Baby Blue has the goods. Must reading. Here’s an excerpt. Wow.
…My friends, you may believe you have discovered a very difficult truth from that of the majority in the Anglican Communion. It not just about sexuality, but about your views of Christ, the Gospel and the authority of the Bible. Please forgive me when I relay that some say you are a different church, others even think that you are a different religion.
I understand that it is difficult for you in your context to accept the standard teaching of the Anglican Communion. This is why you refused to accept Lambeth Conference Resolution 1.10. You also ignored all the warnings of the Primates in 2003, 2004, and 2005. Your response to the Windsor Report is seen by the Primates as not clear. You cannot say you value being a member of the Anglican Communion while you ignore the interdependence of the member churches. The interdependence is what differentiates us from the other congregational churches. I would like to remind you and myself with the famous resolution 49 of the Lambeth Conference of 1930 which declares “the Anglican Communion is a fellowship of churches that … are bound together not be a central legislative and executive authority, but by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of the bishops in conference.” With respect, I have to say that those who would prefer to speak of laws and procedures, constitutions and canons, committees and process: you are missing the point! It is our mutual loyalty and fellowship, submitting to one another in the common cause of Jesus Christ that makes us of one Church on faith and one Lord.
It is clear that your actions have resulted in one of the most difficult disputes in the Communion in our generation. You may see them as not core doctrinal issues. Many like me see the opposite but the thing that we cannot ignore is that these issues are divisive and have created a lot of undesired consequences and reactions. For the first time in centuries, the fabric of our Communion is torn. Our energies have been drained and our resources are lost; and it is difficult for both of us to continue like this.
My friends, if you really believe that the truth revealed to you is different from that shown to the rest of the Communion, then you need to uphold that claim with boldness even at the risk of losing unity. If you think it is right and necessary to ordain and consecrate practicing homosexuals and that you should bless same sex partnerships or even marriages, you should be true to what you believe is right and accept the consequences.
However, if you appreciate being members of the global Anglican family, then you have to walk along side the members of your family. Those who say that it is important to stay together around the table, to listen to each other and to continue our dialogue over the difficult issues that are facing us are wise. We wholeheartedly agree with this, but staying around the table requires that you should not take actions that are contrary to the standard position (Lambeth 1:10) of the rest of the Communion.
Mary says there is “more coming” and Matt+ is also blogging this for Stand Firm. Awesome.
Here’s the link for Matt’s post at Stand Firm: http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/6132/
“My friends, if you really believe that the truth revealed to you is different from that shown to the rest of the Communion, then you need to uphold that claim with boldness even at the risk of losing unity. If you think it is right and necessary to ordain and consecrate practicing homosexuals and that you should bless same sex partnerships or even marriages, you should be true to what you believe is right and accept the consequences.”
Do I hear the sound of the gauntlet being thrown down?
Without having “read it all,” I have to say that I agree in principle. If we — TEC — are convinced of the truth of what we say, then we ought to stand up for it. And if that means that large pieces of the Communion cannot be in fellowship with us anymore… then that’s sad, but we have to give up one or the other and again, if we’re truly convinced that God is calling us this way, then that’s the way we need to go.
The catch is that “we” don’t all agree on this amongst ourselves. The lack of any really definitive resolution coming out of GC06 is ample demonstration that TEC is conflicted on the issue… some of us are convinced that blessing SSUs and ordaining people living in them is the right path to follow, others of us are convinced of absolutely the opposite. So TEC can’t take a firm stand one way or the other because we as an institution are of (at least) two minds on the matter.
I wish it were otherwise, and I dare say most people on both sides could wish the same; but that’s where we are right now.
I wish more TEC leaders knew the man who spoke these words and the context in which he ministers. The ecumenical and interfaith damage to his ministry that has occurred from what TEC has done is considerable.
I sincerely appreciate the time he put into saying this, and hope it is heard and taken with utmost seriousness.
Amazing clarity and not sadly, what we have come to expect from our bishops. I pray an equal clarity in response from the HOB. They did so in March. Then we really know where we stand.
Ross, thank you for your thoughtful comment. I certainly agree that TEC is quite conflicted about this, but what is clear is what has been decided by the leadership. It needs to be owned and either halted or continued. Not telling the truth about what was decided and what is occurring in practice will only make the current conflict worse.
A wise Christian ethicist once said that we are free to act only in the world that we can see: before our actions, before our decisions, comes our vision. That is, we must see clearly and describe the situation rightly. This man does just that.
