Maine Episcopalians passed a resolution at their annual convention Friday that calls for England to rescind a charter issued more than 500 years ago.
The resolution calls for the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Queen of England to disavow the 1496 royal charter issued to John Cabot and his sons, according to information on the Web site for the Episcopal Diocese of Maine. It passed by a vote of 175 to 135.
The Maine diocese is the first in the nation to pass such a resolution, according to John Dieffenbacker-Krall, a member of St. James’ Episcopal Church in Old Town and the executive director of the Maine Indian Tribal-State Commission. He asked the diocesan Committee on Indian Relations to submit the resolution to the convention.
The charter authorized the Cabots “to find, discover, and investigate whatsoever islands, countries, regions, provinces of heathens and infidels … which before this time were unknown to all Christians.” The charter also says that “John and his sons or their heirs may conquer, occupy and possess, as our vassals and governors, lieutenants and deputies therein, acquiring for us the dominion, title and jurisdiction of the same towns, castles, cities, islands, and mainlands so discovered.”
This Doctrine of Discovery, set forth by King Henry VII, was relied upon as justification for the dispossession of lands and the subjugation of non-Christian people, according to information on the Web site.
Are the Episcopalians in Maine going to give their homes back to the indigeneous peoples as a form of penance?
I thought we had much more important things to worry about than a 500+ year old law that is not even in effect any more.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
Until they sign over the deeds to all their properties to the Indians, this is meaningless posturing.
Bah! Just one more BURNING ISSUE the Episcopal Church feels it needs to resolve before it steps lively into the Brave New World.
Let’s see if the framer of this resolution hands his front yard back to the tribe that originally owned it.
It is hard to think that TEC is seriously concerned about this until they start acting like they take it seriously. And I am not talking about giving some house in Maine on property thirty owners removed from these four tribes. I am talking about 215 acres in lower Manhattan, taken by the crown and given directly by Queen Anne to Trinity Parish, Wall Street, in 1705, and which owns it and jealously guards it to this day, even, and perhaps particularly, from 815.
Somebody in Maine has waaaaay too much time on his hands. However, since many people at GC in 1994 in Indianapolis (seriously) insisted that the city be called Nativeamericanapolis, this will easily pass GC 2009.
Well, let’s just not get off track with the new thang gospel proclamation by accepting the Maine gospel, ok? The whole reason for du jour theology will be exposed if there are too many options at once.
It’s not like we don’t have current sins to repent for! I love these people who repent on behalf of the original wrongdoers of 500 years ago for something the present day repenters had nothing to do with. Quite the highminded thing. It’s like having your own sin-representative in the future. Wait a minute, that’s Jesus Christ isn’t it? They should work on their own Pride, anger, envy greed, gluttony, lust and sloth for starters. Maybe with an emphasis on pride?
I really think that the Diocese of Maine has more pressing ecclesiological and theological issues to be concerned about.
And, this is not because I am not sympathetic toward native American issues. My stepson has major Cherokee Ancestry, I have been very interested in Iroquois culture since childhood and my wife and I are members/supporters of an Iroquois museum in Upstate New York.
But enough is enough. I am of Scottish Gaelic ancestry. Our little known or at least little acknowledged travails at the hands of an insidiously and sometime violently encroaching Anglo-Norman culture would, if recorded in detail, prove that my ancestors were treated at least as bad and possibly even worse than many native Americans.
Does this mean that a primary mission focus of an organization, let’s say, ECUSA or one of its dioceses should be diverted to ‘right the wrongs’ of historical and irrevocable Anglo-Norman encursions/atrocities?
The Gaelic story is almost over folks and nobody is going to bring back the Gaelic culture to what it was before the Anglo-Norman assault. Likewise, and sadly also, there is no chance of a native American restoration.
The best that we, wo who have lost the ethnic battles can do, is to preserve the remnants of our cultures and pass them on to our progeny.
Don’t forget to add in the lowland Scots.
This is totally window dressing. Any charter given by the Crown, would be considered to not be rescindable. Even if the Crown did resined the charter, it would have no bearing on United States law. Let everyone get real for a minute. Is the purpose to give back to the natives all the land in the charter? I remember a Murder She Wrote with this as the background.
[i] Edited by elf. [/i]
The Episcopal Church in Maine with this action made a bold and forthright statement for all to hear: there is absolutely no reason whatsoever to be part of the Episcopal Church in Maine–if you are looking for a church, that is. It’s as if they willingly taped an “I’m Utterly Irrelevant” sign to their backside. This is material for “The Onion” (perhaps that’s where they got the idea?). And what’s so amazing is the total lack of self-awareness that would lead them to do something so self-absorbed, self-congratulatory, and totally meaningless. What laughing stocks they’ve made of themselves–and of those few of us who still call ourselves (gulp) Episcopalians.
[i] Edited by elf. Off topic. [/i]
Scripture is full of countings and recountings of God’s faithfulness in generations past and also of the warnings of wrong done. Why? Because Israel did not regard itself in isolation from its own history. They celebrated their collective blessings, and recounted their nation’s sins. The concept of past sins visited on future generations is actually quite biblical, an excellent example being right in the Ten Commandments (Exodus 20:5). As Christians we believe the biblical narrative to be a very real history of which we ourselves are a part. As an historian and a reasserter I personally believe that history is also an arc of which we are a part, a fabric we continue to weave if you will. Is debate over a 1496 charter toothless and inane? Probably. Is knee-jerk white guilt helpful in actually dealing with racial injustice? Debatable. But is collective repentence for past sin in which we still benefit appropriate in the life of the covenant people of God? Friends, don’t dismiss that too quickly.
