Sunday, October 31, 2010

"I am the most sued Anglican Bishop in all of North America" - Jack Iker

"I am the most sued Anglican Bishop in all of North America" - Jack Iker

The following is a transcription of Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth Bishop Jack Iker's remarks to the United Kingdom's Forward in Faith's National Assembly on Saturday, Oct. 16 in London, England.

Transcription by Mary Ann Mueller
www.virtueonline.org
October 30, 2010

Bishop Iker: Good afternoon everyone, and thank you for this opportunity to speak to you briefly and share in your Assembly. As I was listening to your conversation yesterday afternoon, it struck me that it was very similar to the conversations of course, that are going on in my own diocese.

When [FiF-UK Director] Stephen (Parkinson) asked me if I would speak briefly this afternoon I said: "Well, what would you like to talk about?" He said: "Oh, tell them about the litigation. You should get some good laughs out of that."

Audience: Laughter

Read the full story at www.VirtueOnline.org

SOUTH CAROLINA: Four Retired Bishops Blast New Arbitrary Canons

SOUTH CAROLINA: Four Retired Bishops Blast New Arbitrary Canons

Special to Virtueonline
www.virtueonline.org
October 30, 2010

Radical new canons were passed at General Convention in 2009 to go into effect in July, 2011. These canons give bishops (and the presiding bishop) unprecedented and virtually unlimited powers that replace the historic restraints and checks on arbitrary authority and reduce the role of laity in church discipline.

They greatly increase the number and nature of clergy offenses, while dramatically inflating the role of bishops, not only in initiating, but effectively controlling, the outcome of disciplinary decisions. The central and historic role of the Standing Committee (made up of elected laity and clergy, without the bishop) has served in these cases as a grand jury deciding whether the facts do, or do not, merit a trial. The Standing Committee's role has been removed. These new canons will give bishops (and the presiding bishop) authority to depose clergy (and bishops) without an adequate trial.

Read the full story at www.VirtueOnline.org

CNS—Israelis not happy with synod statement, angry over bishop’s remarks

Several prominent Israelis expressed concern over a statement by the Synod of Bishops for the Middle East, which said Jews cannot use the Bible to justify injustices.

But tensions increased when a U.S. bishop told reporters at the synod that Jews could no longer regard themselves as God's "chosen people" or Israel as "the Promised Land," because Jesus' message showed that God loved and chose all people to be his own.

The Vatican spokesman, Jesuit Father Federico Lombardi, said Oct. 25 that the final message of the Synod of Bishops reflected the opinion of the synod itself, while the remarks by Melkite Bishop Cyrille S. Bustros of Newton, Mass., were to be considered his personal opinion.

Read it all.

From the Jerusalem Post

Saturday, October 30, 2010

Loren Fox—Engaging with Islam’s Various Faces

We have heard about Islam, mosques, and freedom of religion a whole lot lately. Much of that conversation has been energized with passions and fears. In light of it all, I find myself really torn by the whole discussion about Islam and the Church’s response. Let me be clear it is fair to be confused by Islam, even concerned by it.

Most of us do not know the difference between Sunni, Shia and Sufi Muslims, or how to read the Quran or each Hadith. In the midst of the current conversation, I offer my own perspective. My experience of Islam is very different than what I most often see in the media here in the US--for two key reasons. First, my experience with Islam really began in Southeast Asia where the Muslims see themselves differently than those in the Middle East.

Second, and more importantly, my focus in Southeast Asia was to share the Good News of Jesus with Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus, and Freethinkers alike. As a result, I am fascinated by the variety of expressions of Islam. There the three main schools, Sunni, Shi’ite and Sufi—which have protestant, catholic and charismatic qualities. They also have their own progressives, secularists, fundamentalists, off-shoots, and cults.

Furthermore, I have a deep assurance that Islam does not stand up well to the witness of Jesus Christ.

Read it all.

Executive Council Writes to Group in South Carolina Upset with the Diocesean Direction

Presiding Bishop interviewed by The Washington Post

From The Washington Post:



Question - who in heaven's name is she talking about in the opening statement? "If you are going to stay as a leader in THIS organization you HAVE to be engaged even if you don't like this decision over here, AND if you are not willing to be engaged it's time to let go of your leadership position."

Engaged in what?? What does that mean?

Is she referring to The Rt. Rev'd Mark Lawrence, the Bishop of South Carolina?

One wonders what Dr. King would make of such a statement.

Dispatches from the HoB/D: We Need to Borrow More to Get Out of Debt

There have been a number of posts concerning the finances and leadership of the Episcopal Church. As the chair of the finance committee and a member of the audit committee, I want to address what I understand to be the key issues and the steps we are taking to address them.

The first issue is the money we have borrowed to pay for the renovations to the Church Center and the purchase of a parking lot as a future site for the national archives.

