|
Friday, March 30, 2007
"My son, do not forget my
teaching, but keep my commands in your heart, for they will prolong your
life many years and bring you prosperity." (Proverbs 3:1-2)
- Message from Canon Anderson
- March/April Encompass Issue
Coming Soon
- Largest Episcopal Church in
Colorado to Leave Denomination, Join CANA
- Bishop Jim Kelsey (N.
Michigan) Reports Orthodox Tactics Are "Chilling"
- Archbishop of Canterbury:
Church Should Be 'Safe Place' for Homosexuals
- Commentary: The Episcopal
Declaration of Independence (by Jordan Hylden)
A Message from AAC
President David Anderson
Beloved in
Christ,
There are several news
items on the U.S. Anglican scene on which I would like to comment this week.
First, Retired Bishop William Cox, who was being unjustly targeted for an
ecclesiastical trial by The Episcopal Church (TEC), has decided to transfer
his Holy Orders to another branch of the Anglican Communion. A couple of
years ago, Bishop Cox – at the request of primates of other Anglican
provinces – confirmed and ordained individuals on these primates’ behalf in
U.S. congregations
affiliated with their provinces. He doesn’t deny his actions, but affirms
that he was acting on behalf of these primates at their request. TEC,
however, maintains that she owns the franchise rights—even over Anglican
churches that are not part of the
U.S. province. When
overseas primates have come personally to do confirmations and ordinations,
TEC has complained but taken no action. When retired bishops of TEC have
done confirmations in non-TEC Anglican churches, such as in
Akron,
Ohio, some years ago, no
discipline was meted out. Now, with TEC Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts
Schori, she wants everyone to know that there is a new sheriff in town.
Bishop Cox, at age 86,
is in clear mind but somewhat frail health, and has become the target of
Jefferts Schori's and the House of Bishops’ wrath; they were in fact well on
their way to having a trial to depose him and strip him of his Holy Orders
in his final years. If the Church had canonical jails, TEC might try to send
him there for life. With chances of a fair trial nearly zero, and not
wishing the ordeal of an abusive trial, Bishop Cox moved his Holy Orders to
the Diocese of Argentina, which is under Archbishop Gregory Venables of the
Province of the Southern Cone. It is unclear at this point whether the
bishop’s move will stop the trial, or TEC will proceed and try Bishop Cox in
absentia, or the tactic will change to the Canon 10 “abandonment of
communion” allegation (resulting in automatic deposition). As TEC loses the
ability to punish clergy who leave the Church, their fury is simply diverted
to property issues, where Chancellor David Booth Beers takes charge with his
“sue them until they hurt” mentality.
Another retired bishop
of TEC, Daniel Herzog, formerly the bishop of
Albany, has decided together with his wife to
swim the
Tiber
River and become Roman
Catholic. To do so, we are told he has resigned all his Holy Orders. Why
some accommodation for his Holy Orders at some level wasn’t made in the
process is unclear; Herzog was a wonderful priest and bishop and would have
been a very positive addition to any church. Maybe he was simply ready to
open a new chapter in his retirement. Dan, we wish you and Carol well, and
may God bless you both.
In
Colorado, Fr. Don Armstrong –
whose bishop has publicly accused him of financial irregularities, specifics
heretofore unclear – has also labored under inhibition, prevented from
participation in his parish, and muzzled by the bishop from speaking out in
his own defense. Bishop of Colorado Robert O’Neill has wanted unlimited time
to keep Fr. Armstrong in ecclesiastical limbo, in which he is cut off from
everybody and prohibited from speaking publicly to reply to the allegations.
It is not surprising that the parish and Fr. Armstrong finally said
‘enough’, and decided to leave TEC and the Diocese of Colorado and its
oppressive bishop. As TEC’s situation and behavior continue to deteriorate,
the old saying comes to mind, “Beatings will continue until morale
improves.”
