in love?”
The Moscow Patriarchate was blunt in its critique. The introduction of women and homosexual bishops would exclude “even the theoretical possibility of the Orthodox churches acknowledging the apostolic succession” of Anglican bishops, Bishop Hilarion of Vienna told Dr. Williams on July 28.
YET ANOTHER PUNCH came on August 1, when Ugandan Archbishop Henry Orombi wrote a letter to The Times (at the newspaper’s invitation), saying that Dr. Williams’ decision to invite to Lambeth the bishops who consecrated Robinson or have sanctioned same-sex blessings was a “further betrayal” that had convinced the “stunned” Ugandan bishops to skip the Conference.
While there are four “instruments” of unity in the Communion, “de facto, there is only one - the Archbishop of Canterbury.” These instruments had “utterly failed” the church, Orombi charged.
Noting that even the Pope is elected by his peers, he said that, “The spiritual leadership of a global communion of independent and autonomous provinces should not be reduced to one man appointed by a secular government.” This, he said, was “a remnant of British colonialism, and it is not serving us well.”
FOLLOWING UPON Orombi’s comments was a call by two senior English bishops, Michael Scott-Joynt of Winchester and Michael Langrish of Exeter, for Williams to negotiate an “orderly separation” of liberals and conservatives while it might still be possible to remain in “some kind of fellowship.”
The anxiety over the direction of the Communion was also reflected in several late night meetings of the conservative Global South primates at Lambeth (most of them not aligned with GAFCON). United in their identification of the problem, the primates were divided as to how to respond, with Dr. Mouneer Anis of Jerusalem and the Middle East and Archbishop John Chew of Southeast Asia counseling forbearance towards Dr. Williams and his policy of delay, while Archbishop Venables and the African primates (believed to have included the archbishops of Sudan, Tanzania and West Africa) urged action.
Their hopes of forging a united front at Lambeth failed, however. While one meeting of the Global South bishops and their supporters from the West took place, and some regional groupings of conservative bishops issued their own statements, they were unable as a body to gather any momentum to promote an alternative to the Conference agenda.
Many bishops spoke of their frustration with the meeting’s secrecy, often asking the media to let them know what was happening at Lambeth, as they did not know. The tight schedule also hindered pre-planned action, as the only time to meet came late at night.
The “Bombshell”
It was only in its last week that Lambeth turned to more pivotal issues.
Hearings were held on the process toward adopting the Anglican Covenant, now in its second draft by the Covenant Design Group, led by West Indies Archbishop Drexel Gomez. Still apparent during Lambeth was that some liberals chafe at the idea of any theological constraints or discipline, while some conservatives worry that the covenant as it stands will not deliver in either respect. Another issue is that the covenant is not an immediate remedy for the Communion. Estimates in Canterbury were that it might be a decade before most provinces have adopted the covenant, though Archbishop Gomez more recently asserted a time frame of three to five years. But for Dr. Williams, a key advantage of the covenant process is that it will shift the onus of deciding who is in or out of the Communion away from his office and onto the provinces, which must choose whether or not to adopt the pact.
More diverting were proposals during Lambeth’s last week from the Windsor Continuation Group (WCG), a panel tasked by Dr. Williams with addressing outstanding questions arising from the Windsor Report, which recommended ways to repair relationships damaged by unilateral pro-gay actions in the North American provinces. Chaired by the retired primate of Jerusalem and the Middle East, Bishop Clive Handford, the WCG took up the question of what was necessary to hold things together in the period leading up to the covenant’s establishment.
Rumored in advance to contain a “bombshell,” the suggestions from the WCG instead included mainly a reassertion of the Windsor-requested moratoria, and a “Pastoral Forum” that many thought resembled the failed Panel of Reference; it would try to respond quickly to conflict situations in the Communion, and encourage compliance with the moratoria. Among a few new twists, though, was the WCG’s suggestion that the Pastoral Forum gather together and hold “in trust” all of the now-foreign-supported parishes and dioceses that have fled their liberal North American provinces - pending reunion of the refugees with those same provinces.