When those needs arose, the staff and Executive Council chose to borrow a combined $47 million dollars from our $50 million line of credit. The terms allowed us to pay as much or little principal as we chose - and we have made primarily interest payments and only about $500,000 in principal payments over the past six year. I and other members of finance and audit committees as well as previous members of those committees with extensive financial expertise whom we have asked to advise us, believe that a loan of that amount should not be made with a line of credit. It is not a standard financial practice to use a line of credit for major capital expenditures. The purpose of a line of credit is to cover cash shortfalls for small amounts of time and is normally repaid as soon as possible (generally within a year).

In retrospect, this loan was undertaken at the time when banks encouraged all of us, individual homeowners and organizations, to over-extend ourselves and to take on loans that were not adequately secured. I believe that is what happened to us. But now the time has come for us to put our financial house in order.

It was entirely appropriate and necessary for us to do the renovations at Church Center and some of the costs were a result of the need for asbestos abatement and not optional. Concerning the proposed future site of the Archives in Texas, (the parking lot) some of us were convinced that the availability of the parking lot was a good purchase at the time, especially since the Archives had been asked to vacate the space to the Seminary of the Southwest, the current home of the Archives. The parking lot is a functioning enterprise and its income is sufficient (at the currently low interest rates) to make interest and some principal payment. If interest rates increase, as well they may, this situation would change. In any case, we need a new site for the Archives and the current parking lot is one option for that.

I and others believe we now need to obtain mortgages or private financing, using the properties as collateral, just as most of us use our homes as collateral for our mortgages. With interest rates at record low levels, we believe we should secure loans and make both interest and principal payment to service our debt - preferably paying principal at an accelerated rate, so less of the church's funds goes towards interest payments and we can again be debt-free.

Several posts have suggested a conflict between the Treasurer, Kurt Barnes, and me. That assessment diminishes the importance of the issues before us undermines the commitment both Kurt and I feel for this Church. We simply have a difference of opinion as to how we should address these questions. Kurt, and others, including members of the staff, want to have the maximum amount of flexibility so if there is a shortfall in income from the dioceses, they can use more of the line of credit to fund the operations of the church and Church Center programs and pay less or no principle. That is understandable - the staff of an organization normally wants this kind of flexibility to do the work they have been given to do.

On the other hand, I believe that we should pay our debt first and make whatever cost reductions are necessary to allow us to do so. That is also understandable - the role of the finance committee is to look at the big picture and the long view.

Another recent thread that has been on the HoB/D list is reflections on the decline in members. I share these concerns. If we project the decline in members and income into the future, it is clear that we can not maintain the size of the operations we currently have. We have lost about 1/3 of our members in the last 50 years - but we have a structure that has stayed pretty much the same. We need to "right-size" our structures and reduce about 1/3 of our costs. That includes General Convention, Committees/Commissions as well as Church Center programs. And it probably also will mean combining dioceses, reducing the number of bishops and committees, on the diocesan and parish levels as well. I believe these are the points Bishop Jefferts Schori was making in her comments to Executive Council.

If we begin to make those structural and organizational changes expeditiously now and focus whatever savings we can generate on our true "mission" of building the church (by which I mean, making disciples for Christ), we can turn this matter around. I keep a copy of Claude Paine's book, "Reclaiming the Great Commission" on my desk to remind me of our mission. (after all, my wife is a priest!)

If we all continue to focus on our dwindling resources, we will simply continue down an unhealthy slope. While the most current manifestations of this have focused on declining membership and finances, it is, at the end, really about vision. The system we are now in is producing what it is designed to produce. I believe we need to challenge what we are doing, change direction and ultimately change the system. That will need the hard work of many, so I hope others will do their part.

I expect these comments will generate resistance - especially from those who now have the most power and resources in the system. I hope they and we all can stop, listen to what God is saying to us and refocus on what our Book of Common Prayer says so well about God's church (i.e., God's people) existing to be the arena by which God restores all people to God and each other in Christ. If we are not about doing that, we have truly lost our way!

Del Glover,
Chair of the Finance Committee of Executive Council

THE 2010 INTERNATIONAL ANGLICAN BLOGGERS SUMMIT MEETING

Lambeth Palace, London

Transcript – Must credit MCJ

ROWAN WILLIAMS: First of all, the Archbishop of York and I would like to thank you all for coming. As many of you know, some are calling this meeting the world’s first digital Lambeth Conference because…

SCOTT GUNN: Dear God, I hope not.

ROWAN WILLIAMS: Um…why?

SCOTT GUNN: Does that mean that we’re all just going to sit around babbling for a few days and then issue some kind of meaningless statement? Because if we are, count me out. I’ve got Spurs tickets for this afternoon.

WANNABE ANGLICAN: Who are they playing?

SCOTT GUNN: Man U.

WANNABE ANGLICAN: Sweet!

ROWAN WILLIAMS: No, no, it’s nothing like that. I called this meeting because the Anglican Communion recognizes the influence and importance of the new media in Anglican affairs…

MARK HARRIS: You’ve finally figured that out, have you, Dr. Williams? Good to know. If you want, I can stick around for a week and do a seminar for Communion staff on something all the kids these days call “electronic mail.”