A deep concern that I
have had for a number of years is how the legal system of TEC is set up. For
eight years I sat as the presiding judge of the Ecclesiastical Court of the
Diocese of Los Angeles. Most cases in prior times dealt with allegations of
sexual misconduct of some type, and rarely financial misconduct. The
inhibition and removal of the accused priest was a regular feature based on
the physical and emotional safety of congregational members while the trial
went forward. When someone accused a priest of an offense, there was to be
an investigation, the evidence of which was then presented to the diocesan
standing committee and bishop. If they felt there was probable cause to
depose the priest should the court returned a guilty verdict, they would
issue a presentment for the clergy person, who would then be inhibited. The
issue of non-contact with vestry or parishioners was an issue with sexual
misconduct or sexual harassment to protect the person (or persons) from the
accused, but I don’t recall the accused even then being prevented from
speaking publicly in self-defense. In the
Colorado case, if the diocese
did its due diligence in researching the allegations and then filed the
presentment against Fr. Armstrong, thereby resulting in his inhibition, then
he would have been entitled to a speedy trial and freedom to publicly speak
of his belief of his innocence. These issues of judicial over-reach are good
government issues, not liberal versus conservative issues, and they speak to
basic rights of an accused to be treated with a presumption of innocence and
a right to defend.
Blessings and Peace in Christ Jesus,
The Rev. Canon David C. Anderson
President & CEO,
American Anglican Council
March/April
Encompass Issue Coming Soon
The March/April issue of the
American Anglican Council's monthly newsletter, Encompass, is
scheduled to be mailed from the printer early next week and will arrive in
your mailboxes soon afterward. This six-page issue contains coverage of the
Tanzania Primates' Meeting and an update on the AAC's newly created
Communiqué Compliance Office. (Note: Encompass is typically
published monthly but is sometimes produced every two months due to the
timing of important Church meetings, as was the case with the March/April
issue.)
If you would like to be added to
the Encompass mailing list, please send an e-mail to
communications@americananglican.org.
Be sure to include your full name and mailing address.
Largest Episcopal Church
in Colorado to Leave Denomination, Join CANA
*Note: In related
developments this week, the Diocese of Colorado
released its charges against the departing congregation's
rector, the Rev. Don Armstrong, who was temporarily inhibited three months
ago and has continued to deny the allegations after they were named this
week. The diocese also
moved to freeze the church's funds and has threatened legal
action against it, and the bishop declared the church's vestry seats vacant.
Source: Grace
Church And St. Stephen's Parish Press Release
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March 26, 2007
The vestry of Grace Church and
St. Stephen's Parish in Colorado Springs, the largest Episcopal parish in
the state and one of Colorado's oldest churches, voted to leave the
Episcopal Church on Monday morning. Effective today the parish affiliates
with the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), a missionary
diocese of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican).
A 40 day process of discernment
is planned for the congregation to fully understand the ramifications of
this decision. At the end of this period parish members will be given the
opportunity to affirm the new ecclesial relationship with the Church of
Nigeria.
Although a long-time and
consistent advocate of orthodox reform within The Episcopal Church (TEC),
the parish's lay leadership has lost hope in future reform of The Episcopal
Church. "It's clear that The Episcopal Church no longer believes the
historic, orthodox Christian faith common to all believers. It's also clear
that purported Episcopal values of 'inclusion' do not apply to orthodox
believers. In fact, we find it bizarre that Episcopal leaders deny what the
Apostles and martyrs believed and reject those who maintain the faith for
which the Apostles lived and the martyrs died," said Jon Wroblewski, senior
warden of the parish.
The congregation's lay
leadership believes that The Episcopal Church's departure from belief in
biblical authority affects the parish's own faith and witness, and to fail
to name and reject this revisionism leaves its children at risk, as well as
all those who depend on the parish to defend and maintain the truth.
"We are concerned that The
Episcopal Church has rejected the historic faith, has abandoned Holy
Scripture for the values and trends of contemporary culture, and has severed
its continuity with the faith of our parents. To remain in The Episcopal
Church is to be influenced by, and under the authority of, such a
revisionist church at our own peril," Wroblewski said.
The March 20, 2007 resolution of
The Episcopal Church's House of Bishops to decline the Anglican Primates
direction to provide alternative pastoral oversight for orthodox clergy,
congregations, and dioceses in the United States further signifies to the
vestry that The Episcopal Church is departing from the Anglican Communion.
By its defiant action, The Episcopal Church chooses to walk apart from the
tradition it claims to embrace. Unlike The Episcopal Church, Grace Church
and St. Stephen's Parish resolves to remain steadfastly Anglican in its
belief and practice.
Additionally, the ongoing
investigation of the parish and of its Rector, The Rev. Donald Armstrong
III, by the Bishop of Colorado and his absolute determination to defrock the
rector and gain control of the parish is intolerable. The continued health,
vitality, and general well-being of the congregation demand immediate
withdrawal from the Episcopal Church and new pastoral oversight by CANA. The
vestry's position is that in spite of numerous attempts to have reasonable
discussions with the Bishop and the Diocese of Colorado, these approaches
have been rebuffed time and again. In the Vestry's opinion, the Bishop has
manipulated the Diocese's judicial system to resemble a kangaroo court, so
that no fair hearing is possible at any level in the Diocese.