“It is clear that your actions have resulted in one of the most difficult disputes in the Communion in our generation. You may see them as not core doctrinal issues. Many like me see the opposite…”
He allows that people can disagree about that. And then he offers a description–painfully accurate as history:
“… but the thing that we cannot ignore is that these issues are divisive and have created a lot of undesired consequences and reactions. For the first time in centuries, the fabric of our Communion is torn. Our energies have been drained and our resources are lost; and it is difficult for both of us to continue like this.”
Now I hope to see Bishop Rowan offer, in his own words, statements that are clear and consistent with these. Then all can move forward, one way or the other. This continued impasse is very hard on everyone.
Matt at Stand Firm identifies this as a speach given on the floor…not a Sermon.
Pre-modern exegetical thinking: The scriptures say what they say and present us with absolute knowledge of the truth plain for everyone to see. We have the truth in our back pocket and no one can tell us otherwise.
A post-modern exegetical thinking: Truth is not manifest. It’s very hard to come by. Our knowledge of truth is inexact, uncertain. The scriptures present us with culturally moderated statements attempting to see God’s truth as revealed within the historical settings of the biblical writers. Scripture does not present us with an absolute knowledge of truth. I do not have truth in my back pocket. I realize I may be wrong and you may be right, but through continued conversation, dialogue, and argument, we may both get closer to the truth.
I no longer am optimistic that the two sides can even talk with one another. I can’t see how the two will ever reach agreement.
I wish more TEC leaders knew the man who spoke these words and the context in which he ministers. The ecumenical and interfaith damage to his ministry that has occurred from what TEC has done is considerable.
I would like to know more.
Virgil, I don’t think we can anymore either. I think we only hurt each other again and again.
Grandapa Dino,
That was not the sound of a gauntlet, that was the iron fist.
Praise the Lord!
And I just think that this point bears repeating:
***
You cannot say you value being a member of the Anglican Communion while you ignore the interdependence if the member churches. The interdependence is what differentiates us from other congregational churches. I would like to remind you and myself with the famous resolution number 49 of the Lambeth Conference of 1930 which declares “the Anglican Communion is a fellowship of churches that…are bound together not by a central legislative and executive authority, but by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of the bishops in conference.†With respect, I have to say that those who would prefer to speak of laws and procedures, constitutions and canons, committees and process: you are missing the point!
***
If only more Episcopalians knew the full history–the fascinating story–of how the Episcopal Church came to be more closely part of the Anglican Communion: really quite recently, in the 1940s, starting with the patient efforts of Abp Geoffrey Fisher. So much was built up in exactly the way it’s described above: through mutual loyalty. And how much is now threatened by TEC’s actions and by its abject failure to live into all that this relationship means.
A good and powerful speech by a man worthy of miter.
his miter***
#6 and #7:
I’m not certain that it’s actually clear “what has been decided by the leadership” because the leadership is, as I said, not united on this. I agree that it is clear what is happening in practice; which is that some dioceses feel free to bless SSUs (whether by an “official rite” or otherwise) and elect to the episcopate people living in them, and other dioceses do not, and that the leadership of TEC as a whole has not changed this — whether because they will not, or cannot, change it.
I also agree that because of this, waving B033 and saying, “See? We complied!” is, to say the least, disingenuous. B033 passed only because it was vague enough not to actually mean anything, it is being plainly ignored in some — again, not all — dioceses, and everyone knows this.
What this means is that the Primates and the other Instruments have to decide how to deal with a divided TEC — and a divided TEC has to decide how to deal with itself. For many, the solution is obvious: the Primates should simply embrace one fraction of TEC and reject the other, and the de facto division should become formal.
I think that’s far and away the most likely outcome, but it’s perhaps not inevitable yet; and from what I see the institutionalists like +++Rowan are still struggling to find a way that the Communion can deal with TEC as a whole. From their point of view, it seems only fair to expect that TEC should find some way, within its polity, of taking a position and sticking to it. Unfortunately, while it may be a fair expectation, it’s clearly not going to happen soon — we’re just not that organizationally centralized. Conceivably the Communion could simply put TEC, reasserters and reappraisers alike, into Coventry until such time as we can take a strong and united stand… but nobody seems eager for that.
So yes, it would be better if the HOB were frank about what’s going on “on the ground” while TEC thrashes through its internal conflict. That doesn’t mean saying, “We have decided this,” because that’s not strictly true; it does mean saying, “While we’re arguing about this, these things are happening in some parts of TEC and they’re probably going to keep on happening.”
Ross, it was my impression from reading the reports of GC 2006 that there was a majority, perhaps a large majority, inclined to step apart from the Lambeth standard on sexuality, but that the compromise resolutions came from an attempt to stay in the Anglican Communion anyhow. This is different from saying that TEC is unable to decide what it thinks about the issues. Bishop Anis is calling for clarity and honesty, a call I heartily second.
Ross, I see your post at the same time as mine answered my point. Sorry.
