DAR2007: The End of Anglican Fudge
Commentary
by Canon Gary L'Hommedieu (en route from Dar es Salaam)www.virtueonline.org
2/21/2007
"Every time Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori dons her personalized vestments, there's a vision of sunrise." (USA Today, Feb. 5, 2007)
"It's a new dawn." (The Most Rev. Emmanuel Kolini, Archbishop of the Province of Rwanda, Feb. 20, 2007; at breakfast the morning after the Primates' Meeting in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania)
Well it looked like fudge; even smelled like fudge. I'm sitting on board a Boeing 777 somewhere between the Persian Gulf and New York with the taste of fudge still in my mouth. But Dar 2007 wasn't fudge after all. It was not what most people expected. It may not have been what anyone wanted. But whatever it was, the Primates' Meeting wasn't fudge.
Over the weekend one orthodox leader told my colleague, Dr. David Virtue, "Go home and tell all your people to abandon ship. Leave TEC. It's over. We lost." This morning at the cashier's window at the White Sands Hotel that same orthodox leader, who asked not to be named or quoted directly, said that the orthodox had won.
At breakfast Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini, Primate of Rwanda and head of the AMiA, said with a tired grin to a crowd of friendly inquirers, "It's a new dawn."
Was there a rabbit pulled out of a hat after all? If so, how did I miss it?
This past week at the White Sands Hotel in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, it was like being on a roller coaster in a soundproofed room where you couldn't hear the clatter of your own wheels . You were blindfolded and shot full of Novocain, so you didn't know whether you were slowly inching your way up a hill or careening down on the edge of a precipice. We had our share of dull moments, gazing out at the Indian Ocean waiting for smoke signals to appear on the horizon, not knowing if we were looking in the right direction.
Our main task all week was to kill time between press briefings. One after another the briefings spelled fudge. On day one TEC seemed to get a complete "pass" on Windsor. The same Primates who railed against TEC's performance at General Convention last year now appeared to be more intent on good manners than on following through on their rhetoric.
The one bit of excitement we had all week was the sudden announcement that the Province of Nigeria had broken silence and issued a statement on its web site that Primate Peter Akinola and six other Primates would not receive communion with Katharine Jefferts Schori, the American Primate. This was a shock, because the Primates had agreed not to speak to anyone outside their immediate circle, and certainly not to publicize any news of the Primates' Meeting and its proceedings. Was this Akinola and company firing a salvo? If so what was the intent? Was it just mischief? Did it show a hint of anything to come?
The press fastened on the element of mystery and intrigue, but this was partly because there was nothing else to grab on to. No other hints had leaked out to place the incident in context. Ultimately it seemed random and ineffectual, like kicking sand.
Throughout the week came repeated reports that the final statement on TEC's Windsor compliance and the draft covenant for the Anglican Communion were still being hashed out. Saturday afternoon there was an impromptu briefing releasing the names of appointments to the Primates' standing committee, which would have special responsibilities during the interim before the next triennial Primates' Meeting. Schori was named to represent the Americas. This was a blow, because that ruled out any formal discipline of the American Church prior to Lambeth. In her navigation of diplomatic waters Schori seemed to have triumphed. The illusion of normalcy was intact. Now all prior conflicts and criticisms would be seen as minor technicalities, and the noisy conservatives would be marginalized once and for all.
Later that evening a second briefing was called with a report on theological education in the Anglican Communion, and a longer report on Millennium Goals. The report, such as it was, was presented by Archbishop Ndgunane, the Primate of Southern Africa,. Ndgunane, who brought with him a special guest, a lay woman who was to be commissioned the next morning as Anglican observer to the UN by the Archbishop of Canterbury. The so-called report was really an extended infomercial for an upcoming conference in Johannesburg next month on Millennium Goals. Archbishop Ndungane preached up the coming conference like he were saving souls, but still something didn't ring true. It was obviously a performance, and the press immediately wondered what the game was. The spin doctors were stalling. Archishop Ndungane was sent out to do a little political soft shoe to distract us. We felt like we were being taken for chumps.
Saturday night at dinner we were all resolved that the orthodox had lost in Dar es Salaam. The ACC and the TEC had pulled it off. They had dissipated another crisis through "process" and "listening". For all the statements since 2003 about restoring the integrity of Christian doctrine and holding false teachers accountable, in the end what appeared to matter was keeping the club together.
Now the clock was running out. Seasoned observers of the Anglican spin machine commented that Dar looked just like the Dromantine meeting three years earlier. Williams and his operatives kept putting off and putting off important statements and decisions. Finally they were saved by the bell. Here again it looked like the meeting would end with no official statement and no official action, except to plan the next meeting, maybe at the next Lambeth.