In the case of the covenant and WCG proposals, the Lambeth bishops were only briefed on the work of the committees. While the prelates could offer comments and suggestions, they were not given the authority to develop the relevant documents.
The Culmination
The committee work and the Lambeth group sessions all fed into a final document composed as the meeting was underway.
On August 3, the conference released a closing statement that noted the broad desire for, but difficulty of upholding, a “season of gracious restraint” marked by abstentions from the consecration and blessing of partnered homosexuals, and foreign incursions into the jurisdictions of the North American provinces.
Written as a “Reflections” paper, the 42-page statement was produced by a committee led by Archbishop Roger Herft of Perth. The paper is described as a “narrative” of the meeting, and attempts to summarize the bishops’ discussions on the various issues addressed; it is not a consensus statement of Lambeth’s vision for the Communion or its position on disputed matters. The bishops were asked, not whether they agreed with the document, but “whether they could see their voices” amidst the various reflections it contains.
In addition to the sexuality issue, the Reflections document spoke to concerns over the environment, war, violence to women and children, disease, and hunger, with the bishops particularly endorsing the MDGs. The paper called for a laundry list of social, economic and political reforms - from peace in Korea to an end to the Mugabe regime.
IN THE CLOSING press conference, Dr. Williams said Lambeth had proven that the bishops could speak to each other respectfully and prayerfully, and had a “strong commitment to remain unified.” And the MDG walk showed that, even in “its current rather wobbly state,” the Communion was capable of being a witness for change in the world, he said.
In his final presidential address, Archbishop Williams pledged to seek within two months a “clear and detailed” plan for the new Pastoral Forum. While that committee did its work and the covenant process advanced, he emphasized the need to avoid provocations. He maintained that there was “wide agreement” on the moratoria, but upset some liberals in specifically warning that the Communion would continue in “grave peril” if the North American provinces did not desist from their pro-gay practices.
“The pieces are on the board” for the resolution of the Anglican conflict, he asserted. “And in the months ahead it will be important to invite those absent from Lambeth to be involved in these next stages.” Notably, after refusing calls to convene a Primates’ Meeting before Lambeth, the Archbishop said he would bring the primates together in early 2009.
Dr. Williams also acknowledged that unlike the ’98 Conference, which ended with a one million-pound surplus, the 2008 Conference had run into debt. According to an internal Conference document distributed to registered bishops, the budget for the meeting was 4.4 million pounds, and 1.2 million for the Spouses’ Conference, excluding the costs of travel to Canterbury. On August 11, the Board of Governors of the Church Commissioners of the Church of England extended an emergency loan of 600,000 pounds to help cover the estimated 1.2 million-pound shortfall. Inevitably, the small but wealthy Episcopal Church was asked for assistance as well.
Was It Worth It?
Defined in his terms, the Lambeth Conference was a success for Dr. Williams. Between July 16 and August 3 the Anglican Communion did not break apart. The strategy of setting left against right in pursuit of dialogue for the sake of delay, as articulated in the revelatory 2003 memo, proved effective.
Many bishops agreed, writing with relief that the Communion was safe and that this time around, the Pastoral Forum, the Windsor Continuation Group, and the Anglican Covenant would make all the difference.
Others – on both the left and the right - questioned the Archbishop’s criteria for success.
“The miracle hasn’t happened,” Archbishop Venables said on his last day at Lambeth. While it was not announced during Lambeth, a “division [remains] over what it means to be a Christian, what it means to be a church,” he said. “So far we have held it together by appealing to diversity,” but that was not enough, as the point had been reached where conscience dictated that the church take a stand.
The idea of a moratorium was “attractive,” but it was clear that the “North Americans will not stop doing what they are doing, and they have said so,” he noted. “And I’m not going to stop now” in supporting North American faithful, said the prelate, who has taken one former TEC diocese under his wing, with possibly three more to follow this fall. “There is no safe place for them.”
“Liberalism is now totalitarianism,” he maintained. “There is no place for those who don’t agree.”