SARAH DYLAN BREUER: Then there’s the whole carbon footprint thing. The world’s first digital Lambeth Conference consists of a bunch of people flying in great big airplanes halfway around the world to sit in a room and stare at each other? Have someone on your staff look up the term “videoconference” some time, Your Grace.

ROWAN WILLIAMS: …and we felt that by calling a meeting of bloggers from all sides of the Anglican Comm…yes? Do you have a question?

CHRIS JOHNSON: Where’s the booze?

ROWAN WILLIAMS: Um…over there in the corner.

CHRIS JOHNSON: Open bar?

ROWAN WILLIAMS: I’m afraid I don’t know what that means.

CHRIS JOHNSON: Do we have to pay for it?

ROWAN WILLIAMS: No, no, certainly not.

CHRIS JOHNSON: Sweet!

GREG GRIFFITH: Get me something, will you, Johnson?

CHRIS JOHNSON: Will do.

ROWAN WILLIAMS: Now then, I’ve asked you here because we feel that…yes?

RED STICK RANT: What’s that thing in the case over there?

SIMON SARMIENTO: That’s William of Wykeham’s celebrated crosier.

RED STICK RANT: Can I have it?

ROWAN WILLIAMS: What? No, you can’t have it. That’s a national treasure.

WANNABE ANGLICAN: But I thought all those cases contained our participation gifts.

CAPTAIN YIPS: Really? Then I’m going home with that original edition of the first Book of Common Prayer over there.

JOHN SENTAMU: No, I’m afraid you don’t quite under…

SCOTT GUNN: Is that a Turner on the back wall?

ROWAN WILLIAMS: I believe so.

SCOTT GUNN: Sweet! Anybody got a razor blade or an Exacto knife?

SARAH DYLAN BREUER: Dibs on the Constable!

SUSAN RUSSELL: Damn it, I wanted that!

SARAH DYLAN BREUER: Too bad. You snooze, you lose, grandma.

SUSAN RUSSELL: Listen, you little punk, I will personally…

CHRIS JOHNSON: Greg?

GREG GRIFFITH: What?

CHRIS JOHNSON: Our gracious lord of Canterbury over there didn’t provide any bourbon.

GREG GRIFFITH: Crap on a stick!! Well what have they got?

CHRIS JOHNSON: A bunch of Irish and Scottish fake bourbon. I guess Europeans haven’t learned how to make real bourbon yet.

GREG GRIFFITH: Effing cradle-to-grave socialism robbing people of initiative. Just pour me a triple of one of ‘em, willya? Doesn’t matter which.

CHRIS JOHNSON: Yeah, they’re pretty much all the same anyway. Comin’ up.

ROWAN WILLIAMS: I think we’ve gotten badly sidetracked here. The items I’ve assembled in this room aren’t your participation gifts although you will be receiving tokens of our appreciation for coming here today.

JOHN SENTAMU: These items are meant to display aspects of the history of Christianity in these islands in the hopes that regardless of which side of the various controversies roiling the Anglican Communion right now that you find yourselves, you will see that we all share a common heritage that would be disastrous to lose.

ROWAN WILLIAMS: We realize that all of you represent radically different, some might even say mutually exclusive, Anglican viewpoints. It was our hope that if you could come to some point of commonality, some point of agreement…

MARK HARRIS: We already have.

ROWAN WILLIAMS: What? You have? When?

WANNABE ANGLICAN: Last night.

RED STICK RANT: We’re at this Kensington pub Sarmiento recommended called the Spork & Beanie-Weenees. We were on our, what, fourth round?

SCOTT GUNN: Fifth.

RED STICK RANT: Fifth round when Sarah just suddenly blurted something out.

CHRIS JOHNSON: Know something? I would kill for a Gentleman Jack right about now.

GREG GRIFFITH: Word.

CAPTAIN YIPS: There’s this dead silence in the group. Then we look at each other and we’re all like, “Yeah. That’s it.”

SUSAN RUSSELL: We’d reached consensus. Maybe you can call it a miracle but all of us, right and left, had reached perfect agreement.

ROWAN WILLIAMS: Well that’s splendid! I must say…that’s wonderful news! What did you decide?!

WANNABE ANGLICAN: We decided this, Your Grace.

SARAH DYLAN BREUER: We all think you should make a decision.

ROWAN WILLIAMS: Um…about what?

RED STICK RANT: That’s up to you. We just think you should actually decide something for a change.

MARK HARRIS: Doesn’t much matter what.

CAPTAIN YIPS: Just decide something before you retire.

SCOTT GUNN: So I guess we’re done here. Listen, I’ve got an extra ducat. Want to come with?

WANNABE ANGLICAN: Sweet! White Hart Lane, here we come!

Fifteen minutes later

JIM NAUGHTON: Sorry I’m late. Can someone fill me in on how…uh…hello? Hello? Is anybody here?