Sunday we all went to the island of Zanzibar for a change of scene, and got to hear the Archbishop of Canterbury preach. Many of us participated in the Eucharist, and all of us tried to get an exact count of how many Primates did not participate in the Eucharist. The precise number was in dispute throughout the day until late that night.
At the end of the service each of the Primates came forward to be awarded a gift of hospitality and be given the opportunity to introduce him or herself and name their jurisdiction. Katharine Jefferts Schori introduced herself as representing "the Episcopal Church in the United States and in fifteen other countries." Those who had followed the recent General Convention recalled the oddity of TEC changing its name from ECUSA, and hanging flags at the altar from all the nations where a branch of the Episcopal Church was located. Right away it triggered speculation that TEC was presenting itself as a mini-communion, perhaps in anticipation of being thrown out of the Anglican Communion. On this particular Sunday Schori's introduction was just weird. It was an eerie sort of triumphalism, and again we couldn't put it in context.
On the way home on the boat one Anglican Consultative Council insider hinted for the first time that Lambeth was not definitely on the schedule for 2008 and it would not be before the final briefing Monday night. This to my knowledge was the first indication that the Anglican spin machine was veering out of control.
The final briefing was scheduled for 6:45 on Monday, the usual time. At 4:45 some of us strolled through the lobby and noticed a press briefing going on at that moment. ACC Communications Director Jim Rosenthal shared a few housekeeping items, apologized for still not having the text of the Primates' Communiqué prior to the final briefing when we might ask informed questions. He announced that the final briefing would take place at 11 PM, following the formal close of the Primates' Meeting.
Members of the press gathered early, expecting to hear that the meeting was postponed till midnight. But at 11:05 Rosenthal walked into the briefing room accompanied by Archbishop Gomez (West Indies). He hurriedly distributed copies of the long awaited Primates' Communiqué summarizing the actions of the week's meeting. Journalists scoured the document in search of potential hot spots to bring up in the question and answer session to follow. There had been no real news all week up until this, the last moment.
Cameras and microphones were hurried into readiness. One group of journalists formed a circle in the lobby to film the dignitaries as they entered the lobby. The rest stayed in the briefing room. Tape recorders were strewn along the top of the podium.
The Archbishop of Canterbury and three other Primates entered the room. Archbishop Aspinall of Australia, who had been the master of ceremonies in our briefing sessions all week, gave a perfunctory introduction. The meeting was then handed over to the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury.
Dr. Williams summarized the still unfamiliar Communiqué we all held in our hands. The text was couched in the familiar language of diplomacy, but for the first time the press was hearing diplomatic language minus spin. We were all taken off guard.
We waited for the fudge, and at first it appeared to come. There was to be no formal discipline of TEC for precipitating the catastrophe of 2003 in approving the election of V. Gene Robinson. Further, no clear picture emerged of the upcoming Anglican covenant document. There were no breathlessly awaited anecdotes of archiepiscopal histrionics -- no primates storming out the door, or barring the door from others seeking to claw their way in. There was no announcement that Lambeth had been canceled or that a second "Lambeth South" was being planned in a rival Anglican Communion next year.
In short, not one of the prewritten scripts we had all arrived with was put into effect. The Communion had held together. The Anglican glacier glided on in its sublime indifference to controversy like the very picture of eternity.
To bloodhound reporters it was a huge anticlimax. The default response of the press was sounds business as usual. In other words, more fudge.
Early in his remarks Dr. Williams stressed that it was not "business as usual" in the Anglican Communion. TEC had not passed Windsor after all, but were summoned to clarify their response. The conservative Primates had not been captivated by the Lady Primate's charm and finesse. They had rather been polite in keeping with the protocols of their own cultures.
More significantly, the American dissidents in the AMiA, CANA, the Anglican Communion Network, along with their overseas allies and sponsors, were vindicated. The purported notion of a parity between sexual sin and canonical irregularity was blasted by the Primates directly. Then in a shocking reversal the blame for the crossings and the chaos of the defecting parishes and clergy was laid at the feet of TEC. They are the ones who had torn the net in 2003, and in the years since then they had torn it even further. The border crossing by foreign Primates was viewed as a problem demanding a solution, but at the same time it was viewed as a compassionate and appropriate response to an intolerable burden placed upon the orthodox minority in the American Church.
Still no sound bites, no explosions, no splattered body parts, no resignations or expulsions. A Reuters journalist commented on the Communiqué after the briefing: "Sounds like a document without any teeth." At the time we all agreed. But the Communiqué had teeth, just not the kind we were looking for.
I made a similar comment to Archbishop Kolini the next morning regarding the Communiqué: "It sounds like the biblical concept of 'discipline' is not there." He smiled and said, "It's there. You have to look for it."