Lambeth 2008 did not “get to the root of the process problem. We talk but nothing is decided,” he said. There are “no ground rules to define the Anglican Church,” and we now have “no way of avoiding the division.”
When Venables met later in August with fellow members of the Primates’ Council of GAFCON – now called the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans - the leaders, while not rejecting the Windsor or covenant processes outright, said it was clear that some in the Communion would keep sanctioning sinful practices, and that Lambeth offered nothing new to address the situation; hence, the FCA’s efforts to reform and renew the Communion would go forward.
WRITING IN his diocesan newspaper upon his return to Washington, leading liberal Bishop John Chane was not sanguine about the Communion’s future prospects, either, and defended his decision not to honor the moratoria.
In his attempts to be non-partial, Dr. Williams had favored the right, Bishop Chane charged. “There was far too much recognition of those who chose not to participate in this Lambeth Conference and far too little recognition of those bishops who chose to come,” he contended. Moreover, homosexuals continued to be a scapegoat for the Communion’s troubles. “Blaming the least among us continues to divert our attention away from the issues that threaten the very existence of humankind and the environmental health of our planet,” he wrote.
“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,” Chane said. “The Anglican Communion must face the hard truth that when we scapegoat and victimize one group of people in the church, all of us become victims of our own prejudice and sinfulness.”
Chane was publicly joined in his “no retreat” posture by Los Angeles Bishop Jon Bruno, California Bishop Marc Andrus, New Jersey Bishop Mark Beckwith, and Massachusetts Bishop M. Thomas Shaw. Also indicating the unlikelihood of a rollback was Archbishop Fred Hiltz of the Anglican Church of Canada, where one diocese already performs same-sex blessings, and four others want to implement them.
For her part, Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori contended in a post-Lambeth webcast that TEC for some time has been observing the “season of gracious restraint,” and that only the General Convention could do anything about these issues.
But she added that, “We were very clear (that), for an overwhelming majority of the bishops of this church…the well being and adequate and appropriate pastoral care of gay and lesbian members of [TEC] is a significant mission issue for us,” and that individual bishops “have always made their own decisions within the canonical responsibilities of their dioceses.”
THAT THERE will be no real change in business as usual, Lambeth notwithstanding, was further made clear on September 18, when Bishop Jefferts Schori presided over a House of Bishops’ meeting that voted to depose conservative Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan.
Acting only five days after being formally notified that the matter would be considered at the HOB meeting in Salt Lake City, U.S. prelates agreed that Duncan had “abandoned the communion” of TEC by holding that his diocese may realign with another part of the Anglican Communion – to which TEC still claims to belong. The Pittsburgh diocese was not due to vote on realignment until October 4.
The move to defrock this leading U.S. defender of the historic faith effectively ended the “season of gracious restraint,” and repudiated Dr. Williams’ authority. As well, it had, at this writing, sparked an international backlash that had half a dozen senior Church of England bishops siding with Duncan, and former Southern Cone Primate Colin Bazley spearheading a call for Williams to suspend TEC from the Communion and support a new North American province.
DR. WILLIAMS’ one opportunity, perhaps until 2018, to convince the bishops that the Communion was more than an antiquarian institution, that it stood for something more than nostalgia, was lost in a swirl of debt, dissension and busy work. While no formal statements on human sexuality were overturned or issued, the move towards making all points of view valid - of countenancing the equivalency of sociology, experience, and psychology with Scripture, Tradition and reason - marked the end of an era.
While the via negativa, the unknowability of God, may have triumphed in a graduate seminar, as a model for leading the church it does not suffice. Dr. Williams’ belief in the absence of a single truth - or the potential for truth to be found in conflict - coupled with the Communion’s weak political structures, has brought the Communion to this point.
END
THE REV. GEORGE CONGER is chief correspondent for The Church of England Newspaper, and over the past ten years has written widely for a variety of newspapers, magazines and journals on the Anglican Communion and religious and political affairs. Educated at Duke, Yale and Oxford Universities, he is an honorary canon of St. Matthews Cathedral in Dallas, and chaplain to Treasure Coast Hospice in Fort Pierce, Florida.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)