We acknowledged that the issues that divide our beloved Communion are far from settled and that the election of the Reverend Mary Glasspool, a partnered lesbian, as a Bishop in Los Angeles in The Episcopal Church (TEC), makes clear to all that the American Episcopal Church leadership has formally committed itself to a pattern of life which is contrary to Scripture.
This action also makes clear that any pretence that there has been a season of gracious restraint in the Communion has come to an end. Now is the time for all orthodox biblical Anglicans, both in the USA and around the world, to demonstrate a clear and unambiguous stand for the historic faith and their refusal to participate in the direction and unbiblical practice and agenda of TEC.
We recognise that the current strategy in the Anglican Communion to strengthen structures by committee and commission has proved ineffective. Indeed we believe that the current structures have lost integrity and relevance. We believe that it is only by a theologically grounded, biblically shaped reformation such as the one called for by the Jerusalem Declaration that God¹s Kingdom will advance. The Anglican Communion will only be able to fulfill its gospel mandate if it understands itself to be a community gathered around a confession of faith rather than an organisation that has its primary focus on institutional loyalty.
“Now is the time for all orthodox biblical Anglicans, both in the USA and around the world, to demonstrate a clear and unambiguous stand for the historic faith and their refusal to participate in the direction and unbiblical practice and agenda of TEC.”
I’ll be curious to see how this is interpreted by those faithful Anglicans still in TEC!
With respect to “the issue,” this does not read well. The tone and manner lack a certain sanity — it is almost self-intoxicated. It is also unhelpful, unlike the two recent episcopal resignations from the Standing Committee which target reform where it is needed.
I’m with Chris in his comment in #1. Where does this leave folks like Rev. Chuck Alley at St. Matthews, Richmond, who say they will not walk away from TEC, no matter what comes? Are they waiting to be kicked out for following the GAFCON admonition? Do they feel that going down with the ship, is the right thing to do? If they are called to be prophets crying out in the wilderness, I don’t think anyone in TEC is listening. I am at a loss to see what the “inside” strategy hopes to accomplish anymore.
“Albany+” I could not DISagree with you more!! Thank goodness you do not speak for most of our diocese.
This statement tells the Truth — not as we might [i]want[/i] to hear it, but as it is. Reality might sometimes be hard or unpleasant, but we will never get anywhere at all until and unless we look at it for what it is.
22 of the 38 Primates of the Anglican Communion declared in 2003 that they were either no longer in Communion with TEC at all, or in such impaired communion that a working relationship was no longer possible. TEC was given time to repair the breach and has clearly and unequivocally chosen not to do so, but rather to make it worse. Just facts — face them, or close your eyes to your own peril.
This communique reads [b]very[/b] well indeed. This [b]is[/b] sanity and not to be able to recognize that fact only shows how far into [b]in[/b]sanity so many have gone. The folks who are truly self-intoxicated are those who believe that their apostasy and political conniving will in fact win any kind of real gains.
These Primates are calling all of us back to sanity. Archbishops Mouneer Anis and Orombi have had the courage to say that they are not willing to be lied to, manipulated or tricked by those intoxicated by their own false sense of power. Go back and read — or re-read — Abp. Orombi’s letter. There never was any “Standing Committee” of the Anglican Communion. It declared itself into existence by its own fiat with no approval from the Primates or Lambeth. It thinks it is now the seat of real power in the Communion, but it is a sham. Both Archbishops were entirely right to walk away from this travesty.
The only real power is found in Jesus Christ, crucified and risen — through the Holy Spirit.
As to what faithful Anglicans still stuck in TEC will do —
We’re packing our bags.
There is no inside strategy left that has any hope of being effective.
[Which, I am genuinely sorry to say, some of us could see 7 years ago. Apologies]
Bishops Howe and Lawrence are the two CP associates (joining their ACNA counterparts) at Singapore on behalf of the CP Dioceses and Rectors. There is steady conversation with the Primates convening and attending. +RDW will be present. This will be an important meeting, given the Glasspool consent and the PB’s letter. The gauntlet has been thrown down. We shall see what comes out of that important meeting of all the GS, beginning at the end of next week. Prayers for all in attendance and for the Holy Spirit’s strength and discernment.
I agree with you, LumenChristie. The stayers are going to have to make a choice as to whom they will serve; TEC or Christ and His Church. Staying aboard a sinking ship in the hope that one can somehow keep it from sinking is not conducive to one’s health or survival; especially since TEC’s leaders are determined to prevent anyone from letting it sink. Barring a miracle, TEC will finally and irrevocably sink beneath waves of hypocrisy and heresy.
Serving Christ or serving TEC? Is this the way it looks to those who have left? Are Howe, Lawrence, Stanton, MacPherson, Love, et al ‘serving TEC’? As canon theologian in Dallas, I can confirm that Bishop Stanton is not ‘serving TEC’. Bishop Burton is not ‘serving TEC.” They are proclaiming Christ and fighting an effort to commandeer TEC, as are the others. Will they lose? Of course they could do. But they are fighting, and thank God for that.
