We, the undersigned laity and clergy of the Episcopal Church, offer the following as a testament to our concern for the life and witness of our church and its membership in the Anglican Communion. The God-given bonds of affection that unite us to one another are based in the prior unity of love that is God’s own Trinitarian life; for this reason, our corporate life should continually strive to be an icon of this same love. At the present moment, we are particularly mindful that “God was in Christ, reconciling the world to himself” (II Cor. 5:19), and that because of this we have been given a “ministry of reconciliation” (II Cor. 5:18). It is our prayer that the Holy Spirit will give the Episcopal Church a renewed awareness that at the heart of our common mission lies the ministry of reconciliation, which endeavors “to restore all people to unity with God and each other in Christ” (BCP Catechism, p. 855).
To that end, we
Affirm that evangelism lies at the heart of the Church’s mission, understanding evangelism to subsist in the proclamation of the Gospel of Jesus Christ, which calls all people to repent from sin, to be united in the Body of Christ through baptism, and to be continually discipled in the communion of the Church.
There is much to commend here but the remarks on schism were not felicitously phrases: “what divides the church is not of Christ.” Would that invalidate the reforms of Martin Luther, for example? What if a church is forcing people to “bow down” to a false god…would defiance be not “of Christ?” Still the call for charity and the general tone is commendable on this day when Christ called us to love one another as he and the Father shared their perfect love.
“Schism undermines the Gospel; what divides the Church is not of Christ.” Agreed, and what of heresy?
I really want to support Covenant/Communion Partners. This statement proves exactly why I can’t. They are trying, desperately to keep on foot in the grave that TEC has become. I agree with everything that is stated, it is sound, faithful even orthodox, but nearly any member of the HoB would say that they could agree with it too. That would include KJS.
Leave the dead to bury the dead, follow Jesus Christ. Jesus descended into Hell to preach the Good News the captive souls. Those who heard were raised to new life, and those who refused remained in torment. The inside strategy is a group of well intentioned, faithful people who are trying to play Jesus to the dead in TEC. They (TEC) have heard the Gospel and are willingly rejecting it. That is their choice.
I have come to the point where it seems the best choice is to make every effort to differentiate ourselves from those who remain captive to sin and death; we must follow Jesus in his resurrection. Remaining in the grave is to deny the truth of Easter. If such separation from death is schism, I can live with that.
At Dan’s blog, I commented that his group’s list is so much more responsive to the GenCon Blue Book’s “State of the Church” report than that list of stuff that will be imposed by the “Consultation” or whatever that “progressive” group is called.
In just one prominent example, The Blue Book, using data gathered by the House of Deputies itself, notes TEC’s total lack of evangelism, while Dan’s group prioritizes evangelism.
I don’t agree that PB Schori and the LGBT “hierarchy” faction could agree to all of Dan’s points. They would not accept Dan’s argument that the Baptismal Covenant in the ’79 BCP has no unique theology. They would not accept his position on schism, because he isn’t just criticizing ACNA, he is criticizing the idea of a “TEC/LGBT Communion” apart from the wider Anglican Communion.
Obviously, GenCon will embrace the “Consultation” because GenCon, like the PB and the “Executive Committee” serve a small, elitist faction that cares nothing for the wider church. GenCon will embrace the “one generation strategy” of making all kinds of money, property and perks available to the current group of aging, dying Boomers, without regard for anything beyond them.
I hear a lot about the covenant, but have yet to see it. Is it out? What does it say?
Unless TEC repents of the great evil it is promoting, no amount of words will help.
WestJ —
The “Ridley Cambridge” (final) draft of the Covenant was released yesterday. It can be found here:
http://www.aco.org/commission/covenant/docs/ridley_cambridge_draft_090402.pdf
Chris Taylor — I think all of us at Covenant would agree that heresy is indeed one of those things which divides the Church, and that TEC has hitherto been pursuing a divisive way. This document represents an effort to call our leaders back to the Gospel’s way of unity and peace (cf. Ephesians 4).
Frreed — I think the Lord’s proclamation of his victory, even in “hell” teaches us that we are not absolved from proclaiming the truth even in those regions where all seem to be dead. Jesus not only reconciled us to himself through the blood of the cross, but he gave us that same ministry (2 Cor. 5.18).
Blessings and peace to all of you on this day of the Lord’s gift of a new commandment.
[blockquote]There is much to commend here but the remarks on schism were not felicitously phrases: “what divides the church is not of Christ.†Would that invalidate the reforms of Martin Luther, for example?[/blockquote]
Probably, and rightly so… but as a friend of these folks who’s not in TEC, I will say that I have no doubt that they associate heresy with schism (the fathers always take the two as inseparable). The phrase above, as is, seems utterly uncontestable. What is contestable is whether TEC is “the Church” that must not be divided, and whether all kinds of separation constitute schism.