"Grace Church and St. Stephen's
Parish longs for, and looks forward to, pastoral direction by a bishop who
genuinely cares about our parishioners. The international reputation of
Bishop Martyn Minns of the Church of Nigeria is excellent, and I am
confident that he will provide us with the necessary leadership and pastoral
oversight lacking in Colorado's Episcopal Bishop," Wroblewski said.
Over the last few months the
parish's relationship with the Bishop and Diocese of Colorado has
degenerated to a level of mistrust and adversity from which point its vestry
sees no hope of recovery. The recent action by The Episcopal Church's House
of Bishops offers no hope of continuing fellowship. This divisive and
perilous situation has compelled the vestry to acknowledge the sad fact that
The Episcopal Church has abandoned Grace and St. Stephen's Parish and all
traditional Anglicans worldwide.
-End-
Contact: Alan Crippen
Cell Phone: 719-684-3660
A Report by the Bishop
of Northern Michigan on the House of Bishops' Meeting
(Note: Below are excepts
only; the full report (which is too lengthy to be reprinted in its entirety
in this update) may be read online
here.)
Source:
Episcopal Diocese of Northern Michigan News
Written March 22, 2007
By the Rt. Rev. Jim Kelsey
Jim Kelsey's report on the
Spring Bishops' Meeting March, 2007
I am now on the plane, flying home from Houston, Texas, having just
completed the spring meeting of Episcopal Bishops from throughout The
Episcopal Church. It was an important meeting, I think, and I'd like to do
as I've done following past meetings: send you a personal account of my
experience there, and my sense of what has happened and where I think we are
and where we might be headed as a faith community...
...On Friday, March 16, the full
meeting of the bishops got underway...While, as usual, there was a variety
of points of view expressed, it was quickly becoming apparent that there was
an over-riding agreement that the Primates, in their Communiqué, had far
over-stepped their authority, and were claiming for themselves a power which
is not theirs, and which represents a centralization which is decidedly
un-Anglican...
...In my opinion, what finally
passed is a strong statement about who we are and where we are prepared to
stand. We do intend to continue relationships with Anglicans world-wide, in
whatever official or unofficial capacity might be possible. We have no idea
how the Primates or the ACC will respond. Rowan Williams has since said he
was "disappointed" in our resolution, and that is hardly surprising, since
he no doubt had been hoping that we would capitulate to all of the demands
of the Primates...
..On the morning of the last
business day, Stacy Sauls, Bishop of Lexington and Chair of the Property
Disputes Committee gave an in depth report concerning research done on the
tactics of the Network and the American Anglican Council (AAC) and other
conservative/dissident groups. It was chilling. There is now clear evidence
that there has been a strategy by these groups to create an alternative
ecclesial structure within the United States, with alternative leadership
(Robert Duncan, the Bishop of Pittsburgh as the Moderator of the Network)
which might be recognized by the leadership of the Anglican Communion (i.e.
- by those strengthened "Instruments of Unity") as the true Anglican Church
in the United States. If indeed the Anglican Communion is transformed into a
hierarchical body (through the implementation of the Windsor Report
recommendations) and the Primates shift their support to the Network/AAC/CANA/AMiA
congregations & dioceses, there will be a legal basis by which the dissident
congregations will be able to claim ownership of all properties and church
assets. This is serious stuff...
...Now it is time to move ahead
with God's work of redemption. Hopefully it will be in partnership with
others throughout the Anglican Communion. The extent to which others are
ready to keep in partnership with us has yet to be seen - - but that we are
prepared to step out in faith and with courage and determination to
celebrate God's liberating work in our midst and in the world, have no
doubt...
Church Challenged to Be
'Safe Place' for Homosexuals (by Archbishop of Canterbury)
Source: Christian
Today
by Lillian Kwon, Correspondent
March 30, 2007
The Anglican Communion has been
challenged to show that it is truly a safe place for people to be honest and
where they may be confident that they will have their human dignity
respected, its spiritual head, the Archbishop of Canterbury.
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr
Rowan Williams, spoke just after the Anglican Communion made available an
interim report on the commitment of churches to listen to the experience of
homosexual people.