I read the Communiqué a little more carefully a few minutes later. If there weren't teeth, there were certainly teeth marks. The language about the failure of TEC to live up to Windsor was noted in no uncertain terms, albeit without the stylized indignation we and our readers had expected - even demanded.
The teeth are in the closing section, "On Clarifying the Response to Windsor", which puts the American Presiding Bishop in an excruciating position. It falls to her to convene the American House of Bishops and draft an "unequivocal common covenant" indicating conformity to the recommendations of the Primates Communiqué. As far as Windsor goes, it falls to Schori to draw from her bishops a credible pledge that a) no rites of blessing of same sex union will be approved; and b) any gay candidate nominated for the episcopate will be refused confirmation. The Communiqué voices its understanding that such pledges will be made credible only by consistent action which will be subject to close and constant scrutiny.
Schori has till September 30 to report back to the Primates and to assure them that the Episcopal Church will comply. Further "if the reassurances requested...cannot in good conscience be given, the relationship between The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion as a whole remains damaged at best, and this has consequences for the full participation of the [Episcopal] Church in the life of the Communion." Perhaps this is an example of biblical discipline Archbishop Kolini assured us was "in there".
The only fudge factor is that there was no explicit detailing of the consequences that the Presiding Bishop and her Church will face if they cannot, or will not, submit to the concluding judgment of the Windsor Process. If they fail or refuse to comply, perhaps nothing will happen.
Many say it still sounds like the classic recipe for Anglican fudge. Here's the difference. In the course of this past week the moral center of gravity has shifted to the Global South, not in the wishful thinking of Western spin doctors, but in word and deed. Ironically, it has also shifted to the orphaned minority in the US. There is no foreseeable way that can change, regardless of what havoc Katharine Schori and her cabal of legal experts can summon up. If Schori pushes more people out of the church, she simply builds the AMiA or CANA or whatever entity she is now obligated to create under the name of the Primatial Vicar. Not only does she add to their numbers but she strengthens their legitimacy, adding to her own recriminations for tearing the net still more.
Even that's nothing compared to the wild political scramble she faces among her colleagues in the House of Bishops, many of whom in local diocesan conventions have publically committed themselves to denouncing Windsor. The TEC "justice" machine is still rolling at full tilt, and it will take an immense effort of corporate will to halt and reverse it. It will require more fudging and outright duplicity than mere mortals have, even in the House of Bishops, to make rebellion and nonconformity look like conformity and the restoration of the bonds of affection.
As I sat aboard the Emirates jet on my way home, a BBC newsflash came on the tiny screens hung throughout the cabin: Anglican Primates give the Episcopal Church till September 30 to change its policy on homosexuality." The BBC is not known for spinning news to the advantage of Christian conservatism. Even they were seeing writing on the wall.
As we reflect in these early days after the Primates' Meeting, let's not be put off by our own disappointment, but rather let's acknowledge what we're disappointed about. We're disappointed because no one was excommunicated or refused communion or had a door slammed in their face. We're disappointed because Katharine Schori was not publically humiliated. We're disappointed because there was no symbolic bloodletting to assuage our long years of outraged grief and offended justice.
That's our business. In all fairness, that wasn't the Primates' business.
I only know two things coming out of Dar es Salaam. The first is that I'm happy to be an Anglican, in fellowship with that odd consortium of decent folk that I met this week in the Anglican First World. I'm more at ease than I was a week ago, even though all I see is dust beginning to settle. No doubt it will be settling for years. This too may be evidence of a new dawn.
The second thing I know is this: I wouldn't want to be Katharine Schori for the next six months. Now it's her turn to pull a rabbit out of a hat.
David Virtue contributed to this report.
END
---The Rev. Canon J. Gary L'Hommedieu is Canon for Pastoral Care at the Cathedral Church of St. Luke, Orlando, Florida, and a regular columnist for VirtueOnline. He can be reached at gary[at]virtueonline[dot]org
| Poster | Thread |
|---|---|
| rturner | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:25 Updated: 2007/2/22 18:25 |
Webmaster ![]() ![]() Joined: 2003/12/31 From: Northern Virginia Posts: 92 |
All comments from this article were deleted today while attempting to find why this page was not displaying nicely inside a standard size window.
One of the members put an extremely long string of characters in a post without spaces which caused the page to stretch beyond reasonable limits. It took some time to find it. Please feel free to repost your thoughts here or at the bottom of another article. -Robert webmaster[at]virtueonline[dot]org |
| Chris2 | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:38 Updated: 2007/2/22 18:38 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/7/20 From: Posts: 135 |
As I was saying, the cancer has metasticized.