The meat for me in this article is this statement: [i] “Peggy Mansir attends St. Matthew’s Episcopal Church in Hallowell. Her husband and children are members of the Quebec Band of Maliseets, according to the diocesan Web site. “Let’s not wait another 511 years to recognize them as full members of the Church,” she said in support of the resolution.” [/i] Not full members of the Church because they’re Maliseet? What’s going on in Maine? What makes this woman feel her family are not full members of the Church? Something is wrong here. If a 1496 Charter is a stumbling block for this family than this whole issue may be something to consider. However the larger issue, at the heart of our current Anglican struggle, is what being full members of the Church really means. Somehow being baptized (witness the spread of CWOB) and believing in the Creeds and central tenets of the Church are becoming optional. Among other things the GLBT inclusion movement (capitalizing on what was a significant step in the Civil Rights era) is shifting the ground. Access to power, be it ordination or meaningless diocesan resolutions, are now key to “full membership”. At a time when post-modernism is becoming passe in intellectual circles, the Episcopal Church seems not to have gotten the memo.
The Episcopal Church got the memo, Alta. They threw it in the bucket.
Larry (13), I’m not sure it’s necessary to damn by invoking the Lord’s name in order to make your point. I think, ECUSA notwithstanding, the Commandments are still in force, and are, with God’s help, observed here.
Even more puzzling is the fact (recognized by both Canada and England) that Cabot landed in what is now Canada. He mapped the area from Nova Scotia to Newfoundland. I have not been able to find any reference to him getting as far south as Maine. The resolution seems to be quite pointless. I’m not sure there was any grant given for Maine, Virginia yes, but Maine I don’t think so!
Jon R
Do you suppose the Episcopalians of Maine feel personally threatened by the edict? After all, it authorizes Cabot and successors to take the property of heathens and non-Christians. (Just wondering with tongue in cheek.)
Wonderful–I can sleep soundly now. Political correctness costs nothing and is never satisfied. Righteousness is having the correct attitude. Compare with “cheap grace.”
#17. There were several grants and it was originally assumed that the grant ran northward. Virginia was a broadly defined area, not a state. The Pilgrims after all were headed toward “Virginia.”
#14 “Nor full members” means that this is another means by which a tribe calls attention to their being abused and misused. There is no sign that the TEC has somehow turned them into illegal immigrants. This is whining, a practice maintained because it is so successful. What they really want is what the homosexuals want, they want to be what they are and they want to be normative Americans, and this is a contradiction in terms, in the case of the Amerinds in Maine, because their are not “residents” of the state but exist under a special status which gives them independence.
Now,I have oversimplified the issue. I know a number of Maliseets and some Penobscots and Passamaquoddies. Their attitudes are widely mixed. Some want to be “natives,” and despise any other sort of life, some want to become part of Maine’s society, and get on with their lives. But the squeaky wheel gets the grease, and the Amerinds, like the homosexuals, have some importunate squeaky wheels. And it is fashionable to be a minority and a victim. It certainly is profitable. I doubt very much if TEC will miss an opportunity (by exclusion) to pander to a minority. Larry
Mormons baptize ancestors by proxy, and Maine Episcopalians repent of ancestral sins by proxy. Both would be better off examining their own lives and how what they do affects their descendants.
It seems that the Convention of Diocese of Maine does not understand the polity of the United Kingdom. (A brief refresher on constitutional monarchy might be advisable).
Considering how easily the other FEEL-GOOD resolutions passed, it is somewhat remarkable that this one only got 55% of the votes. At least one speaker denounced it as frivolous. Nevertheless, emotionalism and symbolism carried the day.
The Episcopal diocese has been striving to insert itself into the story of the Maine Indians’ woes. Episcopalians are not a numerically significant part of Maine’s small population, or even of Maine’s Christian population, but we try to grab headlines and drop names as if what we do matters to the rest of Maine (or to the Indians). Almost none of the Maine Indians are Episcopalians– those that are Christian are mostly Roman Catholic– and Maine’s current Episcopalians rarely even meet members of Maine’s tribes. But we want to be known as “players” in the struggle to liberate the oppressed and right past wrongs.
To speak or vote against this resolution was to risk being seen as unconcerned about the Indians, who have gotten one raw deal after another. The initiators of this resolution are from Old Town, near the Penobscot reservation. They sincerely believe that this is a matter of great importance to the Indians, and they probably believe that this will help the Episcopal diocese be seen as valuable, trusted allies in the struggle for justice.
JonReinert (#17): John Cabot is believed to have landed on Monhegan Island (Maine) in 1492 then returned to England and being issued the charter.
Again we have evidence that the elves are nicer than Jesus, or at least think they are.
What does such prudery serve in the face of such idiocy as the actions of Episcopalians in Maine reveal?
Christopher Hathaway,
Since I almost always agree with and appreciate your comments, I regret that the elves censored your #11. You are of course right that this silliness on the part of the Maine Episcopalians is idiocy.
The geniuses here in Maine did this out of a desire to be “nice” and “inclusive”. The sacrificed their brains to do it, but be that as it may. Our side indulges in its own kind of senseless pursuit of “niceness” in which we censor oursleves, and others, out of a fear of seeming “mean” and “not nice”, though to whom and why we should care about their opinion is never clearly articulated.
This kind of sensitivity I have always found to be completely absent in the teachings of Jesus, in the writings of the apostles, and in the witness of the early church. I therefore see it as a pinch to ceasar which only serves to make our light less glaring and our salt taste sweeter. I will have none of it.
“Do not cast your pearls before swine”, and Shake the dust off your feet” are verses the need to be heeded more than they are by the would-be orthodox lest they become the swine and dust themselves.