The Presiding Bishop's March Letter to Fellow Anglican Provincial Leaders Re: L.A. Bishop Choice

My dear brothers in Christ:

I write you because of developments in The Episcopal Church, about which you will soon hear and read. As you all know, the Diocese of Los Angeles elected two suffragan bishops in December, and the consent process for those bishops has been ongoing since then. One of those bishops-elect is a woman in a partnered same-sex relationship.

At this point, she has received consent from a majority of the bishops with jurisdiction, and a majority of the standing committees of this Church. According to our canons, I must now take order for her consecration. I will do so, and anticipate that both bishops-elect will be consecrated at the same service on 15 May. It has been my practice, since I took office, to preside at the consecration of new bishops, and I intend to do so in this case as well.
It may help you to know that our House of Bishops will continue to discuss these issues at our meeting later this month. The papers we discuss will be available publicly following that meeting, and we will endeavor to see that you receive copies. I would encourage you to engage in conversation any bishops whom you know in this Church, particularly those you came to know at Lambeth, whether in Bible study or Indaba groups.

Know that this is not the decision of one person, or a small group of people. It represents the mind of a majority of elected leaders in The Episcopal Church, lay, clergy, and bishops, who have carefully considered the opinions and feelings of other members of the Anglican Communion as well as the decades-long conversations within this Church. It represents a prayerful and thoughtful decision, made in good faith that this Church is ”˜working out its salvation in fear and trembling, believing that God is at work in us’ (Philippians 2:12-13).

I ask your prayers for this Church, for the Diocese of Los Angeles, and for the members of the Anglican Communion. This part of the Body of Christ has abundant work to do, and God’s mission needs us all.

If you have questions about this decision or process, I would encourage you to contact me. I would be glad to talk with you.

I pray that your ministry may continue to be a transformative blessing to many. I remain

Your servant in Christ,

–(The Rt. Rev.) Katharine Jefferts Schori is Presiding Bishop of TEC

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Anglican Primates, Episcopal Church (TEC), Presiding Bishop, Same-sex blessings, Sexuality Debate (in Anglican Communion), TEC Bishops, TEC Conflicts, TEC Conflicts: Los Angeles

27 comments on “The Presiding Bishop's March Letter to Fellow Anglican Provincial Leaders Re: L.A. Bishop Choice

  1. Jeff Thimsen says:

    That’s pretty clear. She has really thrown down the gauntlet.

  2. Pb says:

    May we all have such a “transformational ministry.” I wonder what she means by this phrase. May we dialogue until the other side gives up and comes over to our point of view?

  3. RomeAnglican says:

    I’m not seeing much “fear and trembling” in this letter or the actions that prompted it. But I do think she learned from the reaction to Frank Griswold’s duplicity that she had better give fair warning that she was going to publicly poke the Anglican Communion in the eye by her presiding at the consecration. In all other respects this is a message that the Episcopal Church is doing what it wants to, and that others will simply have to deal with it–and by implication that she doesn’t care what the consequences might be.

  4. DTerwilliger says:

    She’s very clear: The will of the majority (in TEC) trumps received Christian teaching. So much for Jesus’ words about the “narrow gate.” I truly hope that the “majority” of the Anglican Communion responds as decisively as she has – but I am tired of holding my breath.

  5. Ralph says:

    [blockquote]I intend to do so in this case as well.[/blockquote]
    It’s rather like Al (“I am just a businessman, giving the people what they want”) Capone standing on the steps of the police station and declaring his intent to open another brewery.

    What chutzpah! It’s as if she thinks nobody will respond, or that any response will be weak. Perhaps she’s right. The primates need to man up, not give up.

  6. tired says:

    The puffery is a bit much, if not downright laughable in paragraph four.

    I think all the rest of the AC needs to ‘know‘ is that TEC wants the “mind of TEC” to trump the “mind of the communion.”

    🙄

  7. Br. Michael says:

    5, Well so far the ABC and the AC HAVE done nothing. My guess is that they will continue to do nothing.

