I read it all, and Cary McMullen didn’t really do too good a job in describing how Bishop Howe averted schism, not the writer’s fault, but McMullen did bring up the theory in the first place. Schism averted simply because +++Williams said “the Bishop and the Diocese as the primary locus of ecclesial identity”? Seems like +++Williams, under mounting pressures feels more frequently now a need to throw a “hail Mary”, or would that more appropriately be a “hail Hooker”?
What about orthodox in “revisionist” dioceses?
What about a retiring “reasserter” bishop?
Schism averted? No. I’ve said time and again we’re already in a state of schism. This averts nothing.
I don’t think so. More words and no action. Central Flroida is still in TEC and subject to its constitution and Canons. It is still yoked to dioceses who are proceeding with the GLBT agenda and whom the ABC has invited to Lambeth and whom the ABC has said he will not discipline. In short it’s status quo.
I wonder how the good folks in South Carolina are going to feel about this? Especially if their choice for bishop gets turned down again for whatever reason. The ABofC doesn’t seem to understand just how much the orthodox in America feel in a trap and pressured to adopt revisionism as their creeds.
[blockquote][i]What this means is that Howe can continue to run his diocese in a conservative fashion, maintain his personal convictions and still remain connected to Canterbury as an Anglican, without worrying what the Episcopal Church is up to.[/i][/blockquote]
To do so would be as short-sighted as it is naive and foolish. All he needs to do is look a bit farther north in Florida. ++Rowan’s comment is an attempt to assist ECUSA in running out the clock on conservatives.
We are specifically cautioned against being “yoked together with unbelievers” [2Cor 6:14] — in marriage, in business, or for that matter, with practitioners of ‘churchianity.’ Sadly, it appears increasingly that ++Rowan is approaching this latter category.
If anything comes between you and God, it’s closer to God than you are.
It would not surprise me to see a change in the ecclesiatical structure of the Anglican Communion which is more consistent with ++Rowan’s views of dioceses/bishops and their relationship with the AC rather than with the national churches. Such an approach may be preferrable to many in the communion in lieu of an outright schism. Perhaps it will flow out of the Anglican Covenant process. Certainly, it is revealing that the ABC would release this line of thinking very unofficially to assess its reception in the wider AC. Unfortunately, this does nothing for orthodox congregations in liberal dioceses so as I view it, this novel thought only addresses part of the answer. It does however, stem the tide when one considers that it is the American orthodox bishops who have the greatest abilities, in conjunction with the GS primates to determine the course of Anglican orthodoxy. A bit of rambling but you get the picture!
There is another way to look at this. Williams appears recognizing the power to the Dioceses and the Bishop over any ‘National entity”, than to the ‘National Church”. In short he is giving the Windsor Bishops more strength.
“In short he is giving the Windsor Bishops more strength.” Rubbish. The ABC’s letter does not give individual dioceses in the the General Convention Church any more power. The GCC giveth (a little) and it taketh away (much). Do you think that the GCC would let its precious polity be violated. No, it will invite the ABC over so it can lecture him on Polity 101. The letter is as impotent as the writer.
Dioceses and bishops may have been the locus of authority in 200 AD but not in 2000 AD. For the ABC to spout this nonsense is laughable.
When John Howe retires in 2 years and the diocese of CF tries to obtain consents for a conservative replacement, you will see where authority lies.
Howe sold out. No backbone to do the right thing. Flee.
No matter how he “puts” it, his spiritual direction still comes from those in TEC. Is that what you want? Duh.
Aversion of schism requires only that ECUSA/TEC and ACCanada stope promulgating their errors, stop acting out their errors, and return to the stated Anglican teaching articulated from the Celtic days, Augustinian days, and to and since Lambeth 1998.
Otherwise, ECUSA/TEC and ACCanada will engage in the schismatic walking apart they are currently conducting. Schism is in process, the ECUSA/TEC process and polity and dissimulation and deception continues unabated and Canada rushes to get in on the action while it can seem participatory rather than skulking along (“We’re behind you, PB Schorri!). Nothing any one person can do can or will avert the schism ECUSA/TEC and ACCanada are missionarily intent upon with their new thang gospel.
It seems to me all that Bishop Howe has done is to expose just how clueless the ABC is about TEC and how it works! I thought the man (ABC) to be without a backbone but is he without a brain as well?
So, all we know about the source of this ersatz clarification is that it is “A response received via email from the Lambeth press office� Anybody know more?
RE: “It seems to me all that Bishop Howe has done is to expose just how clueless the ABC is about TEC and how it works!”
Who said anything about how TEC “works” . . . the ABC was commenting on how the Anglican Communion “works” . . . and I think he knows that pretty well. ; > )
[blockquote]What this means is that Howe can continue to run his diocese in a conservative fashion, maintain his personal convictions and still remain connected to Canterbury as an Anglican, without worrying what the Episcopal Church is up to.[/blockquote]
Until, that is, +Howe retires and a new bishop has to be consented to by a body that sees VGR as the wave of the future.
The conservative churches in NY – the conservative rectors – respect the liberal bishop. Except one. The feeling is one of mutual respect.
This is the truth: local dioceses rule. Can progressive and conservative parishes do mission together? If they want to. If not, its their own sin. See how conservative dioceses treat liberals…. Not much different than the other way around (well, a little different).
