Posted on 06/20/2006 5:43:46 PM PDT by sionnsar
THE Anglican Church descended into "ecclesiastical anarchy" last night as American traditionalists refused to accept the authority of a woman and asked the Archbishop of Canterbury to lead them instead.
Liberals celebrated the election of Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori as Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church while the traditionalist Fort Worth Diocese appealed to Dr Rowan Williams for "alternative primatial oversight".
The appeal, being mulled over at Lambeth Palace, is expected to be the first of several. It represents the first formal step towards a schism that evangelicals say began with the consecration of the openly gay Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire in 2003.
The crisis was heightened as resolutions being debated over gays fell short of the "repentance" and "moratoria" demanded by the Windsor Report set up by Dr Williams. One well-placed conservative source said: "We are in uncharted waters. The Church is descending into anarchy."
Last night representatives of the Episcopal Church rejected suggestions that they broke with the worldwide Anglican Communion when they elected Bishop Robinson. In its first action, the 843-member House of Deputies rejected language expressing regret for "breaching the proper constraints of the bonds of affection" by his election. Instead, the deputies approved wording expressing regret merely for "straining" the bonds of affection with the Anglican Communion.
Dr Williams issued a guarded welcome to the new Presiding Bishop, referring to the difficulties the election represents for Anglicans. "I send my greetings to Bishop Katharine and she has my prayers and good wishes as she takes up a deeply demanding position at a critical time," he said. Bishop Schori will be instituted in November.
Bishop Schori told CNN yesterday that she did not believe homosexuality was a sin, adding: "I believe that God creates us with different gifts."
Fort Worth is one of three US dioceses not to accept women priests. These and a further seven evangelical dioceses belong to a network of orthodox parishes and dioceses that represent 10 per cent of the US Episcopal Church.
If Dr Williams agreed to provide alternative oversight and the entire American Anglican Network followed, there would be two Anglican Churches within the US. Both would be in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, although not with each other.
The crunch point would come at the 2008 Lambeth Conference, when both would be asked to sign up to a unifying "covenant" designed to prevent splits and actions in the future.
Officials at the US Episcopal Church have requested that it be known by its legal name of the Episcopal Church rather than the acronym ECUSA, as it represents 16 nations, not only the US. Speaking to The Times, Bishop Jack Iker, of Fort Worth, said: "We would like to be accountable to a bishop of the orthodox faith who shares our theology and perspective."
There was heated debate at the convention as resolutions on gay bishops came up for vote. The House of Deputies was due to take up a revised proposal that came close to calling for a moratorium on the consecration of gay bishops. Gay activists called that proposal "unacceptable".
THE SPLIT
1998 Lambeth Conference rejects homosexual practice as "incompatible with scripture" and advises against the "legitimising or blessing of same-sex unions" and of "ordaining those involved in same-gender unions"
2003 Vicky Imogene "Gene" Robinson, an openly gay father of two, is consecrated Bishop of New Hampshire. Archbishop of Canterbury sets up Lambeth Commission
2004 Commission publishes Windsor Report, which calls for repentance from US church and moratoria on future gay consecrations and same-sex blessings
2006 ECUSA, at its General Convention in Columbus, Ohio, decides that it will in future be known as the Episcopal Church, prompting theories that it is preparing to become an alternative, liberal Anglican Communion. Episcopal Church elects first woman, Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, as Presiding Bishop, equal in status to an archbishop. Delegates come close to fighting as they debate how far to go in complying with Windsor
2007 Archbishop of Canterbury will issue invitations to Lambeth Conference. He must decide whether or not to invite Bishop Robinson and any of the bishops who were consecrated. Bishop Schori voted for the election of Robinson but did not take part in his consecration
2008 Lambeth Conference will meet in the summer, when bishops and archbishops will agree either to "walk apart" or find a way of remaining in communion
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. "Both would be in communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury, although not with each other."
This would make sense if the dispute is only over procedural/territorial type issues.
If it is over issues of faith and morals, then it does not make sense.
You are right it doesn't make sense (though these are the Anglicans we're talking about, so why should it make sense?).
OTOH, on matters of faith, there was a brief period when Antioch and Alexandria were out of communion with each other, though both in communion with both Rome and Constantinople, during the Partiarchate of St. Cyril of Alexandria.
