On Sunday, members of St. Matthew’s Episcopal Parish were still reeling from their separation.
For the second week, two dozen people gathered in the wood and brick building on Northeast Prescott Street that has been their home for 55 years. An hour later, almost 100 of their former brothers and sisters in Christ, who recently declared themselves Anglicans, worshiped in rented space at Mt.Tabor Seventh-day Adventist Church. The storm that has battered the Episcopal Church in the United States has touched down in Portland.
Since the Episcopal Church in the United States decided in 2003 to accept the election of its first openly gay bishop, the denomination has been rocked with disagreements over biblical authority. With a reputation as a conservative congregation, St. Matthew’s had for 66 years included people who read the Bible almost literally and others who interpreted it from more liberal points of view. But over time, that range grew problematic. On March 21, a majority of St. Matthew’s members voted to leave the church.
If only 8 voted against leaving, where did they all of a sudden get three times that number for the photo of the remaining Episcopalians? Did 16 vote to leave but then stayed? (Unlikely.) Did 16 not care enough to vote, but suddenly decided to come to church? (Probably not.) Or perhaps were the extra 16 folks who showed up as props for the bishop to make a Potemkin Parish look viable? If that’s the case, all the bishop could round up was 16 folks for that undertaking?
[blockquote] [b] The departing congregation had hoped for a gradual transition culminating in an April 25 farewell service [/b]in their former church at Northeast 112th Avenue and Prescott Street. Humphrey met at the end of March with the bishop of Oregon’s Episcopal diocese, the Rt. Rev. Michael J. Hanley. [b]During the week of April 19, the diocese changed the locks on the church doors. [/b]The two groups have worshiped separately since. [/blockquote]
Exit question: is changing the locks on the doors a week before you agreed to leave inclusive or exclusive?
Oregon is the diocese that sent me to seminary 24 years ago. Bishop Ladehoff ordained me to the diaconate. I have worshiped in St Matthew’s. This is so sad for everyone concerned, and I can empathize with both sides.
Heh.
[blockquote]During the week of April 19, the diocese changed the locks on the church doors. The two groups have worshiped separately since.
Hanley, who was formally ordained as the diocese’s 10th bishop April 10, said in a written statement that he was “sad and disappointed that many of the people of St. Matthew’s, with whom we have shared a mission and ministry, have chosen to remove themselves from our communion. As we all move forward and seek ways to include all in ministry, it is our hope that we will all find reconciliation in the love of Jesus Christ.” Hanley would not be interviewed for this story.[/blockquote]
Hanley was elected bishop in 09. What a sweet man. ; > )
Yeah, Sarah, a real conciliatory step, that changing of the locks. Reminds me of the infamous +Andrew Smith in CT who resorted to the same ugly tactic.
But what struck me was +Michael Hanley’s remarkable choice of words, saying that he regretted the choice of some (the vast majority) “[i]to remove themselves from our COMMUNION.[/i]” Now isn’t that a revealing expression? More evidence that TEC sees itself as a communion unto itself, and not as part of the worldwide AC as the primary communion. Even when the new bishop is trying to sound conciliatory in a public statement, he inadvertently gives away the typical TEC leadership’s determination to “walk apart” from the vast majority of the Anglican world.
I’m glad to see that a Mulnomah prof is a part of St. Matthew’s. Despite our travails in North American Anglicanism, evangelicals and fundamentalists continue to join the pilgrimage on the Canterbury Trail. And I’m glad that apparently there will be no law suit or fight over the property.
David Handy+
Just curious, does anyone know which diocese in the ACNA the new church is chosing to affiliate with? Perhaps the geographical Cascadia Diocese that’s in formation?
David Handy+
It is telling that the woman who opted to stay–and blubbered when the majority left–had NOT attended the Bible Studies leading up to the split. I know Fr. David; he is a Godly man who grieved for the Episcopal Church. His Bible studies are wonderful. The woman, Toodie Butts, should have availed herself of the good information that the congregation provided to explain the “split.”
This congregation is across the River from us and has been a place we often visit. We will visit again next Sunday. I guess in my heart I am still an Anglican!
(Joan, now a Lutheran LCMS.)
Toodie Butts is typical of the people who ‘Remained Episcopal’ in San Joaquin. They haven’t a clue why anyone is leaving or have made any effort to find out for themselves. I wonder if the ‘Anglican’ congregation had stayed in the building ole’ Toodie would have been in ‘her pew’ wondering why the name on the church marque is being changed.
Most of the ‘Remaining’ I have talked to in San Joaquin equivocate ‘the Church’ with the building and would never dream of leaving ‘the Church’ where their memorials don the walls, pews, etc. or where such and so were ‘christened’.
Sarah (post #3) – especially since there was never any plan on the part of the departing congregation to take the building. The new TEC bishop took this action AFTER the leaders of the departing congregation went to him to discuss a gracious departure. Obviously “graciousness” takes a back seat to anger, bile and resentment that another large group of faithful Episcopalians has decided to vote with their feet and take their money and ASA with them.
Unfortunately, I think that Toodie Butts is typical of the majority of TEC laity. They don’t really know what the issues are about, and they don’t have any interest in learning about what they are about. All they know is that they have attended church in this building for X number of years and the church is an important part of their social network. So their intent is to continue on as they have been for the last 20, 30 or 40 years and they get irritated at anyone who rocks the boat.
The problem for TEC is that folks like Toodie cannot sustain parishes. All too often Toodie’s children and grandchildren have developed social networks that do not include a TEC parish. While Toodie’s children and grandchildren respect the church for caring for “mom” or “grandma”, they have no interest in being a part of it or in contributing to it. So while Toodie’s fill the pews now, their value to TEC is limited. Toodie’s do not evangelize, they don’t grow the church, they typically don’t (or aren’t able to) give at the level to sustain a full-time priest.
Additionally, TEC has realized that too many Toodie’s are dying without leaving the church money in their wills. Thus, it is my observation that the new focus of TEC’s stewardship campaigns is to convince the Toodie’s of this world to write TEC into their wills.
The merits of everyone’s arguments aside, can we lay off poor Toodie, please?
What Dan said, except exchange 26 with 24, Bigliardi with Ladehoff, and add “Members of my family attended there.”
Jamesw at #9 – very perceptive comments!
Like David Handy+, I would also be interested to know if this congregation is going to Cascadia or another ACNA diocese?
To answer your question we will voting on affiliating with diocese of Cascadia very soon.
As for changing the lock on the door, while puzzling but not surprising. The Episcopal Church is making a name for itself for strong arm tactics especially we gave notice we would not challenge the Episcopal Church claim on the property. My voting to leave has more to do with my lack of confidence the diocese of Oregon would tolerate an orthodox Episcopal Church.