“It would be impossible for me to respond to the whole document in the short time I have before I leave for other duties for the next several days, but I have reviewed the document (which is rather confused and repetitive) and make observation of several key points:
The scholarship is very uneven, and even totally in error on major points. For example, in showing the difference between TEC and the rest of the Anglican Communion (especially England), these legal scholars state that we elect our bishops by clerical and lay support, while in England the Prime Minister nominates to Parliament a nominee, who is then either accepted or rejected by Parliament. Only our system is fully open to the Holy Spirit, so we cannot conform to the Tanzania communique. First, names of possible bishops are never submitted to Parliament, which has absolutely no role in the choice of English bishops. Second, a number of other Provinces elect their bishops. Third, claiming that the TEC system is the only way the Holy Spirit operates would cast into doubt the election of Matthias in the Acts of the Apostles, not to mention most of the rest of the Christian Catholic world. And how does our selection process prevent us from conforming to the Tanzania communique?
Obviously, a major issue for the Anglican Communion is the question of the election and consecration of Gene Robinson (and the probability of other non-celibate homosexual persons being consecrated bishop). The whole issue of homosexuality is mis-represented in the document….
Now we hear from the heavyweight champions!
Personally, I think it unfair for the designated TEC lightweights to fight outside their league, but as they have wandered onto the canvas…..
I cite this, note because it is a major point in the whole article, but because it ends Fr. Harmon excerpt above. My objection to Bp. Robinson is not strictly because he is gay. It is no more appropriate for bishops to bring their gay lovers into the bishops house than for straight bishops and rectors to live with their boyfriends and girlfriends. As far as I can see the LGBT crowd appears to be winning the argument because they have been able to keep the issue focussed on LBGT justice.
The real money quote’s in the comments, concerning the mistakes over C of E polity that Bp. Wantland points out:
“It’s really hard to take seriously a document which makes such an egregious error.
Posted by Simon Sarmiento”
Now, if Simon is shaking his head, can you imagine +Rowan’s reaction?
I really how much weight to give the reasoning of the six “legally trained” bishops. The practice of law has become highly specialized, and experience in one area does not necessarily make one qualified in another. My practice was devoted to education and employment law, but I wouldn’t attempt to write my own will. I believe that Bp. Tennis practiced intellectual property, Bp. Robertson worked for the South Dakota Dept. of Labor. (feel free to correct me if I am mistaken)
These men may all be well meaning, but I see no reason to give their conclusions any weight.
Oops! I meant to say”…I really question how much weight to give…”
The bit about the selection of English bishops is a mind-boggling (albeit unimportant) mistake. I have made silly mistakes like that in draft legal briefs over the years, but someone always caught them and corrected me. I do not believe that six bishops in the Episcopal Church are this ignorant about the CofE. It makes me think they didn’t even read carefully their own report.
“six legally trained bishops”
You do realise, I hope, that TEC is giving over the church to the pharisees.
Spare me these narrow judgements from the good bishop on homosexuality. It’s time to stop focusing on the sex and start condemning the judgements. How much more time and energy and resources are we going to spend on this? While all this obsession with sin and sex might be well-meaning, it is downright dangerous. The whole concept of one group (the orthodox) judging homosexuals is contrary to the teachings of Jesus. And this idea that you all are saving gays from dying too early is nonsense. This is not love for your neighbor. This is fear-based, sanctioned hatred and it’s time we started calling it what itis.
Fred, that’s exactly what I’m talking about. THIS IS NOT ABOUT HOMOSEXUALITY! It’s about a denomination turning it’s back on thousands of years of teaching and tradition so it can pursue what feels good. See Bishop Millers article from earlier in the week to see wnat this is really about.
#9, TEC did not “turn its back on (hardly) thousands of years of teaching and tradition,” it squarely faced the issue and wrestled with it for at least three decades. This was not done in haste and without a great deal of theological reflection. The fact that the decision to ordain gay and lesbian clergy has been met with much opposition within TEC among those who intend to remain should not be ignored also.
11. Bob from Boone:
From the outside, looking in, you are being exceedingly charitable to TEC. What I see is three decades of manipulation, covert action, propaganda, and subversion of authority.
AND they turned their back on “..thousands of years of teaching and tradition,â€
#10 tinpipes, Fred is the classic troll. He posts flames and then almost never responds to others when they challenge him. It’s best not to feed him and a testimony to Kendall’s graciousness that he’s still allowed to continue with this practice.
[i] #8 I second #10’s comment. [/i] -Elf Lady
It makes me think they didn’t even read carefully their own report.
It does seem that the report was rather rushed. They didn’t even have time to get all 6 Bishops to sign off on the final draft.
I was deeply disappointed that the paper never really addressed the legal question of why we cannot comply with the Primates’ directives. Nothing in our Constitution and Canons would prevent us from putting a freeze on lawsuits. Nothing prevents the House of Bishops from pledging to oppose the consent to the election of any practicing homosexual to the episcopate, or to agree to issue a godly admonition to clergy to refrain from same sex blessings. Nothing would prevent them from agreeing to allow the alternative primatial oversight plan to be put into operation. After all, it is almost exactly what the present Presiding Bishop proposed before Tanzania.
While +Wantland makes several excellent points, they are all ancillary to the argument presented. The bishops’ argument (at least what I think I get from it) is that there is a set of principles on which Anglicanism is built. To fundamentally change any material principle is to change the very nature of Anglicanism itself. The best way to argue against this is to challenge the assumptions made regarding the core principles. For example, is it true that the reasserters want to make fundamental material changes or not?
“To fundamentally change any material principle is to change the very nature of Anglicanism itself.”
Precisely the problem. Thank you.
While there is some doubts as to what the reasserters are attempting, there is no doubt as to what the reappraisers have done. They have stood Anglicanism on its head, called “good”, “bad” and “bad”, good”. They have challenged the foundations of Anglicanism and any friend of Anglicanism will rise to protect her.
You’ve got it, Brian (#16) – here’s the list from Bishop Miller:
In so many ways, parts of the Episcopal Church have been losing deep aspects of their identity. If God is not Father, Jesus is not Lord, the Son is not unique, baptism is not necessary, the creeds are optional, repentance and sin are dated concepts and the atonement is marginalized or even rejected
Bob from Boone – We wrestled with the issue, but the answer was always “no” until 2003 and 2006. In 1991, we said that there was no clear consensus and that we (TECUSA) should not make a decision without the rest of the Communion. In 2003, the Bishops’ theological report said pretty much the same thing. However, in 2003, we didn’t even listen to ourselves when we decided to ordain +Robinson. When will “The Listening Process” begin for TECUSA? When we we start listening to the rest of the world?
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
The vote was 460 to 41. The news article is here:
http://www.elpasotimes.com/newupdated/ci_6912221
Hat-tip: commenter Terry on Standfirm.
Oh so sorry, wrong thread.