And, the current schism of Rome from the Orthodox--over matters of both order (azymes) and faith (the filioque) began as a local schism between Rome and Constantinople, with both still in communion with Antioch, Alexandria and Jersualem, until the Crusaders imposed Latin bishops on sees with sitting Orthodox bishops.
I mean this in utmost Christian charity: Would you just give up and become Catholic already?! I can't tell you how painful it is to watch the Anglican Communion rot away.
Feminists in every profession are going to wear the britches, and everyone had just better get used to it. Zaftig women crashing ceilings of every kind.
The modern day Episcopal Church, USA, offers all of the liturgy and none of the morality of Catholicism.
Best decision we ever made. Now my interest in this controversy is mostly academic (though laced with a tiny bit of nostalgia of an ugly kind . . . :-( )
Let the folks who like the ceremony and the vestments and the beautiful old buildings and the stained glass . . . but nothing else . . . have the ECUSA.
The Anglican Communion is not rotting away. Liberals have slowly but surely taken over the leadership positions in the Episcopal Church, in much the same way they have taken over most of the administrative and teaching positions in the univerities and colleges in America. The two phenomena are related.
The Episcopal Church is not the entire Anglican Communion, but only a small part of it. The Anglican Communion will survive. The Episcopal Church will simply splinter off. Those in the Episcopal Church who wish to continue being Anglicans will find some other way to remain a part of the Anglican Communion.
As for pain, you don't have to go looking for it. Life brings it in many forms. But pain doesn't define what is most important about living. And it won't define what is most important about the Anglican Communion.
"Ye shall know them by their fruits." (Mat 7:16) Thank you for the quite honest, explicit and object lesson in Orthodox charity, Reader David -- now I will proceed to re-think everything that I thought I had learned about Orthodoxy.
(s) an Anglican, who apparently makes no sense
Schism is a part of Christian history. The way the Church of the Holy Sepulchar is divded up is a reflection of the many divisions among Christians. The Episcopal Church is now just another small, liberal denomination.
Actually pain may define what is most important about living...
Yes, exactly, although it will take a few more years before the formal break with the larger Anglican Communion takes place. Traditional prelates in the Anglican Communion are very patient people, more patient than myself. They will give their respected opposition all the rope they want to hang themselves, and then the formalities will be completed.
I hope you don't wash your hair shirt. The smell will increase the discomfort. And it will give you much prestige as a victim.
Come now. I'm an ex-Anglican. I've seen it from inside. Henry's 'reformation' is a glorious might-have-been, but the Elizabethan Settlement of Religion, with its emphasis on unformity of form without uniformity of doctrine laid the ground work for the current disaster. Sure there was a series of bright moments, when the light of the Holy Spirit shone on Anglicanism--the Caroline Divines are closer to the phrenoma of the Orthodox Church as anything in the West post-schism, the non-Jurors almost 'got it', the Oxford Movement, Bishop Grafton's negotiations with St. Tikhon, even the inclusion of the anaphora of St. Basil the Great as a option in the '79 BCP--but all came to naught because Elizabeth, to establish her state on a rock, built her national church on sand.
Once the House of Bishops decided in the case of the anti-trinitarian Bishop Pike that 'heresy is no longer a relevant category' is was really over. If heresy isn't a relevant category, neither is truth.
I was jibing at the nonsense that passes for sense in the official Anglican Communion. I used to agree with Father Andrew of St. Michael's Skete that the Continuing Anglican groups which have dropped the filioque and declared fealty to the Faith of the Seven Councils are the only Western confessions worth having an ecumenical dialog with--used to until the Latins elected Pope Benedict, now they're worth talking to, too, though it will be a much harder road.
I agree to a point, but would have said it about ECUSA, rather than Anglicans as a whole vis a vis the current troubles.
The problem is that there aren't many Anglicans (in the sense that I thought of myself as an Anglican, and that I suspect you did, at one point, as well) in ECUSA anymore, and there haven't been for several decades.
Bishop Schori told CNN yesterday that she did not believe homosexuality was a sin, adding: "I believe that God creates us with different gifts."
My goodness! An abomination is a gift?
I have a kindred spirit in "Mother" - seems we're leading parallel lives. One small exception, however...on my way to the Catholic Church, I had a short layover in a Continuing Anglican denomination (which shall remain nameless out of Christian charity). Best I can say is that it was better than remaining in that morass that is ECUSA, but the fundamental flaw in ECUSA is also a fundamental flaw in the Continuing churches. IMHO that flaw is the autonomous Bishop - answerable to no one - out of communion with everyone except his own flock - & equally prone to error (albeit of a different kind than ECUSA Bishops). If I had it to do again, I would skip the side trip into the Continuum & go straight to Rome (or one of the Orthodox Churches) & authentic catholicism.
