Here are the letter signers:
Ms. Sarah Dylan Breuer, Diocese of Massachusetts and Member of Executive Council
The Rev’d Tony Clavier, Diocese of Northern Indiana and Alternate Deputy
The Rev’d Scott Gunn, Diocese of Rhode Island and Deputy
The Rev’d Matt Gunter, Diocese of Chicago and Deputy
The Rev’d Tobias Haller, BSG, Diocese of New York and Deputy
The Rev’d Stephen Moore, Diocese of Olympia and Deputy
The Rev’d Bruce Robison, Diocese of Pittsburgh and Alternate Deputy
The Rev’d Mike Russell, Diocese of San Diego and Deputy
The Very Rev’d George Werner, Diocese of Pittsburgh and past president of the House of Deputies
That’s not what I expected to read! And coming from Dylan Brewer, that’s pretty big stuff.
Even as someone who knows Dan Martins less well than I wish I did, I can wholeheartedly concur with everything in this letter. He is honest to a fault in an age when guile has sadly become a virtue. The notion that he is some sort of secessionist is absurd.
Interesting, isn’t it?
One hesitates to speculate. Aw, what the heck…
It is possible that Bp. Lamb and his standing committee are rogues, acting on their own. (That seems unlikely, since the story got picked up and publicized on ENS.)
Is it possible that some centrists and progressives are realizing that the PB has seized too much authority and power, and that they need to start standing up to her?
Is it possible that everyone knows that the consent won’t happen, and that these centrists and progressives are deliberately blowing smoke?
We shall see.
This is an admirable letter. And the list of signatories is impressive. I was especially glad to see the names of Matthew Gunter (no sore loser in Springfield) and former HoD president George Werner among them.
David Handy+
Re: #3 (Ralph–I know almost half of the signatories. Although there are some with whom I have profound differences of opinion, I can assure you that they really, really support Fr. Martins and aren’t just blowing smoke.
As I said on the earlier thread following the bishop-elect’s own blog posting, there is still a substantial middle ground faction within TEC that has no burning desire to “dechurch” anybody who can honestly confess that Jesus is Lord. Discipline in the church is obviously necessary, often painfully necessary, but it needn’t be employed with the obvious relish and very selective zeal that we have seen both to left and right in the past decade or so. Dan Martins understands that.
The dissemination by ENS of the SJ press release looks like more politics as usual, an effort by 815 to silence even the minority of reasserter voices who are left. However, the debate between the PB and the President of the House of Deputies at the recent Executive Council meeting suggests that unease about the Imperial Primacy has spread outside strictly reasserter circles. The Loyal Opposition needs more visible leaders to use that unease as a teaching moment. Again, Dan Martins understands that.
To my mind, Fr Martins is a tad liberal, but about as liberal as a liberal can be and still be ok to vote for. No joke. I wish a lot (though a minority) of bishops thought like him. The rest, of course, ought to be even more orthodox. 🙂
Sarah Dylan Brewer and Tobias Haller, both hard core revisionists, did good with this letter.
robroy,
Don’t forget The Rev’d Mike Russell. If they are for him, who can be against him? (Hum, sounds like a verse I know).
robroy, I think Sarah Dylan Breuer is very revisionist re. sexuality, but not so revisionist re. Christology, from what I’ve seen of her. This is an important distinction. Not that we should accept the teachings of the one or the other, or wish for such a person to be in leadership and teaching – but that we recognize that revisionism re. who Jesus Christ is, is something completely different from revisionism about sexual ethics.
A courageous letter.
I’m glad to see some integrity and independent thinking among reapprraisers and moderates. In truth, Fr. Martins is a moderate in church politics and orthodox in Christology. There is no reason he should not get the needed consents. I hope this letter will serve as a counteraction to the negative ranting from Bishop Lamb.
May this consent process be a turning-point in the terrible wasting of this part of Christ’s Church.
@Wilf: I think that’s a fair description. I’m a biblical scholar who strives to be guided by scripture. I’m not persuaded by the Robert Gagnons of the world on the question of same-sex relationships, but that doesn’t mean that I agree with everything that every notable progressive says. Folks are too quick sometimes to see progressives (and conservatives) as monolithic. I prefer to listen for points of agreement on which I can work with sisters and brothers in Christ.