Joint Standing Committee Report out on New Orleans before all Members Could Even Respond

Read it all.


Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, - Anglican: Primary Source, -- Reports & Communiques, Anglican Primates, Episcopal Church (TEC), Primates Mtg Dar es Salaam, Feb 2007, Sept07 HoB Meeting, Sexuality Debate (in Anglican Communion), TEC Bishops, TEC Conflicts

15 comments on “Joint Standing Committee Report out on New Orleans before all Members Could Even Respond

  1. David Wilson says:

    There is a list at the end of which members signed off on the text and which have not but who exactly wrote it. Canon Cameron? Canon Kearon?

  2. Vincent Coles says:


  3. Bill in Ottawa says:

    Predictable conclusion that TEC has given the “necessary assurances”. I beg to differ. And I think that some of the Primates may also.

  4. samh says:

    This whole process seems to have been more about “we have our rights!” instead of “what is the right thing to do?”

  5. The_Archer_of_the_Forest says:

    There must be an overload, I am having trouble getting the ACC document.

  6. young joe from old oc says:

    “The present text was developed from the remarks of JSC members in New Orleans and in consultation with them. ”

    The above is, in essence, the final sentence of the report, found at the top of last page. It reads as if the JSC was not even actually responsible for the text of the report. Are there ghosts of New Orleans who are the real authors?


    Your comment is a wonderfully concise description of the decline of episcopalianism and with it, the Anglican Communion. I have hope for the Communion, but the capitulation of TEC/usa to late modern/post-modern American values that you are describing is definitive evidence to me that in order for us to come to health again, Anglicanism in North America must have the guidance of Christian leaders who have an entirely different cultural perspective . If God continues to send us healing from their hands, maybe there is no reason to hold onto episcopalianism and the spiritual diseases it has inculcated any longer. If the TEC/usa regime has politically manipulated this report, it is a tragedy. And the complete lack of integrity that would betray so dishonors God that those who are party to it must simply be cut-off – yesterday.

  7. The_Archer_of_the_Forest says:

    “The present text was developed from the remarks of JSC members in New Orleans and in consultation with them.”

    I have a question on that. I have been reading through this document (I admit I have no life), and that begs a question. In the introduction on page one:

    “The JSC met in formal session on Monday 24 of Sept”

    That was the day before the final statement was adopted by the Bishops, right? Further:

    “All members of the JSC present in New Orleans have been consulted electronically in the preparation of this report”
    The last page lists 4 people who have whose “Responses have not yet been received from.”

    So, does that mean this is some weird composite statement made on statements by members of the JSC [b]before[/b] the Bishops’ response was finalized on Tuesday, or does it mean that subsequent discussion was made after the Bishops’ response but only done by e-mail? Even then it appears not everyone was consulted after the fact.

    Why the rush to produce this document now? Something rotten in the state of Denmark Canterbury.

  8. Newbie Anglican says:

    The headline to this post says it all. Shame on the JSC majority! Shame on them!

  9. The_Archer_of_the_Forest says:

    I am also somewhat befoozled by the logic on pages 8 and 9 of the document. I’m not bashing the report in its entirety, as I think there is actually some good stuff to be had here. It seems to be that the author(s) unknown seem to be at first arguing that (on pg 5, et al) that the HOB acknowledges “that is does not have the power to bind future actions of GC” but then on page 8 and 9, that the HOB seems to have suddenly gotten the power to speak for the GC in concretely defining of terms, to which end “the Episcopal Church has clarified all outstanding questions relating to their response to the questions directed explicitly to them.” That just seems like an illogical jump to me.

  10. dwstroudmd+ says:

    Flawed electronic process. Flawed process. Unforgiveable sin, that.
    Do you think the HOB will demand a “re-do” on the basis of flawed procedure?
    I knew you wouldn’t.

  11. chiprhys says:

    It needs to be made clear however that we believe that the celebration of a public liturgy which includes a blessing on a same-sex union is not within the breadth of private pastoral response envisaged by the Primates in their Pastoral Letter of 2003, and that the undertaking made by the bishops in New Orleans is understood to mean that the use of any such rites or liturgies will not in future have the bishop’s authority “until a broader consensus emerges in the Communion, or until General Convention takes further action18”, a qualification which is in line with the limits that the Constitution of The Episcopal Church places upon the bishops.

    I would be interested to see how many bishops of TEC agree that their statement means that ss blessings of type that took place at All Saints Pasadena during the meeting of the HOB will not be permited in their dioceses any more as the statement of this committee claims.

  12. TomRightmyer says:

    The report concludes “The Communion seems to be converging around a position which says that while it is inappropriate to proceed to public Rites of Blessing of same-sex unions and to the consecration of bishops who are living in sexual relationships outside of Christian marriage. . . .” We all know that the great Anglican virtue is appropriateness, and I take this statement, considering the source, to be as close as the signers can get to drawing a line in the sands of appropriateness.

    Tom Rightmyer in Asheville, NC

  13. BlueOntario says:

    [quote]There is an urgent need to facilitate discussion on how a scheme might be operated and put in place within the structures of The Episcopal Church which adequately meets the concerns expressed.[/quote]
    Urgent? Thanks for recognizing this, but it appears that in many parishioners in the US have gotten beyond discussing TEC schemes and found solutions on their own.

  14. Little Cabbage says:

    I believe 815 has rushed this thru due to concern about pending and upcoming Court cases on property issues. It’s part of a larger legal strategy.
    First, I totally believe the JSC report will be rubber-stamped by the ABC. (Otherwise, why did he accept it in the first place, when he knew it was not even seen by 1/3 of the members? It’s a set-up deal if ever I saw one! He probably gave a wink-and-nod to 815 about this at the conference, or before. Remember: he’s an old hand at arcane faculty politics!)
    I also believe it will be approved (tho holding their nose) by the majority of the Primates, who simply are too overworked and without resources to want to permanently offend TEC and the ABC. (Plus, many Primates are from societies in which the ‘top man’ has the last say: and you WILL follow. The ABC has tremendous authority with them).
    Such approval will give 815 what it wants, which is legitimacy as the sole branch of true Anglicanism in the US. They want to be able to tell a Judge, “the ABC, the AC, and the Primates are all in communion with TEC. They are NOT in communion with those nasty schismatics. Therefore, ONLY TEC has a proper claim to the property, because it belongs to the AC, and those nutty bigots do not belong. See, the ABC & Primates (and anyone else they can dig up) have approved the SJC, so TEC is still in good standing. TEC is the only true expression of Anglicanism in the USA. Case closed. Hand us the keys, please.”
    Depressing? Yes. However, I will be very surprised if this scenario (or one very, very like it) does NOT play out in the next few months.

  15. alfonso says:

    Sigh. Shame. Sigh. Shame. Shame. Shame. Sigh.

    Can anyone remember what happened when Ananias & Sapphira lied to the Holy Ghost?

    It is one thing to weasel and dissemble in the process of deliberation, but to produce a “conclusion” document that is so fundamentally dishonest is shameful and spiritually perilous. The whole world knows that blessings of same-sex unions will continue in the US in many shapes and forms. I believe “progress” was made on the issue of consents, but this “restraint” was promised with the simultaneous affirmation that the US had done nothing wrong and that SS behavior was just fine (contra Lambeth/Windsor) and that “pastoral” blessings would continue apace, albeit outside the realm of “official documentation.” I repeat, the whole world knows that SS blessings are okay in TEC. The revisionist bishops were assured the status quo is being kept. Saying otherwise, is a shameless, vile lie. Saying such a lie is somehow prophetic and of the Holy Ghost, is very, very perilous.