Friday, October 29, 2010

Facts and Questions for the Southern Cone HOB and Standing Committee

Ashey
Canon Ashey


The Rev. Canon Phil Ashey, J.D.
Chief Operating and Development Officer




Dearly Beloved in Christ,

The House of Bishops of the Anglican province of the Southern Cone will be meeting this weekend to discuss a variety of matters. Among them will be the unprecedented action by the Secretary General of the Anglican Communion, purportedly on behalf of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Communion, asking Bishop Tito Zavala of Chile to withdraw from the Inter Anglican Standing Commission on Unity Faith and Order (IASCUFO).

The bishops of the Southern Cone, gathered with Presiding Bishop Venables, will no doubt address the following questions based on the following facts:

The Facts
  • In the Communique of the Primates Meeting in Dar es Salaam (February 19, 2007), at paragraph 10, the primates restated the findings of the Windsor Report on the nature of cross-provincial interventions as "reactions to urgent pastoral needs." They stated that there is (a) no "moral equivalence" between violations of the Windsor moratoria on consecrating partnered homosexual bishops and blessing same sex unions, and violations on the moratoria on cross-provincial interventions because (b) such interventions "arose from a deep concern for the welfare of Anglicans in the face of innovation." In other words, such interventions were a pastoral response and a conscientious attempt to "mend the net" of apostolic faith and order (to borrow from the work of former Southern Cone Presiding Bishop Maurice Sinclair and Archbishop Drexel Gomez of the West Indies), ripped asunder by the doctrinal and disciplinary innovations of the leadership of The Episcopal Church (TEC) and the Anglican Church of Canada (ACoC).
  • Section D of the original Windsor Report, which deals with all three breaches of the moratoria, has no language whatsoever calling for or requiring an equal and commensurate response to breaches of all three moratoria.
  • Archbishop Rowan Williams' Pentecost letter to the Anglican Communion (May 28, 2010) stated that the members of those provinces that have "formally, through their Synod or House of Bishops, adopted policies that breach any of the moratoria requested by the Instruments of Communion" on sexually active homosexual bishops, same-sex blessings and the violation of provincial boundaries "should not be participants in the ecumenical dialogues in which the Communion is formally engaged," and further, that members serving on IASCUFO from such provinces "should for the time being have the status only of consultants rather than full members."
  • On June 7, Secretary General of the ACC Kenneth Kearon announced that five American participants on the Ecumenical dialogue commissions had been informed that "their membership of these dialogues has been discontinued," while the sole American member of IASCUFO was downgraded to consultant status. The Secretary General also stated he had written to Archbishop Fred Hiltz asking whether Canada has "formally adopted policies that breach the second moratorium in the Windsor Report, authorising public rites of same-sex blessing," and to Bishop Venables "asking him for clarification as to the current state of his interventions into other provinces."
  • In his Oct 14 press release, Secretary Kearon said "I have not received a response" to this request for "clarification" from the Southern Cone. He made no reference to his request for clarification from Canada. He then withdrew Bishop Zavala's membership from IASCUFO and invited him to serve as a consultant instead.
  • No public action to date has been taken against Canada and its ecumenical representatives.
  • In an interview with Anglican TV, Presiding Bishop Venables disputes Kearon's claims and reports having had two telephone conversations with Kearon and one with Dr. Williams about this issue prior to the October 14 press release.
  • ++Venables further stated that he told Dr. Williams and Secretary Kearon in the three conversations that he could not give a definitive answer to Secretary Kearon's letter until after the October 29-31 meeting of the Southern Cone House of Bishops and Standing Committee.
  • When questioned by the Church of England Newspaper about this discrepancy, a spokesman for the ACC confirmed that Secretary Kearon had indeed "followed up with two phone calls" his June letter to Presiding Bishop Venables. However, the secretary general had "received no clarification as to the current state of his interventions by mid July as requested," ACC spokesman Jan Butter said.
  • He added that Secretary Kearon was "not made aware of the bishop's intention to bring the issue before his House of Bishops or Provincial Synod," but was now "delighted" to learn "that he will be doing so."
  • A spokesman for Dr. Rowan Williams said that Presiding Bishop Venables "has not, as requested, confirmed his province's position in respect of interventions. Confirmation is still awaited."
  • ++Venables also told Anglican TV he never received a copy of the revised Anglican Consultative Council constitution that was to have been distributed to all the provinces before it was adopted this summer, according to the assurances of the Anglican Communion Office.
The Questions

These facts raise troubling questions for the Southern Cone House of Bishops and Standing Committee to consider as they weigh their response to the October 14 letter and sanctions by Secretary Kearon. The questions may be grouped under three headings:

1. What is the nature of the alleged violation by the Southern Cone?

In June of 2009, those former TEC Dioceses that transferred to the Southern Cone (San Joaquin, Quincy, Ft. Worth and Pittsburgh) and other individual congregations that found refuge in the Southern Cone (such as the churches under the Diocese of Bolivia) became founding members of the Anglican Church in North America. Many of those churches, such as the former "Bolivian" congregations in the new Anglican Diocese of the South, have surrendered their ecclesiastical residence in the Southern Cone to become fully resident in their new ACNA geographical diocese. Others are in the process of doing so.