"The commitments of the
Communion are not only to certain theological positions on the question of
sexual ethics but also to a manifest and credible respect for the proper
liberties of homosexual people," Dr Williams said.
The Anglican Communion had
passed resolutions over the past several decades, recognising the need to
explore the issue of homosexuality, which has wracked churches worldwide. In
1998, the decennial Lambeth Conference called each of the global body's 38
provinces to minister pastorally to all people, including homosexuals, and
listen to their experience.
"There are contexts where it is
difficult to find a safe place for gay and lesbian people to speak about
their lives openly," said the Anglican head. "There are contexts where
people assume the debate is over. The report shows that listening is
possible, but also that there is a great deal still to be done. The work
continues, but we have a solid start here."
Summaries detailing the progress
of listening and the stance on homosexuality from all Anglican provinces
were made fully available Tuesday for the entire communion to have access
to. Some have reported their start to "The Listening Process" while
affirming that their position against homosexuality has not been compromised
by listening to homosexual persons.
Primates recently gave the US
Episcopal Church – the US wing of Anglicanism – a September 30 deadline to
respond to a moratorium on consecrating homosexuals and blessing same-sex
unions. The Episcopal Church had heightened controversy over homosexuality
when it consecrated an openly gay bishop in 2003.
While the Anglican churches
affirm that homosexuality is incompatible to Scripture, Dr Williams
expressed concern about violence and abuse against homosexual people.
"I share the concerns expressed
about situations where the Church is seen to be underwriting social or legal
attitudes which threaten these proper liberties [of homosexual people],"
said Dr Williams. "It is impossible to read this [interim] report without
being aware that in many places – including Western countries with
supposedly ‘liberal’ attitudes – hate crimes against homosexual people have
increased in recent years and have taken horrifying and disturbing forms."
Commentary: "The
Episcopal Declaration of Independence"
Source: First
Things
By Jordan Hylden
March 26, 2007
Last week, the Episcopal
Church’s House of Bishops met and let the world know just what they think of
the rest of the Anglican Communion. The official text of their resolutions
ran to several thousand words, but for the effect they are likely to have on
the church’s relations with the rest of the Anglican world, the bishops
could just as well have taken a page out of General McAuliffe’s playbook,
saved everyone a lot of time, and issued a simple one-word response: “Nuts!”
At last month’s meeting of
Anglican primates in Africa, the Episcopal bishops were asked to do three
things: participate in the creation of a church-within-a-church for
Episcopal conservatives, promise not to consecrate any more actively
homosexual bishops, and promise not to conduct any more church blessings of
same-sex unions.
If they did not, the African
meeting clearly suggested, the Americans would in effect be choosing to
“walk apart” from the wider Anglican Communion. It was rightly described as
an ultimatum but nevertheless was quite measured—no one asked Gene Robinson
(the actively gay bishop of New Hampshire) to step down, and no one required
anything of the Episcopal Church’s numerous openly gay priests. Essentially,
the Anglican primates told the Episcopal Church that it would be allowed to
push the boundaries, but within limits.
Unfortunately, last week the
Episcopal Church apparently decided that it will be bound by nothing beyond
itself—not Scripture, not tradition, not worldwide Anglican councils, not
anything. And it said so with a vehemence that was surprising, even to many
of its supporters.
In their statement, the American
bishops accused the global Anglican primates of “unprecedented” spiritual
unsoundness and solemnly spoke of the Episcopal Church’s “autonomy” and
“liberation from colonialism,” which they understood to be threatened by the
creeping rule of “a distant and unaccountable group of prelates.”
Apparently, they were serious. With no sense of irony, the bishops of an
overwhelmingly white, wealthy, and liberal American church actually saw fit
to accuse their fellow Anglicans—many of whom are from poor third-world
countries—of “colonialism.”
It is all very sad. One cannot
read the bishops’ statement without sensing their anger and impatience. And
what is worse, one cannot read the statement without sensing that the
bishops have decided, for now and for always, to leave the Anglican
Communion and cut conservatives out of the church.
The American bishops passed
three resolutions. One was relatively uncontroversial, and passed
unanimously—a simple invitation to Rowan Williams, archbishop of Canterbury,
and the Primates’ Standing Committee to meet with delegates from the
Episcopal Church about the present crisis. As Katherine Jefferts Schori, the
presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, explained: “There is some belief
in this house that other parts of the Communion do not understand us very
well.” Many bishops, it seems, are under the impression that the Episcopal
Church’s unique polity and theological concerns are not fully grasped by
Archbishop Williams and the primates.