It is time for Alexandria. |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:39 Updated: 2007/2/24 10:42 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
ATTENTION: I HAD POSTED FIRST AS MY FIRST POST HERE;
THAT I WOULD REPOST Some of the COMMENTS MADE BY my FELLOW VOLers. Some asked me to repost theirs... and you are welcome. But why my explanation post disappeared is Strange. ??? humbly, gregory Causidicus says; Welcome back Gary: One look around the blogosphere and you will see that the dust is not settling. It is just beginning to swirl in the revisionist camp. The bishopesse, her gay admirers, her sixties radical retread bishops and her 15 flags will not be able to repent. This means that by October the dust devil will be a category 3 tornado filled with the debris of the gospel of inclusiveness, justice-love and their own special brand of exclusive diversity. The rest of the communion had best get ready because, here come the ugly Americans, more than ready to do their own thing and be their own radical chic leftie communion trespassing on everyone else’s turf. Only problem is they will find that no one wants to attend their disordered soiree. This time also presents a great opportunity to every single traditional Anglican (non-TEC) Christian community in North America to join together, perhaps to form something new of value in spreading the Gospel or just find common ground. I hope they can see it rather than spend all their time snarking at each other, critiquing the politics club that is TEC and, generally whining like revisionists. Of course, if some are too tired to continue then by all means let them sit on the porch while others get to work. Not despairing now… no way. Causidicus |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:42 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:33 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
JohnR says,
Not the end, but as Winston Churchill said of the Battle of Alamein, the beginning of the end. Gary's account closely mirrors my own feelings throughout the week - we've lost, we've lost ... oh, what's this then? There are many teeth in the Schedule - see my post at http://tinyurl.com/2unqbc which suggests what a comparable demand directed to the Church of England would look like. The question now is whether, having teeth, the Primates will bite! |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:44 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:34 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
joel7 says,
"" As far as Windsor goes, it falls to Schori to draw from her bishops a credible pledge that a) no rites of blessing of same sex union will be approved; and b) any gay candidate nominated for the episcopate will be refused confirmation."" Does this mean the priesthood is ok, but not the bishopric? As I see it, TEC can easily give lip service to compliance and go on their merry way, biding their time until their innovations are so culturally accepted within COE itself that they can revisit the issue. They are not stupid, and I'm sure they have the ability to craft a statement that is confusing, ambigous, impossible to nail down, and that will satisfy Rowan. What a sad game that both sides are engaged in. What is the point of being united to Canterbury now for the rest of the Anglican world? It's not the new Jerusalem. The best thing the orthodox could do is to agree on what they believe in and cut all ties to any apostate congregation and this corrupt shell in the UK. But then all this attention couldn't get focues on issues and excitement and meeetings and drama. It's old, real old. |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:46 Updated: 2007/2/24 10:43 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
bpcranmer Re-posted their own comment
![]() |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:47 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:18 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
Neal says,
When I tell my children they can't have fudge before dinner but let them have it they will come to me on the next day and ask for it again. This is initially a behavior problem primarily. If for some reason I acquire a little backbone and say here's a little fudge don't expect it tomorrow they will be back tomorrow. And should I say "no" they will brow-beat me with my less than firm spine until I give it to them. And by doing this I will be saying "It's really not that big a deal anyway. Children will be children." If I say here's a little fudge and we will discuss why you shouldn't have fudge at the next family meeting they can cleverly maneuver until they get a consensus among other children and even adults in the neighborhood so that their not getting fudge before dinner will be perceived to be unjust, unfair, and cruel, and even a violation of civil rights. Having fudge before dinner will be perceived to be the norm and the restrictions temporary. They will likely sneak around to get fudge when I'm not watching also because getting the fudge IS the only goal that matters. They will likely expect fudge then whenever they want it. The problem gets larger and I and my unreasonable rule will get more and more irrelevant. "We'll deal with this problem later." It's not a behavior problem at this point. It is a problem of character. And if the subsequent family meetings continue to play with fudge as if it isn't really that big a deal then it may no longer be perceived to be that big a deal. Unles I aquire a firm backbone and say a "no" to my children consistently and with immediate consequences they will only see that my guarding the fudge before dinner is a "season of fasting" from fudge and that to have the fudge is the summum bonum of life. If, however, I do say no firmly, consistently, and with consequences that really MATTER to the children they will eventually begin to see that fudge before dinner is a big deal and develop internal resources to restrict themselves without me. Windsor, Dromantine, Tanzania--A series of ineffective family meetings because the fudge and what it represents has come to really not matter THAT much. We'll put up with it just a little longer. Blessings, Neal |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:48 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:16 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
Isaac says,
We Faithful have been so stomped on since 2003 that any ray of hope is welcome. BUT, what about the fact that KJS is not Christian (Jesus is A way, not THE way)? And what's up with this "committee to (re)interpret the Bible"? It may not be all fudge, but it is at least "Rocky Road." Isaac |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:49 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:16 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