Moreover, since the formation of the ACNA, to the best of our knowledge, there have been no new churches or dioceses received by the Southern Cone. Rather, the Southern Cone has been a strong supporter of the ACNA as the ecclesial body to which it is only too happy to release the churches and dioceses under its oversight.

Why didn't Dr. Williams or Secretary Kearon contact Presiding Bishop Venables to ascertain these facts before the October 14 deadline - or whatever deadline they had in their minds? Why did they choose not to wait for the Southern Cone House of Bishops and Standing Committee to issue such a clarification from their meeting this weekend? Why didn't one or the other telephone Presiding Bishop Venables and simply ask about the statement the Southern Cone bishops and Standing Committee are likely to make on this issue before issuing sanctions? Secretary Kearon and Dr. Williams have said nothing of a response from the Anglican Church of Canada and have made no public sanctions against it. Grace has been extended to TEC to take years to approve the proposed Anglican Covenant. Why were Dr. Williams and Secretary Kearon unwilling to grant the Southern Cone even a modicum of such grace - a mere two weeks - before imposing sanctions?

2. What grounds are there for the actions announced in the October 14 press release by Secretary Kearon?

The Primates of the Anglican Communion are by apostolic position and tradition best placed to address issues of faith and order in the Anglican Communion. The Primates have spoken on the issue of cross-provincial interventions: they are not morally equivalent to the innovations of the leadership of TEC and ACoC in consecrating non-celibate homosexual bishops and authorizing and/or permitting the blessing of same-sex unions. Moreover, the removal of American representatives from ecumenical dialogues and the IASCUFO had at least some logic to it. In both ecumenical and internal theological discussions, representatives of a church body must be able to faithfully represent the teaching of the church body they are representing. Lambeth Resolution 1.10 (1998) remains the official teaching of the Anglican Communion on human sexuality. Representatives of TEC cannot faithfully represent the Anglican Communion because the actions of TEC bishops in permitting and authorizing same-sex blessings, the decisions of GC 2009 authorizing the development of liturgies for same sex blessings, and the consecration of yet another non-celibate homosexual bishop are conscious and premeditated violations of Lambeth 1.10. The same holds true for Canadian representatives whose bishops and diocesan synods publicly authorize the blessing of same sex unions.

Accordingly, there is no rational, doctrinal or disciplinary ground to administer the same sanctions to Bishop Zavala as were given to the representatives of TEC. As we noted last week, the Southern Cone is in firm compliance with Lambeth Resolution 1.10 and upholds it as among the reasons for its cross-provincial intervention in North America to protect Anglicans distressed by the innovations of TEC and ACoC. Bishop Zavala in particular was a significant contributor to the GSE4 Communique in Singapore (April 23, 2010) which again reaffirmed Lambeth Resolution 1.10 as the official Anglican teaching on sexuality and Holy Orders over and against the innovations of TEC and ACoC. Why remove a representative who is in fact faithfully representing the official teaching of the Anglican Communion? Why treat him as if he were guilty of doctrinal innovations contrary to the teaching of the Anglican Communion? If sanctions had to be administered, why not make the sanction equal to the offense? Why not write him a letter of reprimand, or restrict his participation in IASCUFO to topics that do not include the alleged inviolability of diocesan boundaries?

But the most troubling question is this: By what authority does the Secretary General of the Anglican Communion Office (ACO) make demands upon primates and provinces? Where in the new Constitution of the Anglican Communion can we find such warrant? And why was the draft of said new Constitution not received by the Southern Cone, or other Global South Primates and Provinces, prior to its approval this summer? For that matter, why was the draft Constitution not made publically available? What does such a breakdown in communications say about the legitimacy of the ACO, the ACC, the Anglican Communion Standing Committee, the Archbishop of Canterbury and the powers they are assuming for themselves?

3. What questions and implications are raised by the breakdown in communications between the ACO and the Southern Cone?

Did Presiding Bishop Venables call Secretary Kearon twice just to say hello and chat? Did he call Dr. Williams to do the same? Presiding Bishop Venables said that he directly addressed the request in the June 7 letter from Secretary Kearon in his three phone calls with both Dr. Williams and Kearon. In fact, he said that he told both Dr. Williams and Secretary Kearon that he was bringing the issue before this weekend's meeting of the Southern Cone Bishops and Standing Committee, and could not give a definitive answer until they had the opportunity to discuss the matter. How can we reconcile Presiding Bishop Venables' statements with those of Secretary Kearon? Was Secretary Kearon suffering amnesia in his October 14 letter when he declared to the entire Anglican Communion "I have not received a response?" Is he still suffering amnesia, as evidenced by his latest statement through spokesman Jan Butter that he is now "delighted to learn" that Presiding Bishop Venables is bringing the matter before the Southern Cone bishops and standing committee?

Or is there another explanation for Secretary Kearon's statements and Dr. Williams' spokesman's assertion that Presiding Bishop Venables "has not, as requested, confirmed his province's position in respect of interventions?"

