The Diocese of Central Florida is thankful to the Anglican Communion Institute, Inc. (ACI) for taking the initiative in making a statement (see below) about the nature of hierarchy and governance within the Episcopal Church. We fully support and are grateful for The Rt. Rev. John W. Howe, The Rt. Rev. Bruce MacPherson and the other signatories to the statement.
We fully share the concerns expressed in the statement regarding recent court filings and arguments made by the Presiding Bishop’s chancellor to “turn The Episcopal Church’s governance on its head.”
We oppose any attempt, in this civil litigation or in any other secular forum to turn Dioceses into “subordinate units” of the General Convention, the Executive Council or the office of the Presiding Bishop–something they never have been and must not become.
We are deeply concerned that the Presiding Bishop is seeking to reinterpret the Constitution and Canons of this Church and overturn 220 years of settled church custom and law by appealing to an outside secular court.
We welcome and encourage other dioceses within the Episcopal Church to stand with us in resisting this redefinition of our ecclesiastical polity through the use of the secular courts by the Presiding Bishop and her chancellor.
So, Bishops Howe & McPherson and ACI emerge from their semi-fortified enclave to fire a barely functioning water pistol at TEC’s white-hot liberal steamroller? How long will it take the former to roll this into an actually workable legal strategy that bears fruitful results? Their prose, while lovely, moves so slowly as to engender slumber in their readers. In the meantime, what are they DOING to [b]differentiate themselves[/b] from those (the liberal elite) doing violence to the body of Christ??? Inside strategists must plainly, decisively, and demonstrably differentiate (a là rampart construction and ardent defense of same). There is no mild alternative available. None.
I think it is [b]VERY INTERESTING[/b] that a diocese has awakened from its self-induced slumber to realize that, if KJS and the Mighty Chancellor of Doom can re-define the role of SOME dioceses, it can do this to [i]ANY DIOCESE THAT DISPLEASES THEM[/i]. If they are not waking up with nightmares by now, they should be. Hopefully the rest of the sleepers will wake up as well.
+Howe and +McPherson are wonderful orthodox bishops and they deserve everyone’s thanks and respect for making this important statement. On the other hand, I do recognize the frustration with the seeming lack of visble action by the “Windsor Bishops” or “Communion Partners,” as they seem to be called now. What was unclear to me from the ACI statement was whether it was just these two bishops speaking on their own behalf, or if they speak for a larger group of bishops in the Episcopal Church? The answer to this is still not clear, but perhaps ACI can clarify this for us. It’s very hard to get a sense of how cohesive or large this group of “Windsor” or “Communion Partner” bishops is.
I would assume that these bishops are now prepared to testify as experts on behalf of D. of S.J., Ft. W., and Pitt that the diocese is the basic unit of TEC; that each joined the nat’l church voluntarily and can leave voluntarily; that nothing in the history of TEC or its individual dioceses allows nat’l church to have any power or ownership of any diocese or diocesan property; and that the Denis Canon means ??????? and was passed by GenCon for the purpose of ????????
This is a VERY important development (the amicus brief, generally, that is) and it is CRITICAL that more TEC bishops and standing committees join in – not necessarily as supporters of the actions of the Dioceses of Pittsburgh, San Joaquin, Forth Worth, Quincy, etc., but rather as supporters of historic TEC polity as per this statement.
#5, I agree, but there is no other venue right now in which to make such arguments (and to file amicus curiai briefs) than the lawsuits that TEC and its faux dioceses have going against the dioceses that left. So I agree with you that this is important, but only if these Bishops and the other similarly thinking Bishops are going to lend their expert opinions and credibility to these departed dioceses in these lawsuits. And for them to do that may take a lot more sacrifice than they are actually ready to give or may be capable of giving at this time.
Thank you Central Florida!!!!!!!!
Folks, I think the tide is turning. Praise be to the Lord!
Sorry, but the tide ain’t turning. Central Florida has made some good statements in the past as has Dallas and South Carolina (Where is Texas and West Texas? We won’t even talk about [url=http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/21154/ ]Northern Indiana[/url].) These strong statements were simply ignored by 815, for example South Carolina and Central Florida’s condemnation of the “deposition” of Bp Duncan but Bp Duncan remains “deposed.”
Now, if Central Florida were to attempt to bring ecclesiastical charges against Ms Schori…
To add to Chris Taylor’s comment. We had Network (Stephen Noll talks about an entity before Network which I always forget), then Windsor bishops, then Camp Allen 1 bishops, then Camp Allen 2 bishops, then we had Communion Partners bishops. Now, we have Communion Partners 2 bishops who have cajones to speak out. The last is comprised of South Carolina, Central Florida, Western Louisiana, and Dallas. Really a remarkable downfall. Down to four, and 815 will say…”Yawn.”
Before Network was ‘First Promise’…I don’t know if Stephen Noll was referring to this or another entity. However “First Promise” was mainly for priests in TEC.
In the meantime, dioCFL and at least one cardinal parish face mounting and daunting budget deficit problems (result of exodus due to TEC heresies)…
Differentiate, dadblame it! No more tepid gestures!
I wonder if they heard the Imperial March before too and just hoped it wasn’t true or if they didn’t start hearing it until now…