That is unlikely. Rowan Williams
invited three Episcopal bishops to last month’s primates meeting for the
express purpose of allowing the Episcopal Church to explain itself, and
Archbishop Williams has indicated many times that he and the primates
understand the polity and position of the Episcopal Church quite well (see
here and here). One doubts that additional meetings will finally enlighten
Williams as to the true wisdom of the Episcopal Church.
A second resolution was much
more pointed and potentially much more consequential. In it, the bishops
flatly refused to participate in the primates’ proposed “Pastoral Council,”
in effect a church-within-a-church for conservatives, which they rejected as
“injurious” and incompatible with the polity and canons of the Episcopal
Church. The impetus behind the primates’ proposal was to provide a space for
conservatives within the Episcopal Church who, for a variety of reasons,
have become alienated from church leadership in recent years. It was a
temporary, stopgap measure, designed to hold the church together until a
more permanent solution could be found. Many had hoped that, by its
adoption, the steady flow of parishes splitting off from the Episcopal
Church would cease.
Sadly, the bishops’ rejection of
the Pastoral Council means that the disorderly and painful fracturing of the
Episcopal Church will likely continue apace, since the bishops do not seem
willing to provide any sort of acceptable safe space for conservatives. It
also means that tension with Rowan Williams and the primates will ratchet up
another notch—their proposed Pastoral Council, by which the primates
intended to work with the Episcopal Church, will almost certainly now be
implemented against the Episcopal leadership’s will. Conservatives who wish
to participate in it will have to do so in defiance of national church
leadership, and they may be subject to discipline.
The absurdity of this
situation—wherein Episcopalians could be disciplined for daring to conform
to Anglican “doctrine, discipline, and worship,” just as printed in every
single prayer book in every Anglican pew—apparently has not yet occurred to
the Episcopal bishops.
Discouraging as all this is, it
gets worse. This is the reason the bishops gave for their rejection of the
Pastoral Council: “The meaning of the Preamble to the Constitution of The
Episcopal Church,” they solemnly intoned, “is determined solely by the
General Convention of The Episcopal Church.”
While that may seem opaque to
the casual observer, it is actually a bold and sweeping statement that, if
acted upon, will lead directly to a final split with Canterbury and destroy
the idea of Anglican catholicity within the Episcopal Church.
To make clear the radical nature
of the Episcopal bishops’ new claim, the constitution’s preamble is worth
quoting: “The Episcopal Church . . . is a constituent member of the Anglican
Communion, a Fellowship within the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic
Church, of those duly constituted Dioceses, Provinces, and regional Churches
in communion with the See of Canterbury, upholding and propagating the
historic Faith and Order as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer.”
By stating that the meaning of
this sentence is determined solely by General Convention, the Episcopal
bishops are doing nothing less than claiming that what it means to be
Anglican, what it means to be in communion with Canterbury, what it means to
be a part of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church and hold to the
historic Christian faith—that all of this is to be decided solely by the
democratic vote of clergy and laypeople once every two years in a Marriott
hotel convention room, with reference to nothing and nobody. It is
breathtaking in its arrogance.
The bishops’ third resolution is
a long, churlish, and supercilious explanation of their actions, nominally
addressed as a statement to their own American church but really meant as a
jab at the rest of the Anglican world. With an assumed innocence that by
this time ought to convince no one, the bishops proclaim the “deep longing
of their hearts” to remain within the Anglican Communion, while feigning
surprise at the notion that their continued defiance of the rest of that
communion might somehow be a problem.
Stunningly, rather than admit
that the Episcopal Church’s actions may perhaps have had something to do
with the crisis that has nearly driven the entire communion off a cliff, the
bishops actually point the finger of blame at the primates, who, the bishops
allege, in their attempt to set boundaries and work with the Episcopal
Church to provide a safe space for conservatives, are in fact encouraging
“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.”
To their credit, the bishops
here show themselves to be not completely out of touch. They do at least
recognize that their actions may lead to the withdrawal of Canterbury’s
recognition of full Anglican status, which the bishops say they contemplate
with “great sorrow.” But no matter what the archbishop of Canterbury or
other Anglicans may say, the bishops boldly declare that it will not affect
“our own recognition of our full communion with the See of Canterbury or any
of the other constituent members of the Anglican Communion.” One imagines
that Lewis Carroll would be proud...
Continued here
|