I bid your prayers for Presiding Bishop Venables, the Bishops and Standing Committee of the Southern Cone.

Yours in Christ,
Phil+

Next Week: Part 2: Conclusions

Here We Go: More pecusa inclusivity

Bishop Lamb has concerns about Dan Martins becoming Springfield bishop

Bishop Lamb has concerns about Dan Martins becoming Springfield bishop
Lamb pens all TEC bishops and Standing Committees

The Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin
The Central Third of California
The Rt. Rev. Jerry A. Lamb, Bishop
The Rev. Canon Mark H. Hall, Canon to the Ordinary

October 16, 2010
Sent via E-mail and US Mail

Dear Bishops and Standing Committee Members,

The Standing Committee of the Diocese of San Joaquin joins me in sending you this letter that outlines our grave concerns about the election of the Rev. Daniel Martins as the Bishop Diocesan of the Diocese of Springfield, Illinois.

Our concern is not about the electing process, but about the suitability of Daniel Martins to be ordained a bishop in the Episcopal Church. We write to you now before the consent process is in full swing, so you will know of our concerns and have a chance to review pertinent information about Daniel Martins and his involvement in the attempted separation of the Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin from the Episcopal Church. We also request that you visit Daniel Martins' website (http://cariocaconfessions.blogspot.com/) and review his comments about the startup of the Continuing Episcopal Diocese of San Joaquin.

All of the material concerning Daniel Martins' relationship to the Diocese of San Joaquin can be found on our diocesan website (www.diosanjoaquin.org) under "Updates" on the right sidebar or by direct link athttp://www.diosanjoaquin.org/dioceseofspringfieldconsent.html.

Read the full story at www.VirtueOnline.org

Fort Worth church sues bishop Iker over name

Fort Worth church sues bishop over name

by CHRIS HAWES
http://tinyurl.com/2cbksry
October 26, 2010

An historic Fort Worth church is suing another church's bishop, saying that church can't use its name.

"They're spending a lot of time suing people and we're spending a lot of time trying to follow the Lord and pray," said Bob Ferguson. Ferguson and about 100 other people left All Saints' Episcopal Church in Fort Worth early last year. Ferguson's group, along with most Episcopal churches in Fort Worth, decided to cut ties with the national Episcopal Church. They were upset over decisions to ordain women and gay people.

Read the full story at www.VirtueOnline.org

SALT LAKE CITY, UT: Bonnie Anderson takes VOL to task over PB's quote

SALT LAKE CITY, UTAH: Bonnie Anderson takes VOL to task over Presiding Bishop's quote

A VOL EXCLUSIVE

By Mary Ann Mueller
Special Correspondent
www.Virtueonline.org
October 25, 2010

On Saturday, the Episcopal News Service reported that Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori said, in the course of her statements to the Episcopal Executive Council's autumn meeting, that The Episcopal Church was "in danger of committing suicide by governance".

The Presiding Bishop's quote that ENS has posted on Episcopal Life Online is: "However, I think we're in some danger of 'committing suicide by governance' by focusing internally rather than externally. Dying organisms pay most attention to survival."

Based on that quote, VOL asked the Presiding Bishop could it be The Episcopal Church is "committing suicide by litigation" and, that in so doing, TEC is drawing off much needed funds helping to create a budgeting shortfall?

Read the full story at www.VirtueOnline.org

Two Liberal Church groups campaign against Anglican Covenant

In November, the Church of England's General Synod will be asked to approve the covenant.

"Many synod members do not realize it, but it could be the biggest change to the church since the Reformation," said an Oct. 28 press release from Inclusive Church and Modern Church, ahead of a campaign launch Oct. 29 when full-page ads will appear in both the Church of England Newspaper and the Church Times.

The campaign "will continue during the weeks leading up to the General Synod debate," scheduled for Nov. 24, "and if the [covenant] is not rejected, but referred to the dioceses, it will continue throughout 2011," the release said.

Read it all.

Bishop Lawrence removes four from Episcopal ministry

Robert Sturdy, 28 year old senior pastor/ Rector of Trinity Episcopal Church, Myrtle Beach shares the news that,

The clergy of St. Andrew’s Mount Pleasant have been formally removed from ministry in the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina.

The church of St. Andrew’s voted to leave the Episcopal Diocese of South Carolina last April. They are now a member church in the ACNA Diocese of the Holy Spirit.Here's the letter from Bishop Mark Lawrence to Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori reporting their removal.

Contrary to its actions to legally challenge All Saints Pawley Island's claim to property, the diocese has taken no action to prevent the departing group in Mount Pleasant from taking the parish property.

Bishop Lawrence: How to Do It Right

Bishop Mark Lawrence of the Diocese of South Carolina shows every other bishop in the Episcopal Church -- including especially the Presiding Bishop -- how one canonically removes clergy under one's jurisdiction who have departed ECUSA for another province of the Anglican Communion.

