Over the last 10 days the 76th General Convention of the Episcopal Church met in Anaheim, California. With the departure from the Episcopal Church of a major portion of the conservative and orthodox voices over the past year, this convention was predicted to be characterized by a lack of theological balance. During the past few days, this prediction has been proven to be overly optimistic.
In a matter of days, the General Convention has absolutely denied the role of the Church as the “pillar and foundation of the truth” (1 Timothy 3:15), our position as a “constituent member of the Anglican Communion” (Constitution) and the sufficiency of Scripture as containing “all things necessary to Salvation” (Article VI of the Articles of Religion and the signed statement required for all ordinations, deacon, priest and bishop). Although the effect of these actions is immensely painful, at least now there is perfect clarity as to where our venerable denomination stands in the history of the Church.
Being in the line of the witnesses of the early Church and the reformation leaders Cranmer, Ridley and Latimer, as your clergy we see this clouding of the Gospel light as an opportunity to shine even brighter for Jesus Christ. As Mordecai merely continued to be “the Jew” under the persecution of Haman and God prevailed (Esther) and as Latimer encouraged Ridley at the stake in Oxford with the exclamation of the power of proclamation provided by their martyrdom, your clergy will continue to stand firm for the Gospel in the context of the Episcopal Church until our voice is eliminated by God or the Episcopal Church.
I wonder if the congregation is on board with the martyr role. Also, are they saying they will fully contribute to diocesan and national programs, or that they will withhold such moneys as a matter of conscience. If the latter, what will they do when they are forced (like mandatory apportionments in the Methodist church) to contribute? Doesn’t seem like a very tenable position for the long term.
I hear a voice in the wilderness. What will the authorities do?
Daniel (#1),
My understanding is that the parish as such does not make contribution decisions. Rather, parishioners are given the option when pledging whether to restrict their giving from the Diocese and national church. If a parishioner restricts his giving, the parish does not include it in contributions to the Diocese, and vice versa.
As your comment suggests, DioVA doesn’t (YET) have a mandatory apportionment, so a parish whose members restrict their giving can send in less than the usual percentage of its total receipts. I believe that a significant portion of the pledges at St. Matthew’s are restricted, so the enactment of a mandatory apportionment would bring things to a head, so to speak.