  8. wvparson says:

    Consent may well have been given by “a majority of the elected leaders” of TEC and in a secular democratic state such a claim may well be deemed adequate. However a Province of the Church Catholic within the Anglican tradition is not simply an ecclesiastical version of a secular state. If a majority of the elected leadership should decide that because Holy Communion discriminates against alchoholics, foot washing should replace it as the norm for Sunday worship, it would not therefore follow that the practice would be a legitimate substitution for the Eucharist.

    I have written elsewhere -http://afmclavier.wordpress.com/2010/04/03/presiding-bishop-writes/ – about the fallacy of the claim that TEC is democratically governed, but even it it were popular support would be neither here nor there.

  9. jric777 says:

    On the bright side, only two more years left of her. God help us if we elect someone like her again.

  10. jric777 says:

    Where is her contact information?

  11. Jon says:

    Hey jric777 — isn’t it the case that KJS will remain in power until late in 2012 (months after GC 2012)? If so, she’ll be in power for another 2.6 years.

    2.6 years is a lot of time for her to further damage the church. A lot more lawsuits can be filed in that time, at least one more gay bishop to consecrate, a lot more gay wedding liturgies to be developed, a whole GC to lead with more heretical resolutions, and most importantly, more time to drive more orthodox bishops and priests and laymen out of the church. By the time we get to elect her successor, who will be around who will want someone different? And if be a miracle someone were elected who wanted to heal the breach with the rest of the Christian world, how by that time could he do it?

  12. Intercessor says:

    The will of the majority (in TEC) trumps received Christian teaching

    This is not surprising at all coming from a Non-Christian Political activist justice organization self deluded into a non-canonical lawless mode. What? You thought that 815 was the head of a Christian church??
    Intercessor

  13. dwstroudmd+ says:

    Did she cc: Bonnie Anderson and David Beers and, as an afterthought, the ABC (and all the folks she and Bonnie sent the GC2009 letter “it doesn’t mean what it says”)?

  14. Jeff Thimsen says:

    Don’t expect any relief when KJS steps down. The problem is not her, but the theology that she represents, which is deeply embedded in TEC. She is fairly representative of the mind of the church as it is now constituted.

  15. LumenChristie says:

    The next presiding bishop will not be like [i] the current one. [/i]

    She/He/It will undoubtedly by worse.

    [i] Slightly edited by elf. [/i]

  16. Barbara Gauthier says:

    Jon, I believe she was elected to a nine-year term, which will end in 2015, not 2012. My understanding is that that the Presiding Bishop serves for nine years unless the bishop so elected will pass the mandatory retirement age of 72 during the third triennium, in which case it then becomes a six-year term. PB Jefferts Schori has just turned 56, so age is not a factor in this case and her term of office will end in with the installation of the new Presiding Bishop elected at GC2015. Her predecessor, Bp. Frank Griswold was Presiding Bishop from 1997 to 2006.

  17. Jon says:

    Many thanks, Barbara. I had thought that KJS’ term ran through 2015, but when I heard “2 more years” I thought I must have been mistaken.

    So it’s that much worse — 5.6 more years of harm. That will be a LOT more lawsuits, and so on. Huge amount of time for more damage.

    That said I agree mostly with Jeff Thimsen: KJS was elected precisely because she was an apostate, her theology closely matched that of of the majority of TEC priests and lay leaders. It wasn’t an accident. It was well known for example prior to the election that she was a supporter of Jack Spong.

    Where KJS was a bit of a surprise was her intense draconian legal persecution of the orthodox. E.g…. witness the direction Virginia was going under +Griswold (dialogue with departing parishes, progress toward amicable if sad separation, etc.) — and then the huge about face that occurred weeks after KJS assumed power. I think to be honest she’s surprised a lot of reappraisers that way too.

  18. jric777 says:

    Wow! I thought it was only two more years. That is disconcerting!

  19. Cennydd says:

    I’m beginning to think Frand Griswold is an angel compared to this woman.

