Go to StandFirm where Matt Kennedy is reporting on breaking news from the House of Bishops. It looks like we won't even have to wait until September. It looks like the bishops reject the pastoral council (and with it, the Primatial Vicar) and it appears that they reject the Communique. No wonder they are heading to court. The Episcopal Church House of Bishops has defiantly said no to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Anglican Communion. Wow - they aren't even going to try. It's over. LATER: The Living Church has now released this article:
Bishops Reject Primates' Ultimatum
3/20/2007
The House of Bishops has declined to participate in a pastoral initiative designed by the primates to care for congregations and dioceses which for reasons of conscience cannot accept the episcopal ministry of their bishop or primate.“We understand that the present situation requires intentional care for those within our Church who find themselves in conscientious disagreement with the actions of our General Convention,” the bishops said. “We pledge ourselves to continue to work with them toward a workable arrangement. In truth, the number of those who seek to divide our Church is small, and our Church is marked by encouraging signs of life and hope.”
The rejection was contained in one of three resolutions approved by the bishops on March 20. The resolutions were debated as part of a business session during the bishops’ annual spring retreat held March 16-21 at Camp Allen near Houston.
The bishops noted several times in the three resolutions that they desired to remain full members of the Anglican Communion. Only General Convention, however, can make decisions which are binding on The Episcopal Church. In their Feb. 19 communiqué, the primates asked the House of Bishops to respond on behalf of The Episcopal Church no later than Sept. 30. The bishops deferred the Church's response on the pastoral council to Executive Council.
The bishops listed five reasons why they considered the pastoral council and primatial vicar to be a bad idea. The pastoral council violates the canons which contain no provision for the primate to delegate authority. It would change the character of the “Windsor process.” It harkens back to a period of Colonialism from which The Episcopal Church was liberated. It replaces local rule by laity with a curial model.
“Most important of all it is spiritually unsound,” they said. “The pastoral scheme encourages one of the worst tendencies of our Western culture, which is to break relationships when we find them difficult instead of doing the hard work necessary to repair them and be instruments of reconciliation. The real cultural phenomenon that threatens the spiritual life of our people, including marriage and family life, is the ease with which we choose to break our relationships and the vows that established them rather than seek the transformative power of the Gospel in them. We cannot accept what would be injurious to this Church and could well lead to its permanent division.”
In the first resolution, the bishops said only General Convention can define the Church's relationship toward the Anglican Communion. In the second resolution, the bishops restated their desire to continue to participate in the life and work of the Communion and requested an urgent meeting with the Archbishop of Canterbury and the primates standing committee.
“We believe that there is an urgent need for us to meet face to face with the Archbishop of Canterbury and members of the primates’ standing committee, and we hereby request and urge that such a meeting be negotiated by the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church and the Archbishop of Canterbury at the earliest possible opportunity,” they said. “We invite the Archbishop and members of the primates’ standing committee to join us at our expense for three days of prayer and conversation regarding these important matters.”
Minneapolis 1992
5 comments:
The fat lady has sung!!
Art+
I wouldn't say it's over yet, Baby Blue. This statement primarily seems to be an attempt to reframe the issue from the communique's "requests" to TEC's own concerns and requests.
Politically it is over. There is no wiggle room for TEC to stop performing SSU's or ordaining non-celibate homosexuals. These documents - both the resolutions and the House of Bishops letter make it very clear that such activities are Human Rights issues - NOT issues of theology.
What is not clear is whether KJS "played" Rowan Williams or if she has lost control of the leadership of the Church. She showed up in shorts at the Primates Meeting - is she either completely out of her depth or does she really just encouraging the schism? What is clear is that Bishop Lee apparently did not vote with the majority and TEC decided to file seperate lawsuits in Virginia rather than join the Diocese of Virginia. One still wonders that even in the progressive camps, all is not happy in Whoville. If I have any room for hope, it is in Bishop Lee's actions. He defied the majority in the House of Bishops. I don't recall him doing that in recent memory, especially on these issues. He is an institutionalist and what seems to be winning the day in the House of Bishops are the activists.
The one possibility is that some sort of deal has been made with the Windsor Bishops and the Institutionalists like Bishop Lee. But so far, there's no evidence in any of the public communications that such a deal has been made. Rowan Williams is intentionally vague by not specifying who he plans to talk to and get clarity. Take note that the kept that vague. And notice the SLAM against Archbishop Akionla in the HOB's letter. This is the House of Bishops we're talking about - not the Executive Council. No, it's all over.
I could do some speculating offline - but I think I will leave it offline for now.
So let us not talk falsely now, the hour is getting late.
bb
Having said that, if we see TEC being Machiavellian, then these actions are to make the activist liberals happy. In September the House of Bishops could call a long-term "fast" from all SSUs and non-celibate ordintations and so by turning TEC into a "Puritan Church" as the activists like to call it, they won't need a Pastoral "Scheme" because the Church itself will be Windsor-compliant. That would be Maciavellian. It would also cause a spit between the actvists and the institutionalists (and Schori will have proved she's actually using the activists to strengthen the institutionalists). Are these Bishops scheming that way? Is that why Rowan needs "clarity" - to see if they plan that kind of Maciavellian Manuever?
Do we think that the Bishop Powerhouses will go for that? Is this what they've told bishops like John Howe? That the institutionalists will rule the day?
If that was so, then why did Bishop Lee vote no? If there was a plan to comply with the rest of the Communique, why not be silent now (and not upset ones own Episcopal Majority types in the Diocese of Virginia)? Why not go along and then - bham! - hit everyone with the Great Turnabout?
That would run contrary to everything I've seen since Denver 2000 - the institutionalists are now the ones conflicted and perhaps they buy this idea that the Anglican Communion is bluffing, that money still talks, and the Communion can't survive without the Americans.
Ah, but which ones? That is the question - and may be one reason Rowan hasn't said who he is going to talk to.
No, the Episcopal Church we all think we knew and loved is finished. It's now coming out of the closet as the sect - even cult - that it is now. It's taking on more and more qualities that would qualifty it as a classic cult, as we saw that back in Minneapolis. Check out who the scapegoats are as well - that is very telling. So much for the MDGs when the spiritual leaders of those countries are being used as scapegoats for TEC's own internal strife. Anything, anything but dealing with the problems inside the church. And now those problems have been elevated as Human Rights issues.
No, it's all over. Tried to talk myself out of it. But no, it's all over. And believe me, I am sad. Very very sad.
bb
BB, for you it was over on Dec 17, 2006. That I believe taints your prospective. Others in was over in Denver in 2000. Others still inside TEC carry on their fight.
I think the AAC press release makes the most sense. Granted I'm basis for it reads the closest to my first post in the above thread. I do think it is a calmer observation and leaves room for the Lord to act other than a pronouncement.
---
Here is the warning of pronouncing it over -- Satan not after just TEC, he going for the AC. He will try to divide the GS from Europe, South Africa, Central American, Australian - creating two groups both of which stay in defiance, "I don't need you."
Post a Comment