Somehow Kendall missed a section. Here’s a re-post from Episcope
House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church
New Orleans, Louisiana
September 25, 2007
A Response to Questions and Concerns Raised by our Anglican Communion Partners
In accordance with Our Lord’s high priestly prayer that we be one, and in the spirit of Resolution A159 of the 75th General Convention, and in obedience to his Great Commission to go into the world and make disciples, and in gratitude for the gift of the Anglican Communion as a sign of the Holy Spirit’s ongoing work of reconciliation throughout the world, we offer the following to the Episcopal Church, the Primates, the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), and the larger Communion, with the hope of “mending the tear in the fabric” of our common life in Christ.
“I do it all for the sake of the Gospel so that I might share in its blessings.” 1 Corinthians 9:23
Introduction
The House of Bishops expresses sincere and heartfelt thanks to the Archbishop of Canterbury and members of the Joint Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council and the Primates for accepting our invitation to join us in New Orleans. By their presence they have both honored us and assisted us in our discernment. Their presence was a living reminder of the unity that is Christ’s promised gift in the power of the Holy Spirit.
Much of our meeting time was spent in continuing discernment of our relationships within the Anglican Communion. We engaged in careful listening and straightforward dialogue with our guests. We expressed our passionate desire to remain in communion. It is our conviction that The Episcopal Church needs the Anglican Communion, and we heard from our guests that the Anglican Communion needs The Episcopal Church.
The House of Bishops offers the following responses to our Anglican Communion partners. We believe they provide clarity and point toward next steps in an ongoing process of dialogue. Within The Episcopal Church the common discernment of God’s call is a lively partnership among laypersons, bishops, priests, and deacons, and therefore necessarily includes the Presiding Bishop, the Executive Council, and the General Convention.
Summary
* We reconfirm that resolution B033 of General Convention 2006 (The Election of Bishops) calls upon bishops with jurisdiction and Standing Committees “to exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion.”
* We pledge as a body not to authorize public rites for the blessing of same-sex unions.
* We commend our Presiding Bishop’s plan for episcopal visitors.
* We deplore incursions into our jurisdictions by uninvited bishops and call for them to end.
* We support the Presiding Bishop in seeking communion-wide consultation in a manner that is in accord with our Constitution and Canons.
* We call for increasing implementation of the listening process across the Communion and for a report on its progress to Lambeth 2008.
* We support the Archbishop of Canterbury in his expressed desire to explore ways for the Bishop of New Hampshire to participate in the Lambeth Conference.
* We call for unequivocal and active commitment to the civil rights, safety, and dignity of gay and lesbian persons.
Discussion
Resolution B033 of the 2006 General Convention
The House of Bishops concurs with Resolution EC011 of the Executive Council. This Resolution commends the Report of the Communion Sub-Group of the Joint Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council and the Primates of the Anglican Communion as an accurate evaluation of Resolution B033 of the 2006 General Convention, calling upon bishops with jurisdiction and Standing Committees “to exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion.” (1) The House acknowledges that non-celibate gay and lesbian persons are included among those to whom B033 pertains.
Blessing of Same-Sex Unions
We, the members of the House of Bishops, pledge not to authorize for use in our dioceses any public rites of blessing of same-sex unions until a broader consensus emerges in the Communion, or until General Convention takes further action. In the near future we hope to be able to draw upon the benefits of the Communion-wide listening process. In the meantime, it is important to note that no rite of blessing for persons living in same-sex unions has been adopted or approved by our General Convention. In addition to not having authorized liturgies the majority of bishops do not make allowance for the blessing of same-sex unions. We do note that in May 2003 the Primates said we have a pastoral duty “to respond with love and understanding to people of all sexual orientations.” They further stated, “…[I]t is necessary to maintain a breadth of private response to situations of individual pastoral care.”
Episcopal Visitors
We affirm the Presiding Bishop’s plan to appoint episcopal visitors for dioceses that request alternative oversight. Such oversight would be provided by bishops who are a part of and subject to the communal life of this province. We believe this plan is consistent with and analogous to Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight (DEPO) as affirmed by the Windsor Report (paragraph 152). We thank those bishops who have generously offered themselves for this ministry. We hope that dioceses will make use of this plan and that the Presiding Bishop will continue conversation with those dioceses that may feel the need for such ministries. We appreciate and need to hear all voices in The Episcopal Church.
Incursions by Uninvited Bishops
We call for an immediate end to diocesan incursions by uninvited bishops in accordance with the Windsor Report and consistent with the statements of past Lambeth Conferences and the Ecumenical Councils of the Church. Such incursions imperil common prayer and long-established ecclesial principles of our Communion. These principles include respect for local jurisdiction and recognition of the geographical boundaries of dioceses and provinces. As we continue to commit ourselves to honor both the spirit and the content of the Windsor Report, we call upon those provinces and bishops engaging in such incursions likewise to honor the Windsor Report by ending them. We offer assurance that delegated episcopal pastoral care is being provided for those who seek it.
