Living Church: Dissenting Bishops Issue 'Anaheim Statement'

Twenty-nine bishops have endorsed affirming their desire to remain part of the Anglican Communion and Episcopal Church while being faithful to the calls for restraint made by the wider church.

Styled as the “Anaheim Statement,” the letter of dissent to the actions of the 76th General Convention pledged the bishops’ fealty to the requests made by the Archbishop of Canterbury, the 2008 Lambeth Conference, the primates’ meetings and ACC-14 to observe a moratoria on same-gender blessings, cross-border interventions and the ordination of gay and lesbian people to the episcopate.

In the hours after its release, the statement drew support from 23 diocesan bishops, four suffragan and assistant bishops, and two retired bishops and included bishops who voted on both sides of D025 and C056 — resolutions that rescinded the ban on two of the three Windsor Report moratoria.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, - Anglican: Primary Source, -- Statements & Letters: Bishops, Episcopal Church (TEC), General Convention, TEC Bishops

7 comments on “Living Church: Dissenting Bishops Issue 'Anaheim Statement'

  1. Br. Michael says:

    It appears that at least 6 Bishops voted in favor of the Resolutions and this statement thus taking mutually exclusive positions.

  2. Loren+ says:

    Here are the signatories plus their votes on D026. I count 7 who voted for the resolution and signed the Aneheim Statement.

    The Rt. Rev James Adams, Western Kansas NO
    The Rt. Rev Lloyd Allen, Honduras NO
    The Rt. Rev David Alvarez, Puerto Rico YES
    The Rt. Rev John Bauerschmidt, Tennessee NO
    The Rt. Rev Peter Beckwith, Springfield NO
    The Rt. Rev Franklin Brookhart, Montana YES
    The Rt. Rev William Frey, Rio Grande NO
    The Rt. Rev Dorsey Henderson, Upper South Carolina YES
    The Rt. Rev John Howe, Central Florida NO
    The Rt. Rev Russell Jacobus, Fond du Lac NO
    The Rt. Rev Don Johnson, West Tennessee YES
    The Rt. Rev Mark Lawrence, South Carolina NO
    The Rt. Rev Gary Lillibridge, West Texas NO
    The Rt. Rev Edward Little, Northern Indiana NO
    The Rt. Rev William Love, Albany NO
    The Rt. Rev Bruce MacPherson, Western Louisiana NO
    The Rt. Rev Alfredo Morante, Litoral Ecuador NO
    The Rt. Rev Henry Parsley, Alabama NO
    The Rt. Rev Michael Smith, North Dakota NO
    The Rt. Rev James Stanton, Dallas NO
    The Rt. Rev Pierre Whalon, Convocation of American Churches in Europe YES
    The Rt. Rev Paul Lambert, Suffragan-Dallas NO
    The Rt. Rev David Reed, Suffragan-West Texas NO
    The Rt. Rev Sylestre Romero, Assistant– New Jersey YES
    The Rt. Rev John Sloan, Suffragan–Alabama YES
    The Rt. Rev Jeffrey Rowthorn, Retired-Convocation of American Churches in Europe NO
    The Rt. Rev Don Wimberly, Retired-Texas NO

    NOW HERE are the 20 additional bishops who voted NO BUT are not listed as signatories of the Anaheim Statement. I am very curious about this list: why they would stick out their necks within TEC to vote against ‘open’ ordinations in keeping with the moratoria and yet
    not sign a statement affirming their commitment to the Communion.

    Central Gulf Coast NO Duncan, Philip *Diocesan
    Colombia NO Duque-Gomez *Diocesan
    Dominican Republic NO Holguin-Khoury *Diocesan
    Easton NO Shand *Diocesan
    Florida NO Howard *Diocesan
    Georgia NO Louttit *Diocesan
    Haiti NO Duracin *Diocesan
    Louisiana NO Jenkins *Diocesan
    Milwaukee NO Miller *Diocesan
    Mississippi NO Gray, Duncan *Diocesan
    North Dakota NO Smith, Michael *Diocesan
    Northwestern Pennsylvania NO Rowe *Diocesan
    Oklahoma NO Konieczny *Diocesan
    Rhode Island NO Wolf, Geralyn *Diocesan
    Southwest Florida NO Smith, Dabney *Diocesan
    Taiwan NO Jung-Hsin Lai *Diocesan
    Texas NO Doyle *Diocesan
    Virgin Islands NO Gumbs *Diocesan
    West Virginia NO Klusmeyer *Diocesan

    Here’s my assessment: the six who voted yes, but signed, and the many, if not the majority, of those who voted no but did not sign, really do believe that TEC can proceed with its agenda and be part of the Communion. That they really do not believe that they have lifted the moratoria on restraint or on developing liturgies. They really do not get it: they really do not hear or understand the international voices. This is absolutely stunning after all these years. I mean, I can understand the full-steam ahead progressives not hearing the voices of our black, hispanic, and asian brothers and sisters. They are caught up with their own vision and goal (I regret that they are not listening, even refusing to listen, but I can understand.) But those who are not caught up with that vision and goal, shouldn’t they be able to see the choice of two roads and be able to choose one or the other?

  3. magnolia says:

    LCF, may i suggest that you read gene robinson’s interview with the NYT and try to guess which bishops are going to ‘help their people along’ to hades in a handbasket. there are some psuedo orthodox bishops that are hiding their true agendas. doyle is probably one of them since taking over for wimberly in houston; where btw, integrity regularly has a special eucharist take place at the cathedral. its hidden in plain sight in the diocean newspaper. quite clever seeing as how most people have no idea what integrity is.

  4. magnolia says:

    in reference to my last post, that is just my opinion, no facts to back it up.

  5. Jeremy Bonner says:

    LCF,

    You’ve listed Michael Smith (ND) in both places. Surely he’s a signatory?

    I’m surprised by the absence of Jenkins and Wolf (she urged non-passage, didn’t she?).

  6. Loren+ says:

    Thank you Jeremy. Yes +Michael Smith (ND) is a signatory.

  7. Scott K says:

    According to my bishop (+TN), bishops were continuing to add their signatures well into the afternoon. So there will probably be more trickling in.