I read it all, and Cary McMullen didn’t really do too good a job in describing how Bishop Howe averted schism, not the writer’s fault, but McMullen did bring up the theory in the first place. Schism averted simply because +++Williams said “the Bishop and the Diocese as the primary locus of ecclesial identity”? Seems like +++Williams, under mounting pressures feels more frequently now a need to throw a “hail Mary”, or would that more appropriately be a “hail Hooker”?
What about orthodox in “revisionist” dioceses?
What about a retiring “reasserter” bishop?
Schism averted? No. I’ve said time and again we’re already in a state of schism. This averts nothing.
I don’t think so. More words and no action. Central Flroida is still in TEC and subject to its constitution and Canons. It is still yoked to dioceses who are proceeding with the GLBT agenda and whom the ABC has invited to Lambeth and whom the ABC has said he will not discipline. In short it’s status quo.
I wonder how the good folks in South Carolina are going to feel about this? Especially if their choice for bishop gets turned down again for whatever reason. The ABofC doesn’t seem to understand just how much the orthodox in America feel in a trap and pressured to adopt revisionism as their creeds.
[blockquote][i]What this means is that Howe can continue to run his diocese in a conservative fashion, maintain his personal convictions and still remain connected to Canterbury as an Anglican, without worrying what the Episcopal Church is up to.[/i][/blockquote]
To do so would be as short-sighted as it is naive and foolish. All he needs to do is look a bit farther north in Florida. ++Rowan’s comment is an attempt to assist ECUSA in running out the clock on conservatives.
We are specifically cautioned against being “yoked together with unbelievers” [2Cor 6:14] — in marriage, in business, or for that matter, with practitioners of ‘churchianity.’ Sadly, it appears increasingly that ++Rowan is approaching this latter category.
If anything comes between you and God, it’s closer to God than you are.
It would not surprise me to see a change in the ecclesiatical structure of the Anglican Communion which is more consistent with ++Rowan’s views of dioceses/bishops and their relationship with the AC rather than with the national churches. Such an approach may be preferrable to many in the communion in lieu of an outright schism. Perhaps it will flow out of the Anglican Covenant process. Certainly, it is revealing that the ABC would release this line of thinking very unofficially to assess its reception in the wider AC. Unfortunately, this does nothing for orthodox congregations in liberal dioceses so as I view it, this novel thought only addresses part of the answer. It does however, stem the tide when one considers that it is the American orthodox bishops who have the greatest abilities, in conjunction with the GS primates to determine the course of Anglican orthodoxy. A bit of rambling but you get the picture!
There is another way to look at this. Williams appears recognizing the power to the Dioceses and the Bishop over any ‘National entity”, than to the ‘National Church”. In short he is giving the Windsor Bishops more strength.
“In short he is giving the Windsor Bishops more strength.” Rubbish. The ABC’s letter does not give individual dioceses in the the General Convention Church any more power. The GCC giveth (a little) and it taketh away (much). Do you think that the GCC would let its precious polity be violated. No, it will invite the ABC over so it can lecture him on Polity 101. The letter is as impotent as the writer.
Dioceses and bishops may have been the locus of authority in 200 AD but not in 2000 AD. For the ABC to spout this nonsense is laughable.
When John Howe retires in 2 years and the diocese of CF tries to obtain consents for a conservative replacement, you will see where authority lies.
Howe sold out. No backbone to do the right thing. Flee.
No matter how he “puts” it, his spiritual direction still comes from those in TEC. Is that what you want? Duh.
bl
Aversion of schism requires only that ECUSA/TEC and ACCanada stope promulgating their errors, stop acting out their errors, and return to the stated Anglican teaching articulated from the Celtic days, Augustinian days, and to and since Lambeth 1998.
Otherwise, ECUSA/TEC and ACCanada will engage in the schismatic walking apart they are currently conducting. Schism is in process, the ECUSA/TEC process and polity and dissimulation and deception continues unabated and Canada rushes to get in on the action while it can seem participatory rather than skulking along (“We’re behind you, PB Schorri!). Nothing any one person can do can or will avert the schism ECUSA/TEC and ACCanada are missionarily intent upon with their new thang gospel.
Why did the ABC not just say ‘let my people go’ and don’t sue ?
Because he is still fence sitting.
#10, Please forgive my temerity — +++ Williams has done so much fence sitting it appears he is at risk of becoming one with the fence.
It seems to me all that Bishop Howe has done is to expose just how clueless the ABC is about TEC and how it works! I thought the man (ABC) to be without a backbone but is he without a brain as well?
#12 –Whoa!
[i] Duplicate comment from this thread. [/i]
http://new.kendallharmon.net/wp-content/uploads/index.php/t19/article/7050
So, all we know about the source of this ersatz clarification is that it is “A response received via email from the Lambeth press office� Anybody know more?
Heh heh.
RE: “It seems to me all that Bishop Howe has done is to expose just how clueless the ABC is about TEC and how it works!”
Who said anything about how TEC “works” . . . the ABC was commenting on how the Anglican Communion “works” . . . and I think he knows that pretty well. ; > )
[blockquote]What this means is that Howe can continue to run his diocese in a conservative fashion, maintain his personal convictions and still remain connected to Canterbury as an Anglican, without worrying what the Episcopal Church is up to.[/blockquote]
Until, that is, +Howe retires and a new bishop has to be consented to by a body that sees VGR as the wave of the future.
The conservative churches in NY – the conservative rectors – respect the liberal bishop. Except one. The feeling is one of mutual respect.
This is the truth: local dioceses rule. Can progressive and conservative parishes do mission together? If they want to. If not, its their own sin. See how conservative dioceses treat liberals…. Not much different than the other way around (well, a little different).