One does it by a simple, two-sentence declaration of removal: "Notice is hereby given that on October 21, 2010, acting with the advice and consent of the clerical members of the Standing Committee of the Diocese of South Carolina, I removed N. N. and N. N. from the ordained ministry of the Episcopal Church. This action was taken for causes which do not affect the moral character of the persons removed from the ordained ministry of the Episcopal Church."

There is no phony or illegal resort to the Abandonment Canon (IV.10); there is no phony pretense of treating some communication from the departing clergy as a "voluntary renunciation of the ordained ministry" which the bishop uses to claim that "N. N. is released from the obligations of all Ministerial offices, and is deprived of the right to exercise the gifts and spiritual authority as a Minister of God's Word and Sacraments conferred in Ordinations."

The integrity of the Communion, and of the role which the Episcopal Church (USA) plays in it, is honored. The Recorder of Ordinations is notified, and the clergy are no longer on the rolls of ordained ministers in the Episcopal Church -- but they are still fully ordained, and qualified to be licensed as ministers in another province of the Anglican Communion.

See how simple it is to follow the canons when one is of a mind to honor the Church's membership in the Anglican Communion? Bishop Lawrence once again puts his colleagues to shame.

That does not stop the usual back-biters from sniping at him. They and their ilk believe that despite the binding precedent of South Carolina's highest court ruling that the Dennis Canon had no legal effect in the State, he should have wasted diocesan resources, and frayed tempers still more, by a vain pursuit of St. Andrew's parish property in the state courts. (You can find the link to The Lead's post to this effect in the column to the right.) It is attitudes such as theirs, which the Presiding Bishop exemplifies, which are wrecking the Church and the Communion.

Thank you for setting the proper canonical example, Bishop Lawrence!

ACNA Bishops officiate in Port Elizabeth, South Africa

ACNA Bishops officiate in Port Elizabeth, South Africa

by Chris Sugden in Port Elizabeth
www.anglican-mainstream.net
October 27th, 2010

The Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (Southern Africa) opened its second annual conference at St Saviour's Church in Port Elizabeth on Wednesday October 27th.

The Diocesan Bishop, Bethlehem Nopece welcomed participants from the Dioceses of Cape Town, False Bay, Durban, Natal, and George, along with Bishop P.J.Lawrence, Bishop of Nandyal in the Church of South India, Bishop Glenn Davies, Bishop of North Sydney, Australia, Bishop Desmond Inglesby, the newly elected Presiding Bishop of the Church of England in South Africa, and Bishops of the Anglican Church in North America, officiating for the first time in Southern Africa - Bishop John Guernsey of the Diocese of the Holy Spirit and Bishop Bill Murdoch of the Anglican Diocese of New England. Greetings were received from Archbishop Valentine Mokiwa from Tanzania who was prevented from attending by ill-health.

Standing with Diocesan Bishop Bethlehem Nopece (Centre) are (left to right) Bishops Glenn Davies (North Sydney), P.J.Lawrence (Nandyal, Church of South India), Bill Murdoch (ACNA) and John Guernsey (ACNA)

Read the full story at www.VirtueOnline.org

Thursday, October 28, 2010

From IRD

Episcopal Divinity School Embraces “Gender Continuum”
Seminary Event Seeks to Upend Traditional Views of Sex
Jeff Walton
October 26, 2010

The binary concept of sex as either male or female is an illusion, according to an event at an Episcopal Church seminary. The workshop and panel discussion, “The Gender Continuum,” was held October 15-16 at Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Massachusetts. Facilitated by the Miami-based YES Institute, the workshop aimed to deconstruct “the illusion of binary gender.”

The Gender Continuum

In explaining sex and gender, YES Institute’s Joseph Zolobczuk contrasted a traditional understanding of the two as male/female and masculine/feminine with a radically revised model.

“The binary illusion throws us into complicity with many detrimental consequences,” Zolobczuk asserted. The institute’s education staffer explained that the traditional understanding assigned persons a male or female body, assumed that their gender was accordingly masculine or feminine, and expected them to be sexually attracted towards the opposite gender. All three of these criteria collapsed into the “illusion” of sex, according to Zolobczuk.

In contrast, the YES Institute proposed thinking of gender as a continuum – a continuous whole, no part of which can be distinguished from other parts except by arbitrary division.

“Every single human characteristic that we know about exists in a continuum,” Zolobczuk asserted, citing weight, height, hair color and IQ score. “The only two we have as binary are sex and gender.” Zolobczuk did not acknowledge other biological binaries, such as blood antigens that are either positive or negative, or the binary concept of a gene being switched “on” or “off”.

“Cultural meaning is attached to everything and we live into a binary illusion,” Zolobczuk said, explaining how masculine cultural dress has changed since George Washington’s time, when wigs, tights, powdered faces and lace cuffs were associated with men.

“The binary is so insidious that it not only prevents us from seeing things – that once people have a perception of what gender is, it chases us,” Zolobczuk said.

But what about the seemingly obvious characteristics that make people male or female – starting with the appearance of genitalia?