It is not to support TEC to point out that this GAFCON statement has a superior, detached and almost self-intoxicated quality. Archbishop Orombi’s letter, on the other hand, is thoughtful, strong, engaged, and not easily waved off by those who actually need address. I am sorry, but the GAFCON statement reads like cheerleading to me. I just don’t care for it. I am pleased if others find it helpful.
#5 Prof Seitz
[blockquote]+RDW will be present.[/blockquote]
Is that right? Can you tell us more? What about the “Joint Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion”?
Some more stuff this morning. Fulcrum have put up two old items re. Singapore:
1. An article from +Graham Kings on the position of Singapore he sees as a “fulcrum between the emerging economic giants of China and India. Theologically and strategically, it may prove to be also the key point of balance in the creative tension of the Global South Anglican movement”.
http://www.fulcrum-anglican.org.uk/page.cfm?ID=529
Although Rowan Williams will probably not agree with me I do not see the tension in the Anglican Communion as “creative” at all, quite the opposite.
2. Rowan Williams explaining why his involvement is important to Singapore and SE Asia, backing them up in their engagement with China and some of the most precarious countries in the world for Christians:
http://www.anglicancommunion.org/acns/digest/index.cfm/2007/5/17/Archbishop_of_Canterburys_interview_in_Singapore
This goes some way to explaining their pliability to the wishes of Canterbury.
It sounds as if Canterbury is very involved, with the aid of Singapore, in trying to get the GAFCON provinces involved in the Covenant, presumably as recently bowdlerised by the ‘Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion’. However it is hard to see that this is wise, unless the issue of the Standing Committee/JSC and control by the Primates is restored and the position of TEC/Schori is dealt with. We will probably find out before long the involvement of Canterbury. By their Indabas shall ye know them!
There has been a discussion of some of the issues here:
http://www.standfirminfaith.com/?/sf/page/25900#426309
Let the schmoozing commence.
RE: “I’ll be curious to see how this is interpreted by those faithful Anglicans still in TEC!”
As one who is staying in TEC, unless God gives me different marching orders, I see no difficulty in demonstrating “a clear and unambiguous stand for the historic faith and their refusal to participate in the direction and unbiblical practice and agenda of TEC.”
Nor does, apparently, the Diocese of SC or Mark Lawrence.
RE: “Where does this leave folks like Rev. Chuck Alley at St. Matthews, Richmond, who say they will not walk away from TEC, no matter what comes?”
Um. Not walking away from TEC, I presume.
RE: “Do they feel that going down with the ship, is the right thing to do?”
Guess so.
RE: “If they are called to be prophets crying out in the wilderness, I don’t think anyone in TEC is listening.”
Oh, I think the folks in TEC who are orthodox are pretty much the ones with the powerful voice at this point. Depends, I suppose, on whom one is speaking to. If one desires to speak to the choir, then sure, leave TEC.
RE: “As to what faithful Anglicans still stuck in TEC will do—We’re packing our bags.”
Speak for yourself — not I, and not my friends either.
RE: “The stayers are going to have to make a choice as to whom they will serve; TEC or Christ and His Church.”
Thanks — we already have made that choice. We’re serving Christ.
RE: “Staying aboard a sinking ship in the hope that one can somehow keep it from sinking is not conducive to one’s health or survival…”
Right — but as I don’t know anyone who’s staying in TEC in order to somehow keep it from sinking, the comment is irrelevant.
All I can say is . . . judging by the comments here from the leavers — thank goodness we’re not on the same side!
Want to change TEC? Oust the present leaders and make sure that no more of their ilk replace them.
#7-
I wish I could share your enthusiasm about Bp. Stanton as he confirmed me. [edit]
BigTex AC
[edited by Elf]
#9–unless there has been a change in plans I am unaware of, +RDW was planning to attend.
#11– the only way for the leaders of TEC to find themselves in a spot they do not want to be in, is from those staying. I can’t see how leaving helps that cause. It simply shifts the burden to endorsement as a province. Fine, be in pursuit of that. What should it matter what those staying are up to if you have decided to leave? That’s an odd stance to take, as if the rightness of your effort is determined by how large it is, and how many more leave to join you. If it is right, it is right.
Sarah and Dr. Seitz,
As one who left seven years ago, I support your decisions to stay and witness within TEC 100%. God bless you and all that you do. If there were any remotely safe harbor in my geographic TEC diocese, I’d most likely still be there as well. Having just returned from a short stay in Charleston, SC, I can tell you that worshipping in an Episcopal church there was like a breath of fresh air. Same for worship at St. John’s in Savannah. But not living in either place, I have with deep sadness left for the very uncertain waters of ACNA.
God bless you Evan. I was in Scotland for a decade and know what it is like to be isolated. And before that, two decades in Diocese of CT. Great new letter from +Indian Ocean now appearing.