I am an Anglican. My parents are Anglicans. My grandparents and great-grandparents and their grandparents and great-grandparents were Anglicans (OK, there was a Christian Scientist in the mix, but other than that, we've been Anglicans for a long time).
You can't just "become" Roman Catholic. You don't change your religion the way you change your clothes. I belong to a parish (in New York City, believe it or not) that is rather traditional in its liturgy and its theology. We have had female curates, but they did not inject any radicalism into their ministry.
All in all, I'd rather remain an Anglican, thank you very much.
Go back far enough, and they would all be Catholics ;)
Okay then. I get frustrated with them too, though I'm in a Continuing church.
I used to agree with Father Andrew of St. Michael's Skete that the Continuing Anglican groups which have dropped the filioque and declared fealty to the Faith of the Seven Councils are the only Western confessions worth having an ecumenical dialog with--used to until the Latins elected Pope Benedict, now they're worth talking to, too, though it will be a much harder road.
Last Sunday while traveling I visited an ECUSA church. I'd been there once before, a couple of years ago I think, and the rector had noted then that the word "Episcopal" was not to be found on their sign. This year I noted that they had dropped the filioque and had adopted certain (superficial) elements of Orthodoxy in the service (such as standing instead of kneeling). I wonder if a move is afoot...
She's being intellectually dishonest (actually intellectually deceptive). Technically, she is correct: homosexuality as a condition is not a sin. But she pointedly did not say that homosexual activity IS a sin. Whereas, for example, the Catholic Church teaches that homosexual orientation is not a sin (an evil, yes, but not a sin), but homosexual activity is intrinsically evil, one of the worst sins, that cries out for the vengeance of heaven. Homosexuals are owed dignity as creations of God, but they are called to either be chaste, or attempt to overcome their disorder and live a heterosexual lifestyle.
Sermon on John 18This last Sunday morning I woke early while it was still dark. I wanted to go out for a run. When I ventured out, it was warm and still and quiet. The clouds were just beginning to show tinges of pink. I startled two workers coming out of the service doors of the Hyatt. I encountered a man I had seen at the convention centre. The I found a lovely green park and ran around it. A man in a reflective vest was waiting by some cones. Around the corner I came to a fellow with some bags who looked like he had been sleeping rough. Then I met a rabbit, one of us eyed the other with more than a little wariness. Around the corner was a woman getting out of a car delivering papers. I nodded at two guys on their way of work. There was some degree of wariness in each of those meetings. The unrealised possibility of a real relationship whether out of caution or fear meant we had long way to go.
Can we meet in a stance that is not tinged with fear. When Jesus says that his kingdom is not of this world, he is saying that his rule is not based on an ability to generate fear in his subjects. His willingness to go to the cross means that fear has no import. King Jesus’s followers do not fight back when the world threatens.
Jesus calls us friends, not agents of fear.
If you and I are going to grow into the full stature of Christ, and be the blessed one’s God calls to be. Our growth will be rooted in the soil of internal peace, souls that are planted in the overwhelming love of God, given with such unwillingness to count the cost that we too are caught up in similar abandonment. This drives out our idolatrous self interest. Fear is a reaction, unconscious response to something that is so essential that it takes the place of God. I cannot go on living without it, my bank account, my theological framework, or my sense of being in control.
That bloody cross brings new life into the world. Colossians calls Jesus the first born of all creation.
Our mother Jesus gives birth to a new creation and we are his children. We are going to have to give up fear. Do not be afraid. God is with you. You are God’s beloved and God is well pleased with you. When we know ourselves as beloved. We can recognise another beloved in a homeless man, a rhetorical opponent. We can reach beyond the defences of others. Our invitation in the last work of this convention is to lay down our fear and love the world. Lay down our shield and sword, lay down our narrow self interest. Lay down our need for power and control, and bow to God’s image in the weakest, poorest and most excluded.
We children of Jesus can continue to squabble over our inheritance. We must share the name beloved with the whole world.
Ugh.