“What if you lost them in an accident, would you still be male?” counters YES Institute co-founder Martha Fugate, attempting to disassociate the presence of genitalia from gender. The chromosomes which determine sex? Fugate references Spanish Olympic athlete Maria José Martínez Patino, disqualified in the 1980s when it was discovered that she was born with a Y chromosome.

Genitalia, chromosomes, physical attributes, societal roles, even the possibility of carrying a child – all are indeterminate of “gender” in Fugate’s view. It is not that male or female do not exist, Fugate argues, rather that they are poles at the end of a wide spectrum – and where many people fall in between.

Life and Death?

A reoccurring theme in the YES Institute workshop was the seriousness of gender issues.

“People kill themselves because of the arbitrary roles we’ve put on gender,” said Fugate. “Gender is a life or death issue.”

Workshop participants who were themselves transgender affirmed the Institute’s position.

“I got to the point where transitioning wasn’t an option for me,” voiced one transgender participant. “If I didn’t transition [to being male] I’d kill myself.”

The institute’s presentation cited a statistic claiming a 31 percent suicide rate among people who identify as transgender. Fugate noted that youth who identified as gay or lesbian were more than two times more likely to commit suicide.

“We don’t know – but suspect – a lot of that is transgender,” Fugate said of the homosexual suicide number. Brandishing the statistics, the institute co-founder pushed for presenting the institute’s view to even the youngest of students. Fugate did not entertain the possibility that these tragic inner conflicts could be resolved in ways other than affirming an individual’s self-chosen gender identity and sexual desires.

Showing clips of Barbara Walters and Oprah Winfrey interviews with families who had children they claimed were transgender, the workshop leaders argued for school programs redefining gender. The Oprah interview featured a 10-year-old girl living as a boy, while Walters spoke with a six-year-old boy who insisted he was a girl.

Fugate said the Miami-Dade County school system, which had already agreed to YES Institute presentations for high school students, was now requesting that the group extend its work by creating a “gender transition guide” for elementary schools to support children changing their gender identity.

“In my experience, there are many children that age saying ‘no mommy, no daddy, I’m a boy or a girl,’” said Dr. Sidney Trantham, an Associate Professor in the Graduate School of Arts and Social Sciences at Lesley University, the institution immediately adjacent to EDS. Trantham described a 12-year-old patient who was on hormone therapy in order to delay puberty, as she insisted she was male. The psychologist lamented that the hormone therapy had been unsuccessful, as the girl had experienced her first period that week.

“That’s causing him a great deal of distress,” Trantham assessed, using the girl’s preferred male pronoun.

Transgender Theology?

While most of the workshop was secular in nature, a panel discussion on the second day provided participants with a revisionist religious view of transgenderism.

“From the [traditional] religious perspective, it is seen as an evil spirit that must be beat out of them,” Fugate alleged of the response to transgenderism among some faith communities.

Patrick Cheng, an ordained minister in the majority-homosexual Metropolitan Community Churches and an openly homosexual faculty member at EDS, attempted to claim biblical characters such as the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8 as examples of transgenderism.

“That’s the first queer person of color in the Bible,” Cheng said of the Ethiopian eunuch. Cheng also named Joan of Arc, Saint Perpetua, and early church theologian Origen as people who defied traditional gender expectations: Joan for her use of male clothing, Perpetua for her visions of gladiatorial combat, and Origen for reportedly castrating himself.

“There’s a lot of work being done on the transgendered Christ,” Cheng revealed, producing several different books that either focused upon or addressed the notion of Christ as transgendered.

“There’s a lot in our standard church history and Bible that deals with trans issues,” Cheng proposed. During his panel discussion, Cheng did not reference a biblical basis for gender as male and female, such as in Genesis 1:27 later cited by Christ in Matthew 19 and Mark 10.

Christ, Cheng said, defied gender norms of the time by washing feet and associating with women.

“Jesus has the experience of being excluded from the family,” Cheng noted, listing another perceived commonality with transsexuals, along with a sense of homelessness.

“[Author] Virginia Mollenkott says that if Jesus was truly born of a virgin – a truly parthenogenetic birth with no male to contribute a Y chromosome, Jesus would have had XX chromosomes,” Cheng explained. “Mollenkott said that if he is said to have a male body but with XX chromosomes, that’s sort of a trans Jesus.”

Cheng also noted how author Justin Tanis wrote that resurrection can be an important metaphor for transsexuals – Jesus was still the same person, but in a different body.

“Justin even talks about communion as taking hormones, sort of sacramental theology as hormones,” Cheng said. “I think it shows the exciting and interesting work that is out there.”

“I think Christian theology is queer at its heart,” Cheng said. “Jesus is challenging the binary between the human and the divine, Jesus is challenging the binary between life and death, between the center and the margins, between body and spirit, heaven and Earth, alpha and the omega,” Cheng said. “Jesus is that transitional figure. That’s what queer theology is about – you’ve got these poles, but reality is actually more spectrum.”