Communion-wide Consultation
In their communique of February 2007, the Primates proposed a “pastoral scheme.” At our meeting in March 2007, we expressed our deep concern that this scheme would compromise the authority of our own primate and place the autonomy of The Episcopal Church at risk. The Executive Council reiterated our concerns and declined to participate. Nevertheless we recognize a useful role for communion-wide consultation with respect to the pastoral needs of those seeking alternative oversight, as well as the pastoral needs of gay and lesbian persons in this and other provinces. We encourage our Presiding Bishop to continue to explore such consultation in a manner that is in accord with our Constitution and Canons.
The Listening Process
The 1998 Lambeth Conference called all the provinces of the Anglican Communion to engage in a “listening process” designed to bring gay and lesbian Anglicans fully into the church’s conversation about sexuality. We look forward to receiving initial reports about this process at the 2008 Lambeth Conference, and to participating with others in this crucial enterprise. We are aware that in some cultural contexts, conversation concerning homosexuality is difficult. We see an important role for the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) in this listening process, since it represents both the lay and ordained members of our constituent churches and so is well placed to engage every part of the body in this conversation. We encourage the ACC to identify the variety of resources needed to accomplish these conversations.
The Lambeth Conference
Invitations to the Lambeth Conference are extended by the Archbishop of Canterbury. Those among us who have received an invitation to attend the 2008 Lambeth Conference look forward to that gathering with hope and expectation. Many of us are engaged in mission partnerships with bishops and dioceses around the world and cherish these relationships. Lambeth offers a wonderful opportunity to build on such partnerships.
We are mindful that the Bishop of New Hampshire has not yet received an invitation to the conference. We also note that the Archbishop of Canterbury has expressed a desire to explore a way for him to participate. We share the Archbishop’s desire and encourage our Presiding Bishop to offer our assistance as bishops in this endeavor. It is our fervent hope that a way can be found for his full participation.
Justice and Dignity for Gay and Lesbian Persons
It is of fundamental importance that, as we continue to seek consensus in matters of human sexuality, we also be clear and outspoken in our shared commitment to establish and protect the civil rights of gay and lesbian persons, and to name and oppose at every turn any action or policy that does violence to them, encourages violence towards them, or violates their dignity as children of God. We call all our partners in the Anglican Communion to recommit to this effort. As we stated at the conclusion of our meeting in March 2007: “We proclaim the Gospel of what God has done and is doing in Christ, of the dignity of every human being, and of justice, compassion and peace. We proclaim the Gospel that in Christ there is no Jew or Greek, no male or female, no slave or free. We proclaim the Gospel that in Christ all God’s children, including women, are full and equal participants in the life of Christ’s Church. We proclaim the Gospel that in Christ all God’s children including gay and lesbian persons, are full and equal participants in the life of Christ’s Church. We proclaim the Gospel that stands against any violence, including violence done to women and children as well as those who are persecuted because of their differences, often in the name of God.”
________________________________________
(1) The Communion Sub-Group noted that “the resolution uses the language of ‘restraint’, and the group noted that there has been considerable discussion since General Convention about the exact force of that word. By requiring that the restraint must be expressed in a particular way–‘by not consenting…’, however, the resolution is calling for a precise response, which complies with the force of the recommendation of the Windsor Report.” The group also noted “that while the Windsor Report restricted its recommendation to candidates for the episcopate who were living in a same gender union, the resolution at General Convention widened this stricture to apply to a range of lifestyles which present a wider challenge. The group welcomed this widening of the principle, which was also recommended by the Windsor Report, and commend it to the Communion.”
Wow. This is the same thing that they have said before. I think the weakest part of this statement is the clause about same-sex rites. This basically means that we won’t authorize anymore Rites (says nothing about the ones already in existence). It says nothing about preventing clergy from doing it on their own as part of “local option.”
As for moratoria on homosexual bishops, B033 was weak to begin with. I believe the language was that the Bishops would “exercise restaint.” It will be interesting to see what happens with the Chicago election. Will restraint really happen?
We call for an immediate end to diocesan incursions by uninvited bishops in accordance with the Windsor Report and consistent with the statements of past Lambeth Conferences and the Ecumenical Councils of the Church.
I do find it quite odd that there is continued reference by +KJS, now the HoB for the Ecumenical Councils. It seems they desire Council of Ephesus Canon VIII but it remains to be seen if the House of Bishops can keep Canon VII
[blockquote]
When these things had been read, the holy Synod decreed that it is unlawful for any man to bring forward, or to write, or to compose a different (ἑτέÏαν) Faith as a rival to that established by the holy Fathers assembled with the Holy Ghost in Nicæa.