This is my idea of what I want to hear from a Presiding Bishop. I’m not given to weeping over words that I find on my computer screen, but the power of the Spirit is so evident that tears of joy and thanksgiving came before I knew it.
Brien,
It is a sad commentary when it is such a powerful surprise to see a bishop actually speaking and acting like a bishop rather than a social worker.
++Anis has blessed us and the world with clarity. He obviously does not know how to make fudge. May the Lord bless him and keep him.
The response on EpiscopalCafe was, I think, shocked. Their only response was to post an excerpt from yesterday tht stated the fudgers’ party line. It will be very interesting to see what today’s responses to this flawless gem will be. It is wonderful to watch the Holy Spirit at work.
and it wasn’t a scheduled agenda item. He stood from the floor and spoke as the Holy Spirit gave him utterance.
Thank you God, thank you bishop, thank you faithful bloggers.
With all due respect to Bishop Anis, and having read the full post, two statements strike me. The first is,
[blockquote] With respect, I have to say that those who would prefer to speak of laws and procedures, constitutions and canons, committees and process: you are missing the point! It is our mutual loyalty and fellowship, submitting to one another in the common cause of Jesus Christ that makes us of one Church on faith and one Lord. [/blockquote]
Perhaps so; but then what are we to make of those who want to make law of Lambeth 1998-1.10; or process of the Windsor Report; or canon of requests of primates? The phrase “the standard teaching of the Anglican Communion” is accurate perhaps in a descriptive sense; but how it might be accurate in a prescriptive sense is part of the unresolved discussion.
Then, there’s this:
[blockquote] Sitting around the table requires humility from all of us. One church cannot say to the rest of the churches “I know the whole truth, you don’t”. Sitting around one table requires that each one should have a clear stance before the discussion starts. It also requires true openness and willingness to accept the mind of the whole. [/blockquote]
Sitting around one table also requires time; and as has been said in other places, “The Church thinks in centuries.” While none of us would like this discomfort to last lifetimes, surely it is entirely too hasty for us to seek to resolve it in one year, or two, or even three. Any process of sharing and discussion and then reception in all the provinces will surely take longer than that. But those who are not willing to wait are talking about no longer “sitting at the table.”
Marshall Scott #26
[i]Sitting around one table also requires time; and as has been said in other places, “The Church thinks in centuries.†While none of us would like this discomfort to last lifetimes, surely it is entirely too hasty for us to seek to resolve it in one year, or two, or even three. Any process of sharing and discussion and then reception in all the provinces will surely take longer than that.[/i]
When it took the best part of a year to get from London to Hong Kong, and now it takes one click, the decades you describe as necessary to react completely have easily been spanned world wide by instant communication. It’s been since Lambeth ’98, and that’s more than several hundred years in expanded “clicks of the mouse.”
[i]But those who are not willing to wait are talking about no longer “sitting at the table.â€[/i]
Yes, TCGC has walked away from the table…and now are asked to acknowledge this “fact on the ground.”
Christians in Egypt know what persecution really is – and they know what militant Muslism are saying about Anglicanism.
#29: no, I don’t want to appease them – and neither would I give grist to their mill, as Tec has done in confusing the Gospel with the nostrums of modern secular liberalism. I was pointing out the doubly tragic effects of Tec’s unfaithfulness. Christ bade us to live in obedience to His Father’s will.
Would Archbishop Anis care to put his name in as the next Archbishop of Canterbury?
The entire communion is being shown this, unfortunately some are ready to see it yet.
TPaine – how can you say what the rest of the communion is being shown?
#29. I most certainly agree with you.
TPaine,
I have walked, so as to speak, the path of +Mouneer when I lived in Alexandria, Egypt some years ago and my sons were confirmed by the Bishop of Cairo (as the Anglican See was called then.)
In Egypt, most Christians were Copts and Orthodox and lived in upper Egypt. Our church in Alexandria had a vast preponderance of expats. A secret service car sat in front of the church during each service to keep any Egyptians from entering.
Yet in spite of all this, our Bishop preached the Gospel with authority!
Here in the U.S. not even the ACLU focuses as much on Christians and their gatherings as the Muslims do in Egypt.
It takes a deep belief that Jesus Christ is God and his Word must be how we try to pattern our lives for a man like +Mouneer Anis to stand up against the forces of Islam.
I was there when the Muslim Brotherhood killed Sadat and all that followed. I listen carefully when a strong church leader speaks the truth of the Gospel and it would behoove the American Bishops to do the same.
Since when should Christians base their witness on what Muslims think?
Uhmmm….because we are trying to convert them?