Don Gander says,
We complain about what the archbishops, the "good" archbishops, should have done. We act as if we should know what they should have done. Unfortunately, only they have considered a complete strategy, only they have considered the results of their doing "X", "Y", or "Z". I believe that we should consider well what was in this report and realise that the faithful archbishops are in the minority and need to bring all good Anglicans into the majority. They walk a very fine line. They are prayerful, they are humble, they are standing up for God against a very strong, very strong apostate foe. God has obviously brought this group of six or seven archbishops to their current state - God will keep them. I will pray for them. God does not order this Universe around my desires. Neither should the loyal archbishops. Don |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:51 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:42 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
OtisPage says,
There is no fudge here – the game is up! “it falls to Schori to draw from her bishops a credible pledge that a) no rites of blessing of same sex union will be approved; and b) any gay candidate nominated for the episcopate will be refused confirmation. The Communiqué voices its understanding that such pledges will be made credible only by consistent action which will be subject to close and constant scrutiny. Schori has till September 30 to report back to the Primates and to assure them that the Episcopal Church will comply.” Considering the past deceit, manipulation, sense of power with the Anglican Communion by Griswold (et al) how can any reasonable mature thinking orthodox believe something will really happen to transform TEC? Think of the carnage of orthodox priests, such as the Connecticut six (ect.). Shori may act and she may not – given that she may be constrained by the very large body of homosexuals now invested and now controlling TEC. So what should the orthodox do? It would be naive to not leave during this time period of the next nine months. If the lawsuits on property are to be relinquished – that is TEC’s action – but that doesn’t say such an action is done without prejudice. If the commitment by TEC to the Anglican Communion is realized – there is the possibility to rejoin TEC. But TEC’s reputation – and the belligerence of many Bishops cannot be reconciled by a great movement of repentance based on sorrowful confessions. Why? These Bishops have crossed the line into apostasy – and Hebrews 6:4-6 prevails!! TEC is loaded with deceit and one cannot believe deceit will not be the continuing tactic. What has happened here is the Anglican Communion has signaled that TEC will be out in nine months. That is the true reconciliation – and the orthodox that hold dear the “faith once given” must be prepared to assemble its own system of governance to remain part of the Communion. |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:55 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:45 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
joeames posts;
chaps wrote, "" Ms Schori and TEc don't think that way, Gary—they really believe in secular humanism and they believe that “the ends justify the means,” so they will view the requirements as an inconvenience they must wiggle around while they pursue their agenda, believing that they will be vindicated in the end. You need to understand that what we perceive as TEc “getting away with,” they perceive as righteous—as a duty and obligation. Therefore, backing off their agenda is heresy to them and denying their agenda would require a conversion experience.""" You've got it, chaps. Exactly got it! This is one of John Dewey's main themes: win by using the forms of the old insitutions to usher in the new. It does not bother him that many call this tactic dishonorable. Read about Religious Secularism CLICK and here too CLICK |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:57 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:49 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
LionHeartsays,
"" "Many say it still sounds like the classic recipe for Anglican fudge. Here's the difference. In the course of this past week the moral center of gravity has shifted to the Global South, not in the wishful thinking of Western spin doctors, but in word and deed. Ironically, it has also shifted to the orphaned minority in the US. There is no foreseeable way that can change, regardless of what havoc Katharine Schori and her cabal of The "moral center of gravity"? That's what you're hanging your hat on now? I assume the good man is not being purposefully dishonest and I hesitate to call him a fool; however, he is behaving foolishly. This is fudge. There are no teeth. The one clear signal is Schori's new position. That signal is negative. There is absolutely no hope and some just can't face it. You lost many years ago, you just didn't know it. There was a chance the GS were going to take this opportunity to set up an alternate communion, they failed. Only seven had the cajones to even refuse communion and those seven didn't do anything else of note like split decisively from those still in communion with TEC. The revisionists won, the show's over, go home. This is piece is just another in the endless pathetic line of pieces saying, "Oh, the TEC is REALLY in for it now!" No, it's not. lh |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 18:58 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:51 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
deaconM 's first post says,
What a long 10-days! I have fretted over the tidbits that eked out and the many posts here and have arrived at the same place that Gary describes (I have seen ++Kolini grin that way before). Having finally garnered a modicum of peace, I was greatly blessed by this morning’s psalm: Fret not yourself because of evildoers; be not envious of wrongdoers! For they will soon fade like the grass and wither like the green herb. He will bring forth your righteousness as the light, and your justice as the noonday. Be still before the LORD and wait patiently for him; fret not yourself over the one who prospers in his way, over the man who carries out evil devices! Refrain from anger, and forsake wrath! Fret not yourself; it tends only to evil. For the evildoers shall be cut off, but those who wait for the LORD shall inherit the land. The wicked borrows but does not pay back, but the righteous is generous and gives; for those blessed by the LORD shall inherit the land, but those cursed by him shall be cut off. A first post is always awkward… so let me say by way of introduction that I have been a silent participant in this site for several years and speak now to thank you for the record of your struggles that have been so informative to me. As for my biases: I had fidelity with the First Promisers and departed ECUSA as soon as possible after GC2000. Blessings, +/M |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 19:00 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:58 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