I would take it further than TEC (that seems to be what they're calling themselves today), which is furthest down the road, and include Canada, some of CofE and (maybe) New Zealand and Australia... all told, maybe some 5% of worldwide Anglicanism.
The problem is that there aren't many Anglicans (in the sense that I thought of myself as an Anglican, and that I suspect you did, at one point, as well) in ECUSA anymore, and there haven't been for several decades.
Bingo!
Welcome to the new, improved Episcopal Church where the only sin that is recognized is orthodoxy, and a belief in Jesus as Lord and Saviour.
Today's service features our very own contemporary band, music, environmentally friendly candles with dancing, faux flames. The service will conclude with a Holy Eucharist light refreshments of wafers and a sip of wine at the altar in memory of all those who have died because of our murderous, patriarchal, non-inclusive past.
Coming soon to a diocese near you. (If it isn't already there.)
"all told, maybe some 5% of worldwide Anglicanism"
But the richest, highest-profile, most influential, most historically important, most articulate, and most insistent 5%
Babies aren't born without pain, Jesus didn't die painlessly. Catholics don't say, "offer it up" for no reason. No pain no gain. Hell, I'm not sure you can even be Christian without some better appreciation of pain...
Babies are born in throes of their mother's pain.
Aversion of pain is the seed of abortion, euthanasia, greed, adultery, etc. It certainly defines the lengths man will go to harm others for the sake of easing it.
Some people never tire of rejecting the gifts someone else brings them. Some never tire of the perverse pleasure of suffering.
All of the activities you mention bring pain to others. Focusing on the joys you can bring to others changes your own conduct. It is the sugar that makes the medicine go down.
I don't disagree with what you said. Life is about being pro-active as wells as re-active. Some, however, believe there's NOTHING redeeming in suffering - even on the most mundane level of working hard to feed your family every day.
If the value of life is determined by a low incidence of pain (like a low golf score), then not only do I fail to reap the benefits, but sooner or later, I'm going to start devaluing others who live with pain until I come to the conclusion that they're worthless and have no reason left to live.
What is virtuous about seeking pain and suffering? People today seem to measure the value of their lives in terms of the quantity of pain they have suffered. It gives them status as a victim. We don't judge people who suffer as worthless. We put them up on a pedstal and declare them superior to everyone else.
What ever happened to courage as a virtue to face and bear the pain that life metes out to you without self-pitying complaint?
What is most important about the Anglican Church?
Who said anything about SEEKING pain and suffering? Pain and suffering is part of reality. Escapism is usually at the expense of someone else.
What ever happened to courage as a virtue to face and bear the pain that life metes out to you without self-pitying complaint?
Accepting suffering and wallowing in self-pity are two completely different things. It's courageous to accept suffering when there is no legitimate remedy, or in the face of injustice.
Someone seeking "victim status" is a charlatan looking for handouts. But there are legitimate victims of injustice in the world, most notably, unborn victims of abortion.
Since the original bishop of the ECUSA (I use that acronym because apparently they don't like it) was from the Scottish Episcopal Church, I guess we've gone and crapped up our entire legacy from the Scots.
I think we're seeing a mighty lurch to the left, as one would in a boat if everybody on the right side jumped over. Suddenly they have no resistance, and they mazy think they are victorious, but they will realize that no one wants to play with them now that they've taken all the toys.
You're right. I couldn't just "become" Roman Catholic. They required me to study for a year, to come to classes every thursday night, to take intellectual chances, to learn, to take up a mission, to be blessed, to come to mass... I didn't just "become" Roman Catholic. I had to work for it. And I had to do without any communion at all for a long, long time. How sweet it was, when I received it again, after being anointed and confirmed, to know that I was now receiving true meat and true drink indeed. And all the sweeter for having gone without.
Yes my friend, you too can "become" Catholic. Habit and length of attendance is no excuse for continuing to enable and condone the antics of the so-called episcopal church.
Indeed, what does "communion" mean? What holds Anglicans together? You have these polarities that are antithetical. What's so important about maintaining "communion" when there is no agreement about doctrine, let alone praxis?
Wafers? Haven't you forgone the silly tradition of unleavened, tasteless, cardboard wafers in favor of bakery fresh bread of which you can have yourself a nice tasty hunk? Intincted into the wine it's a nice snack. Very nice. Course they have white whine at my Catholic Church, which I don't like so much.
On a leaky sinking boat!
And babies arrive screaming for some reason!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.