The whole reason for our existence as Christians is to be a light to the world for the Gospel and to do whatever we can to open their hearts to it. All our freedoms are restricted by this single purpose. We are not here to affirm ourselves or to endulge boast about our blessedness. We will have all eternity to do that. Here we preach about Jesus, and we cannot do that if we are a scandal to even the pagans in what dim light they understand.
Well put #36.
Bp. Mouneer is bringing that message and on site experience to the HOB meeting. Too bad the agenda of HOB does not seem to be the Gospel of Jesus Christ but a secular one.
Since when should Christians base their witness on what Muslims think?
I find that question faintly ironic, considering how much attention TEC seems to pay to what Muslims think.
As an outsider, I think that the leadership shown by Bp Mouneer Anis, and other GS bishops, is actually a “new thing” in Anglicanism.
Historically, Anglicanism has its home, and finds its natural habitat, within the ruling classes of a pre-evangelized, broadly Christian establishment. Within such privileged circles, it is easy to embrace diversity (when the very milieu will contain the diversity within “decent” limits) and gradually jettison discipline, both in doctrine and in praxis.
The experience in the GS is very different. Christians must witness to their faith before a very different kind of audience, and point to a credible and consistent alternative.
It is interesting, then, to reflect that it is perhaps the GS brand of Anglicanism, which seems to know where it stands, that has the best prospect of effective ecumenical dialogue with other Christian (as well as non-Christian) traditions.
Like Luther’s attempt to return the church to Holy Scriptures in 1517, a new Reformation has begun. Based on what we have seen so far, it appears this Reformation will also take about 200 years. Christ is renewing the church! Praise God.
TPaine, believing what the Bible, and God, say about sex is not indulgling the muslims’ prejudice. Just because they are driven by a false religion doesn’t make their conscience completely blind. they still understand some basic truths. And we won’t be able to bring them to see greater truths by foolishly and indulgently denying the few basic ones that almost all peoples who haven’t blinded themselves with wealth and decadence have always known.
How we will convert your TEC’s of paganism is quite another matter. Their conscience is clouded by darkness from without (their false religion). The TEC is clouded from within (idolatry and atheism).
How do you know God’s in charge if you don’t believe what he says in His Word?
The fool says in his heart “there is no God”. All the while he says he believes with his lips. You can’t just make it up and call it “faith”.
#45 TPaine: TEC does not worship the one true God almighty because they reject Jesus Christ as the sole savior of the world, and “those who reject me, reject the One who sent me…..and those who reject me, I will reject when we stand before my Father.”
“Jesus clearly stands with the oppressed, the dispossessed, and those discrimated against. The Episcopal Church is standing in the prophetic forefront, against the popular culture of bias and hate.”
Please. please TPaine. But Jesus also stands for what he said in the Gospels that are not the gospels the TEC believes in. It’s late, and I’m old and tired, but please someone else quote what Jesus said about marriage! I will appreciate it so much! Good Night in the Lord!
I do believe what God says in his Word. I just interpret God’s Word with a bit of reason and education.
And I believe you when you say that God only says what you want to believe He says.
I just used my reason and education to interpret that as your meaning behind (and despite) your words.
How did that work for you?
I just interpret God’s Word with a bit of reason and education.
So have those who stand firmly in the catholic mainstream of two millenia of Christian tradition, TPaine. This isn’t something that progressives and liberal innovators invented in Tübingen in the late 19th century.
Knowing that makes your comment only sound supercilious – not to say self-righteous – and bigoted.
I just interpret God’s Word with a bit of reason and education.
Unlike, say, Aquinas, Newman, Augustine, Bellarmine, and the rest of those benighted illiterates.
“I do believe what God says in his Word. I just interpret God’s Word with a bit of reason and education.”
Just a little bit, mind you. Not too much. ‘We are the people and wisdom will die with us.’
deleted — attack against another commenter
deleted — attack against another commenter
[i[We will not convert Muslims by indulging their prejudices. [/i]
And yet tthe General Convention Church believes the best way to convert secularists, humanists and atheists is to induldge THEIR prejudices….
Interesting.
This is a really wonderful speech by Bp. Anis – I just get the feeling it’s completely fallen on deaf ears. The HoB is largely filled with those who either believe that at the least they’ve done nothing wrong and at the best they’re prophetic. How do you get compromise from those who refuse to accept any responsibility, even with the best of words?
[i]But secularists, humanists and atheists, both here and abroad, are by and large homophobic and sexist as well.[/i]
Really? I’ve never met one, and I know a lot of secularists, humanists and atheists. Where do you get your statistics, TPaine?
Actually, I was referring to the GCC’s tendency to to discount Cristology, baptism, the Trinity, etc, TPaine.
The GCC has been working to remake the Church in the World’s image for 50 years.