lapittengr says,
I"m utterly mystified by the continued attempt of those who just can't bear to actually get off the fence to try to find silver linings on the volcanic death cloud. PECUSA was supposed to be censured for failing to uphold Windsor. Instead, their dishonest lip-service was given credit and respect, and the deadline was kicked down the road another 7 months. And kicked, moreover, with language already in the Communique to set up delays based on "procedure" and "conscience" and "waiting for the return of the G.S. parishes." There was speculation about a second jurisdiction. Instead, a system was proposed which would go in the opposite direction -- a way of bringing the G.S. parishes (with language even hinting at the AMiA & CANA negotiating with it) under a Primatal Vicar -- a PV acceptable to Dr. Schori, with only those powers delegated by Schori, and liasing with the primates through a council 40% chosen by Schori. And rather than any specific penalties being promised, we're told there will simply be vague "consequences" which haven't been spelled out... and which will require yet more delays and meetings and compromises to even decide upon... let alone to decide whether or not to impose them. This is progress?!! And, look, even if the primates, come September, do not accept PECUSA's calls for delay so that they can go through their "canonical procedures", and even if PECUSA doesn't come up with something sufficiently fudgey to pass the generous compromise readings which treat their lip-service as having any substance, and even if the primates actually impose some sort of as-yet-to-be-determined penalty, and even if, ultimately (after however many more years of fudging and waffling and whining), the revisionists controling PECUSA decide to walk apart from the new "Covenant" Anglican Communion... IT WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER PECUSA will still be apostate -- denying the divinity of Christ but insisting upon buggery; the few "traditionalist" parishes will still be persecuted (including the G.S. parishes returned to PECUSA control under PV oversight); the seminaries will continue to crank out anti-Christian secular humanist apostates as the next generation of priests & bishops; the more "traditionalists" will still be marginallized at all levels (including not given consent to become new bishops); any parish leaving will be hit with massive litigation if it tries to keep the property it paid for and maintained; and so on and so on and so on. In other words, the only thing that's going to change -- even in the most optomistic outlook -- is that every day it is going to continue to get more difficult and costly to leave PECUSA. And, ultimately, all this Communique is really going to do is -- by providing false hope under the hands of the oh-my-gosh-I-couldn't-bear-to-leave-let-me-come -up-with-some-tangential-reading-to-assure-my- conscience-everything-can-be-okay-if-I-stay-put crowd -- to prevent a growing number of souls from facing that blazingly obvious fact and separating themselves from the spiritual corrosion and contaminated sacraments of PECUSA. But, just as was the case 30 years ago when the Continuing movement rightly diagnosed the situation, only a minority are willing to sit up and actually smell the coffee and do what's necessary. Everyone else continues to sit on the fence, wringing their hands, and pointing out silver lining in the volcanic clouds as the lava and brimstone races ever closer. pax, LP ==== LP sorry but i did not take the time to bold face, etc your post. ***LP please PM me. **** |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 19:01 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:13 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
ptay says,
The primates fudge is not stopping the lawsuits in Florida. An order of expulsion would have. A hearing is set for March 2, 2007 However, don't give up. We all have high hopes for GC 2565 |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 19:05 Updated: 2007/2/22 19:12 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
Festivus says,
Primates Communique IGNORED by Dio of FL Well, it didn't take long for it to happen. Accoriding to the Florida Times-Union, the Diocese of Florida opposed the Redeemer Anglican Church's bid to halt the current lawsuit seeking to evict them from their parish. I guess Bishop Howard has decided that the Primates Communique section on "Property Disputes" can be ignored. === gregory added, Judge rejects parish bid to halt eviction lawsuit A Jacksonville parish's attempt to suspend a bishop's lawsuit against it was denied Wednesday, clearing the way for the Episcopal Diocese of Florida to proceed with efforts to force the congregation to hand over the property on which it worships. Duval County Circuit Judge Karen Cole rejected the motion by Redeemer Anglican Church for a stay. Her decision means Bishop John Howard's motion for an immediate ruling in the case will be heard as scheduled March 2. Redeemer is part of a movement of conservative Episcopalians who have quit the Episcopal Church since it elected an openly gay bishop in 2003 and approved same-sex blessings. Jeff Brumley ==== Looks like i may need to find a new church home March 2... gregory Lord have mercy Christ have mercy Holy Spirit guide me |
| FrSam+ | Posted: 2007/2/22 20:03 Updated: 2007/2/22 20:03 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/7/15 From: Posts: 555 |
"The End of Anglican Fudge"
Uh, huh. Just watch. There will be another batch freshly baked for September 2007, and then Lambeth 2008, and then....... |
| bpcranmer | Posted: 2007/2/22 20:08 Updated: 2007/3/22 0:06 |
Just can't stay away ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/4/14 From: PA Posts: 150 |
I'm way beyond disappointed and well into "angry," "afraid," and "determined."