  20. Cennydd says:

    Ooops! I mean “Frank Griswold.”

  21. remaining says:

    Isn’t it the case that we WANT her to be the chief consecrator?

    On the other hand, if I was being consecrated, I would want her to be the chief consecrator – well knowing she would not nor could not be the only bishop consecrating – so that she might also be able to claim that she helped usher in a new wave of orthodoxy.

  22. art says:

    What is so fascinating about the text she has chosen is its awesome context on the one hand – Phil 2:1-13, which includes the singular exposé of God’s humility, 6-11 – as well as on the other hand the best interpretation of the enigmatic phrase, “fear & trembling”, for which see 1 Cor 2:3, 2 Cor 7:15, Eph 6:5; i.e. humility before other human beings.

    In which case, one is sorely tempted to ask, what perversity of spirit (as opposed to Phil 2:1-4) has opted for [i]this[/i] text, 2:12-13, among all possible others?! Probable answer: the autonomous spirit of that hideous strength … And we know who also knows – [i]thinks[/i] it might know – Scripture to so quote it …

  23. Sarah says:

    Wow — I have a very different take than many commenters here on Schori. I’m thrilled she’s the PB and I was thrilled when it was first announced. I remember it clearly — I was on an escalator heading downstairs in the General Convention hall and I chortled aloud.

    Schori is one of the best things that ever happened to TEC — [other than, of course, repentance, and conversion, but that didn’t happen]. I’d far rather have a truth-telling, tin-pot bully than a talented rhetorician like Griswold any day of the week.

    [i] Slightly edited. [/i]

  24. pendennis88 says:

    I think the difference between Griswold and Schori are in two main areas. Topmost is that Griswold, for all his faults, had actually been a pastor. Look at Schori’s CV – she has no pastoral experience. She appears to have not a pastoral bone in her body. Shes is all politics and power, as her letter illustrates. Second, Griswold was of a more traditional Episcopal background, of the elitist sort that viewed a lawyer as a servant to the executive. He would never have let lawyers lead him by the nose. Schori, understandably from her experience, has no concept of this.

    But on a separate note, there are also rumors that through back-channels (Kearon to certain EC members perhaps?), Lambeth let TEC know that it does not intend to take any measures against TEC for Glasspool’s consecration, in terms of the JSC, ACO and so on. Just a little handwringing for public consumption. Take that, ACI and Fulcrum. That is one of the reasons the letter is so bold, apparently. So unless some primates decide to do something that forces the ABC’s hand, nothing will happen. Except for the de facto division of the communion into two parts, that is.

  25. Sarah says:

    Hey Pendennis88 — I think you and I differ on Griswold’s character.

    I don’t think his lying and twisting in the wind was any more “pastorally” meant than Bruno’s twisting in the wind about whether he gave permission to do same sex blessings.

    Schori’s “above” that — in part because of her suppressed anger and arrogance, but in part because she’s just of a different character and personality.

    [i] Slightly edited by elf. [/i]

  26. pendennis88 says:

    Oh, I think we are closer than that. Griswold wanted people to like him, and he certainly had a lot more experience in dealing with people. His deceptiveness about what he was doing, and his kinder treatment of the orthodox that wanted to leave, was a way of avoiding confrontation and unpleasantness. I don’t see Schori sharing any such concern. Plus, having a little more tendency to interest himself in what others thought, I also think he appreciated the way that litigation would be “bad for business”. I honestly don’t think Schori shows the least bit of awareness that her lack of concern for others, scorched earth litigation policy or general meanness (see the Virginia deposition video!) make it harder for TEC to be successful in anything it is trying to do. For which small favor, I suppose, we should be thankful.

  27. Cennydd says:

    Compared to +Frank Griswold, Schori was abysmally educated and trained for the ministry, woefully lacking in experience……never having served as a rector, but merely as a “dean of an adult education program cum School of Religion,” and not being entirely truthful about it in her resume’. All of which (and other things) immediately gave me pause about remaining Episcopal……which I didn’t. No regrets.