BB NOTE: Schori has attempted to reimpose DEPO (guess this means that they can't complain anymore about "boundary crossings" now can they?) after it died three years ago (or perhaps is was only mostly dead). This is another classic example of the church in denial. DEPO doesn't solve the problem, it kicks it down a field (or in this case, it shoots it into the sky). She's gotten eight bishops to fly. The thing about being a flying bishop is one is prone to lose their luggage - one way or another - along the way. The problem is we have a lot of bags being packed, we don't need flybys. Also, note how they attempt to split off John Howe and Jim Stanton - as though flying will solve anything. We don't need flying bishops, we need steadfast and grounded ones. But if this means that TEC is endorsing boundary crossings now, well? Some boundary crossings, perhaps, may be more equal than others. Again, TEC attempts to redirects the issue to suit their themselves. DEPO revisted. Does she think that after three years we've forgotten? I don't think so.Stay tuned.
Read 815's press release here.
The Living Church has an update here which spells out what these flying bishops might be doing, which sort of harkens back to this. So we get not one primatial vicar, but eight flying ones. And what does "certain disciplinary actions" mean?
7 comments:
I'm going to use BB as my think pad and throw something out there.
UP front, I think this is a bad plan and we've seen this before (it stunk then, but check out my critique of +KJS gymnastics).
HOWEVER, it may not be all that bad in the hands of the Lord.
My thinking is that Common Cause folks will be picking up those parishes and diocese that are willing to pay the price to stand for Christ. However, I didn't expect Dio Dallas or CFL to make that jump. They're pretty split and +Stanton's greatest legacy maybe in the way he allowed parishes to leave to AMiA without hassle (unlike so other local bishops), thus shifting the balance more left but granting an exit with structure to others. There are probable many split parishes, some 50/50 mixes will give up on TEC and this will push them to level where they are ready to go to AMiA, CANA or ICON. Others are not willing to pay the cost in their witness, so this plan does offer some measure of protection and godly oversight for those folks. My take is you'll get what you're willing to pay the costs in your witness.
----
(Before some Anon appears to make the predictable comment on my thoughts, Truro and other CANA parishes were in negotiations with DioVA and it was presented that there could be expected some money changing hands (like Christ Church, Plano deal) before all negotiations were cut off in favor of law suits by 815 - so now their proving a willingness to pay the cost of discipleship in another way).
The SS ECUSA has sunk and it seems that this is basically a salvage operation. Unlike the successful refloating and redeployment of ships at Pearl Harbor, ECUSA is, in my opinion, the Titanic, and will not allow itself to be raised to be anything useful.
My wife and I did visit an exhibit of the Titanic in Atlanta earlier this year. We even touched a piece of the hull. There were wonderful artifacts and stories, but the fact is that the ship is rusting away to nothing on the bottom of the ocean. I see definite parallels to ECUSA.
If you read the description of DEPO found on the internet (and published by General Convention of the Episcopal Church), you will see that DEPO has to be approved by the bishop with jurisdiction. Let's say a parish in San Juaquin wants Depo. They MUST consult with their OWN BISHOP (Schofield), and he MUST approve the Depo before Depo is given. That is different from a parish voting to leave the Episcopal Church without "permission" from their local bishop, and then saying they are suddenly no longer under the jurisdiction of the Episcopal Bishop, but are under some "unnapproved bishop"(not approved by Bishop Schofield). In short, Depo must be approved by and be in consultation with the bishop with jurisdiction. It is NOT carried out unilaterally by a congregation. It is done IN CONSULTATION WITH the Episcopal bishop with jurisdiction. Depo is NOT use of a bishop without permission from the bishop who is in charge of the diocese. "Flying bishops" from the Global South, however, work in direct violation of the understood role of bishops in the Episcopal Church. Episcopal means "ruled by bishops." Bishops elected by their Episcopal diocese and consented to by a majority of diocesan standing committees and the Episcopal House of Bishops become "bishops with jurisdiction." Each bishop's jurisdiction is a certain land area. When other bishops come into a "bishop with jurisdiction's" land area, they must have permission from the "bishop with jurisdiction" to officiate at any services in that diocese. In Depo, the "bishop with jurisdiction" GIVES PERMISSION FOR a DEPO bishop to do this. That is why depo bishops are NOT "flying bishops." They operate with permission from the bishop with jurisdiction.
Of course, if the congregation has left the Episcopal church, I don't see a big problem with "flying bishops," as long as the congregation knows that the Episcopal Church is the only church in the United States that is recognized by Canterbury as being in the Anglican Communion. I really don't see what the fuss is about, up until a few years ago, most of the people in the Episcopal Church had never heard of the words "Anglican Communion." If people are happy being in some church that is no longer affiliated with the Episcopal Church or the Anglican Communion, more power to them! Whatever floats your boat!
I am really tired for being referred to as a sinking ship. There are plenty of Episcopalians around that want to remain Episcopal. My ship is not sinking, no matter how many cannons you fire at it.
So "strong ship" - do you want the deck chair over here by the pool or over there by the lifeboats?
Funny pun about the canons, er cannons. Are you talking about Jim Naughton and Jim Rosenthall by chance?
bb
Actually, the pun wasn't intended, but I left it because, well, it WAS punny.
In all honesty, you are WAY more entrenched in this issue than I. I have no impressions of Jim Naughton or Jim Rosenthall. My only impression is that TEC is being discounted and, therefore, all of the remaining members of TEC(myself included) are going down. We don't see it that way - and maybe we are silent majority because we are not entrenched in this issue. But believe me, there is a lot of support for the remaining Episcopalians that didn't vote the way congregations such as yours did and STILL want to remain Episcopalians AND retain their houses of worship - and they will NOT go down without a fight.
Post a Comment