Lots of lovely rhetoric. Little Biblical / ethical clarity. Since when did one have to "just look for it" in Jesus' teaching? Since when does not consecrating active homosexuals ONLY to the episcopate send a clear ethical message? Though Kolini is my own Archbishop and I appreciate his optimism, I fear that he vastly underestimates Western mendacity. It's not realignment, brethren, it's reformation for which I seek. Not revolution, mind you, but clear, unequivocal re-formation centered on the Scriptures and the Anglican formularies. Politics be damned (I use the word advisedly). That's why I'm way beyond disappointed and well into "angry," "afraid," and "determined." One final point: these things ARE the Primates' business. They are bishops. Read the ordinal. See my essay: Realignment or Reformation at www.bishopcranmer.com |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 20:15 Updated: 2007/2/22 20:15 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
Chris2 says'
I have read the nice communique and appendix. It's getting cozier and cozier for the froggies. Now Gary's a froggie, too. === ans again later; The Primates have no faintest notion of the depravity and snakiness of the TEC, the Canadian Anglican "Church", and the "Church" of England. It is time for Alexandria. |
| Fr_Rob | Posted: 2007/2/22 20:26 Updated: 2007/2/22 20:26 |
Just popping in ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/10/20 From: Posts: 15 |
lapittengr says, "I'm utterly mystified by the continued attempt of those who just can't bear to actually get off the fence to try to find silver linings on the volcanic death cloud."
It's called denial, LP. And those who think the A of C is really much different in theology than Dr. Schori are sadly mistaken. It's really long past time for all truly orthodox Anglicans in the U.S. to join with us in the Continuing Churches. All the fuss about our lack of organizational unity and "failure to get our act together" is simply an excuse for remaining in a heretical, abusive, manipulative, dishonest, and ultimately cruel social club. And now that the GS bishops have jumped into the Continuing Church business, we're going to see an even greater multiplication of Anglican groups in this country. Might it be that the experience of the Continuing Churches over the past 30 years is simply the next stage in the historical/divine development of Anglicanism--and precisely what can be expected when the institutional, historical, and legal facade of unity among Canterbury Anglicans is stripped away? Fr. Rob ACC Priest |
| gregory | Posted: 2007/2/22 20:26 Updated: 2007/2/22 20:26 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/8/4 From: Nflorida Posts: 4423 |
RMachina says,
Despite the fine-sounding rhetoric and the firm pronouncements, it's over. TEC had already sealed it's fate, this meeting was the Anglican Communion's decision point. Actions speak louder than words, and at the end of the day, KJS was allowed to remain in good standing in the organization, and was even selected for a leadership position, on the Standing Committee. The organization was not resolved enough to separate themselves from her New-Age, spirit of the Anti-Christ (1 John 4:1-3) apostasy. As a result, God has removed His Spirit from the organization, as He did from King Saul. Nothing good will come from the Anglican Communion from this point on. Those who would remain faithful to His calling will do so from outside of the Communion organization. JAM |
| FrSam+ | Posted: 2007/2/22 20:36 Updated: 2007/2/22 20:39 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/7/15 From: Posts: 555 |
JAM,
Her election to the Standing Committee was the real punch in the gut that many orthodox missed. If that wasn't the Anglican Communion's way of saying "They are here to stay" I don't know what would be. Why would they elect Schori to this position if she and her entire church is in "danger of being ousted in September????" It really is a cruel joke. I don't see this level of denial with the drug addicts that I deal with on the streets as a police officer. I am utterly astounded at what people will do to preserve their concept of reality when all other indications point otherwise. Christ, have mercy. |
| Bob4th | Posted: 2007/2/23 23:07 Updated: 2007/2/23 23:07 |
Not too shy to talk ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/23 From: McDonough GA Posts: 37 |
As long as the Episcopal Church, even the conservative elements of it, and the Anglican Communion continue to accept the idea of women clergy and continue to worship in a style that is inconsistent with traditional Anglican worship (i.e., 1979 BCP and additions), then it would seem to me that the question of orthodoxy is being limited to sexual behavior. Until those in the Episcopal Church recognize that ANY deviation from "the faith once delivered" is a step away from orthodoxy, then there is little hope of genuine renewal. To me, the sexuality issues are just the latest line in the sand in a series of battles that began in earnest in 1976 with the attempted ordination of women to the Priesthood. Meanwhile, here in the Anglican Catholic Church, we watch and we pray for our brothers and sisters and we offer them rest and a home that is truly Anglican. -- Father Bob Jones, Diocese of the South
|
| lionheart | Posted: 2007/2/24 18:24 Updated: 2007/2/24 18:24 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2005/10/19 From: Posts: 354 |
Bob4th, you make a good point. Really the "unorthodoxy" of TEC is at least decades old. It began with the failure to enforce discipline on clergy who challenged the theological statements of traditional Christianity. It progressed into WO and the rest. The "orthodox" really aren't orthodox at all. They just wish to turn back the clock 4 years to before the gay thing became official practice in TEC.