But those who shall dare to compose a different faith, or to introduce or offer it to persons desiring to turn to the acknowledgment of the truth, whether from Heathenism or from Judaism, or from any heresy whatsoever, shall be deposed, if they be bishops or clergymen; bishops from the episcopate and clergymen from the clergy; and if they be laymen, they shall be anathematized.
And in like manner, if any, whether bishops, clergymen, or laymen, should be discovered to hold or teach the doctrines contained in the Exposition introduced by the Presbyter Charisius concerning the Incarnation of the Only-Begotten Son of God, or the abominable and profane doctrines of Nestorius, which are subjoined, they shall be subjected to the sentence of this holy and ecumenical Synod. So that, if it be a bishop, he shall be removed from his bishopric and degraded; if it be a clergyman, he shall likewise be stricken from the clergy; and if it be a layman, he shall be anathematized, as has been afore said.[/blockquote]
Please note the total omission of reference to Lambeth Resolution 1.10 on Human Sexuality (apart from the cherry-picking of “listening process” language). The ABC has stated that Lambeth 1.10 represents the mind of the Communion. Clearly it is contrary to the mind of TEC. See my essay on [url=http://www.stephenswitness.com/2007/07/return-to-lambeth-110.html]Return to Lambeth Resolution 1.10: An Up-or-Down Choice for the Episcopal Church[/url].
Is there to be no minority report at all? Where are the Windsor bishops?
Sherri, I think the minority report is the pitter patter of feet walking out the door.
As someone who happily attends a rather gay-friendly parish, I have to admit that the pledge regarding rites for same-sex unions is remarkably dishonest in its avoidance of the real issue.
It seems like there is a pledge to NOT ordain practicing gay persons to the episcopate. Isn’t that right?
But I agree that the statement about “authorizing” is weak and obfuscatory (did I just invent that word?) Bruno+ of LA is a good example, priests there bless gay unions without “authorization” because it is simple known that it is OK with him.
Let us hope that the ABC will come down strong on this double-talk as I think that will be the only thing to save the Anglican Communion in anything like a coherent form.
I am reminded of a scene in the movie “When Harry Met Sally”. In the scene the character played by Carrie Fisher is having lunch with her friends. She is having an affair with a married man, who has broken promise after promise to leave his wife and marry her. She tells her friends, “I don’t think he is going to leave his wife.†Her friends groan and say “no one thinks he is going to leave his wifeâ€.
Another meeting anticipated for months. Another disappointment. Guys, the cloud of dust on the horizon is not the Calvary coming to the rescue. We are supposed to be spreading the Gospel not arguing about what is .
19. The church
The visible church of Christ is a congregation of believers in which the pure Word of God is preached and in which the sacraments are rightly administered according to Christ’s command in all those matters that are necessary for proper administration. As the churches of Jerusalem, Alexandria, and Antioch have erred, so also the church of Rome has erred, not only in their practice and forms of worship but also in matters of faith.
Those that wrote this thought that there was something that could objectively be called the “Pure Word of Godâ€. Imagine such a Church!
This is more of the standard fare of evasion and dissimulation. They do NONE of what was asked. The “reconfirm” that the Gen. Convention passed BO33 calling on bishops not to consent to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion, which is hardly a news flash, but they make no statement about whether they actually intend to abide by that resolution. This is REALLY pathetic. I suspect that had they actually put it to a vote about whether or not they would commit as a body to the implementation of B033, it would not have passed — so they settled for merely confirming that the GC called upon them not to consent. Do we know what the vote on this “bold” document was? Once again we are left wondering where the so-called “Windsor Bishops” are? This fig leaf will fool no one, and attention now shifts to Pittsburgh.
“We call for an immediate end to diocesan incursions by uninvited bishops”
These bishops were not “uninvited”. They were invited by congregations who had already left TEC (never to return – with or without buildings).
I suspect the primates will be unimpressed.
What does DT’s J Petre mean when he writes:
The American bishops were also asked to agree to provide an enclave for American conservatives who reject the authority of their liberal bishops, overseen by an independent council whose chair would be appointed by Dr Williams.
Outward compliance and for some inward defiance. Pity the House of Bishops could not see its way clear to say this last Spring.
Tom Rightmyer in Asheville, NC
whilst Gene Robinson remains sacrametally active the promises are utterly worthless surely? IF there is an acceptance that practising homosexuality is not consistent with Christian living then he must be defrocked. If iit is seen as valid- there is still grave breakdown in shared vision and beleif. If n fact there is still confusion …then the discussions need to continue.
All that we have seen is a fudge that fools no-one and does nothing to answer the deep questions that divide us at present.
Or is it only me who feels this way?
Recently I read “Simply let your “Yes” be “Yes” and your “No” be “No,” anything beyond this comes from the evil one. If course this depends on what is meant by yes and no.
#14 Good scripture quote. Nuff said!!