America: The Episcopal Rift (from the backup blog, July 21)

Kendall posted this on his backup blog on July 21, but it’s not yet been posted here. –elves

The problem, however, is not homosexual clergy. The problem is ecclesiology. The much vaunted “via media” that Anglicans pride themselves on has hit a fork in the road. If it had not been the issue of homosexuality it would have been another issue. They need to make a decision that is binding on the whole church, but they have no mechanism for doing so. They need a Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, as it were, but they very idea seems so un-British. Or, they need to decide that the Baptists and Congregationalists were right all these years, that the local church alone should guide its own destiny and that thoughts of a universal communion are delusional.

The statements coming from the Episcopal Church’s General Convention were purposely not inflammatory, but they did pass a resolution that dug in on their position. Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori wrote to the Archbishop of Canterbury and to the other Primates of the Anglican Communion, assuring them that the new resolution affirming gays was no news at all. But for conservatives the Rubicon was already crossed. They want a guarantee of orthodoxy and the Anglican church, as a whole, cannot provide it.

Read it all

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Episcopal Church (TEC), General Convention

7 comments on “America: The Episcopal Rift (from the backup blog, July 21)

  1. The_Elves says:

    These were the 5 comments from the backup blog:

    John (Ad Orientem) said…

    America is not even close to being my favorite catholic magazine. That said, this article is dead on. The Anglican Communion claims to be part of the catholic church spoken of in the creed. But it has repudiated the instruments employed by the Church for keeping order and preventing schism or heresy. I am not Roman Catholic and don’t regard the Pope as essential. but the OEcumenical Councils were and are definitive in matters of doctrine. Could the Anglican Communion convene a great council of the Church and pronounce anathema on a modern heresy?

    I think we all know the answer to that question.

    ICXC NIKA
    John
    4:24 PM
    ——————-
    Anonymous Words Matter said…

    America praising the CDF – and the need for it – is just too delicious!
    4:48 PM

    ————————–
    Blogger John (Ad Orientem) said…

    Words Matter,
    The Romans are (mostly) right here. But yea, the irony in the message coming from this particular publication is pretty thick. But as they say, even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

    ICXC NIKA
    John
    4:58 PM

    —————————–
    Anonymous Anonymous said…

    Isn’t it interesting how few comments there are now about all this…has everyone just given up?
    5:57 PM

    ————————-
    Blogger John (Ad Orientem) said…

    I suspect the dearth of comments is in part due to the problems with the blog. There are at least three (that I know of) T-19 sites. One is down, the second is down sometimes and then there is this one. I am sure Kendal and the elves are pulling their hair out trying to fix the main site. But until it gets back up I think we will continue to see this. A lot of people probably don’t even know where the back up blogs are.

  2. tired says:

    “They want a guarantee of orthodoxy…”

    This article appears to be written from a perspective that intrudes into the news. For example, this quote strikes me as unsupported. “Conservatives” were not in much of a place to expect anything good to issue from GC, and I do not think that any did. The whole initiative or provocation of the schism is with the reappraisers. I also disagree that the subject resolutions are not “inflammatory.”

  3. Words Matter says:

    tired –

    It’s America, which is a relatively left-wing publications. From their perspective, the resolutions are not inflammatory. I would say that the picture of VGR in full episcopal regalia with his lover… now that’s “provocative”.

    Now, for inflammatory, the

  4. teatime says:

    I have to admit that I found the picture accompanying the article startling. It reminded me of an odd modern take on the famous American Gothic painting. (Dour-looking farm couple with pitchfork.)

    I was proud, though, of the Anglican priests who responded to the article. Their points were very well made. And, yes, an article in the left-wing America that champions the CDF is breathtakingly ironic! I hope readers remind them of this when the next CDF “witchhunt” they don’t like comes down!!! Ironic, too, because the last chief of the CDF (whom we now call Pope Benedict!) presided over the sacking of America’s editor.

  5. New Reformation Advocate says:

    Thanks, teatime, as I was one of those Anglican priests who responded. I won’t repeat my comment here, but I appreciate the encouragement.

    David Handy+

  6. teatime says:

    Your comments were excellent, Fr. Handy!!!
    Tea

  7. New Reformation Advocate says:

    Thanks again, teatime. Three exclamation marks? Hmmm. You seem like a good candidate for joining the elite NRAFC (wink).

    I’ll take that as encouragement that I should start posting more comments on liberal websites, or places that aren’t safe conservative blogs like SF or T19. The problem is that, despite all the endless liberal rhetoric about the need for everyone to engage in the vaunted Listening Process, it so often turns out to be a one-way street: i.e., conservatives are expected to listen patiently with an open mind to them and their uncritical appeal to human experience, but they seldom return the favor and truly listen to us and our appoeal to Scripture, Tradition, or even authentic reason (real science as opposed to pseudo-science). My previous attempts at commenting on “progressive” blogs have generally resulted in me simply being ignored. So that’s why I haven’t done it much.

    David Handy+