Even if they succeed, in keeping WO they allow enough "fudge" in interpretation that it really isn't consistent of them to get upset about sodomy. The same method of limiting morality to historical context gets you to both errors. lh |
| lapittengr | Posted: 2007/2/24 19:00 Updated: 2007/2/24 19:01 |
Home away from home ![]() ![]() Joined: 2004/1/21 From: Posts: 195 |
[reposted per gregory's request]
I'm utterly mystified by the continued attempt of those who just can't bear to actually get off the fence to try to find silver linings on the volcanic death cloud. PECUSA was supposed to be censured for failing to uphold Windsor. Instead, their dishonest lip-service was given credit and respect, and the deadline was kicked down the road another 7 months. And kicked, moreover, with language already in the Communique to set up delays based on "procedure" and "conscience" and "waiting for the return of the G.S. parishes." There was speculation about a second jurisdiction. Instead, a system was proposed which would go in the opposite direction -- a way of bringing the G.S. parishes (with language even hinting at the AMiA & CANA negotiating with it) under a Primatal Vicar -- a PV acceptable to Dr. Schori, with only those powers delegated by Schori, and liasing with the primates through a council 40% chosen by Schori. And rather than any specific penalties being promised, we're told there will simply be vague "consequences" which haven't been spelled out... and which will require yet more delays and meetings and compromises to even decide upon... let alone to decide whether or not to impose them. And having to impose them on a jurisdiction whose primate is now a member of a key Communion council... thus further complicating the whole process of discipline, were it actually to be considered. This is progress?!! And, look, even if the primates, come September, do not accept PECUSA's calls for delay so that they can go through their "canonical procedures", and even if PECUSA doesn't come up with something sufficiently fudgey to pass the generous compromise readings which treat their lip-service as having any substance, and even if the primates actually impose some sort of as-yet-to-be-determined penalty, and even if, ultimately (after however many more years of fudging and waffling and whining), the revisionists controling PECUSA decide to walk apart from the new "Covenant" Anglican Communion... IT WILL MAKE NO DIFFERENCE WHATSOEVER PECUSA will still be apostate -- denying the divinity of Christ but insisting upon buggery; the few "traditionalist" parishes will still be persecuted (including the G.S. parishes returned to PECUSA control under PV oversight); the seminaries will continue to crank out anti-Christian secular humanist apostates as the next generation of priests & bishops; the more "traditionalists" will still be marginallized at all levels (including not given consent to become new bishops); any parish leaving will be hit with massive litigation if it tries to keep the property it paid for and maintained; and so on and so on and so on. In other words, the only thing that's going to change -- even in the most optomistic outlook -- is that every day it is going to continue to get more difficult and costly to leave PECUSA. And, ultimately, all this Communique is really going to do is -- by providing false hope under the hands of the oh- my- gosh- I- couldn't- bear- to- leave- let- me- come- up- with- some- tangential- reading- to- assure- my- conscience- everything- can- be- okay- if- I- stay- put crowd -- to prevent a growing number of souls from facing that blazingly obvious fact and separating themselves from the spiritual corrosion and contaminated sacraments of PECUSA. But, just as was the case 30 years ago when the Continuing movement rightly diagnosed the situation, only a minority are willing to sit up and actually smell the coffee and do what's necessary. Everyone else continues to sit on the fence, wringing their hands, and pointing out silver lining in the volcanic clouds as the lava and brimstone races ever closer... or merely hopping off the fense into the next field (rejecting homoerotic bishops but keeping the '79 BCP and WO) and considering themselves safe! pax, LP |
| Bob4th | Posted: 2007/2/27 17:23 Updated: 2007/2/27 17:23 |
Not too shy to talk ![]() ![]() Joined: 2006/5/23 From: McDonough GA Posts: 37 |
LP,
It's probably no surprise that I agree with you whole-heartedly!! - Father Bob Jones, Diocese of the South |












gregory








