I was fairly sure we did not need another group with a national headquarters, a logo and regular conferences. I believed that conservatives within TEC needed to find some way between the poles of departure and mere acquiescence to the more provocative resolutions of General Convention.
I’ve now heard some encouraging notes for a conservative future within TEC. Two hours of audio, posted on the website of St. Andrew’s Church in Mt. Pleasant, South Carolina (PBinSC.notlong.com), suggest that the conservative future sounds assertive rather than aggressive and hopeful rather than despairing.
Those who follow the regular drama of bishops’ elections will remember that that Diocese of South Carolina’s 14th bishop, Mark Lawrence, was said not to have received adequate consents from standing committees after a diocesan convention elected him. The diocesan convention reconvened and elected Lawrence again, on acclamation. After standing committees heard renewed assurances that he had no intention of leading the Diocese of South Carolina out of the Episcopal Church, Lawrence received sufficient consents and was consecrated on January 26 — nearly a year later than the diocese originally had planned.
To expect that this difficult path to consecration would leave Bishop Lawrence haggard or tongue-tied was to misunderstand him. In late February, as part of the Presiding Bishop’s visit to the diocese, Bishop Lawrence devoted two hours of a clergy day to a frank discussion of tensions involving the diocese, General Convention and the Presiding Bishop herself.
Assert all we want, that is NOT the problem.. When SSB/M is approved at Anaheim (GC-09), and the new disclipinary canons are enacted to forbid anyone speaking against TEC, no reasserter will feel the need to leave, they’ll either shut up, or be thrown out.
Doug doesn’t seem to see very far in the future, and no matter how long-drawn out this period is, the future is coming quicker than we realize.
Come Lord Jesus
Gloria in SC
Although this is a nice article, as far as it goes, conservatives in TEC [and I am one of them] need something far far far far more robust than merely “asserting our beliefs.”
One reason, in fact, why so many are leaving TEC is that there is no plan or strategy or even series of actions that conservatives within TEC are working through. Nothing, in fact.
All of the action, the strategy, the planning, and the responsiveness is from those outside of TEC. Inside? There is standing in a safe parish in a safe diocese, “asserting our beliefs.”
Not that it really matters, I suppose — but such a plan of differentiation is no plan at all and more laypeople will simply look around and say “what are we standing around here for — there is no leadership here, so I’ll just do my waiting outside of TEC over here in this nice church”. It is simply more of the same as the past 30 years. Nice — but laypeople recognize it for the floundering that it is.
The most shocking thing to me of the past year is not the actions of the progressives in TEC — they are merely living into their theology and values. It’s the non-action of conservatives in TEC [other than those who are leaving, of course, but then they’re no longer in TEC.]
Mr LeBlanc needs to remember Neuhaus’s Law: where orthodoxy is optional, sooner or later orthodoxy will be proscribed.
He asserts in his article that conservatives “care about doctrine.” Apparently they do not care enough about it to break fellowship with false teachers. Continuing in communion with those who teach heresy says that bishops and priests who teach falsehood have just as much right to speak for Jesus Christ as do those who teach the truth. While a great deal of patience is certainly called for, at a certain point remaining in communion with heretics is an implicit but definite endorsement of, and sharing in, their heresy. That “certain point” came long, long ago.
While I have great admiration for Bishop Lawrence and of course Kendall, I have great difficult envisioning staying in an organization which collects funds which it uses to wage reconcilation with deBeers model AK-47s against faithful brothers and sisters around the country. Applause for assertiveness but how do you justify financial support for apostasy?
http://www.vermontanglicans.org
Speaking for myself, I agree with Mr. Leblanc but the problem is, I have children and have to consider their needs too. That’s not the only reason I left TEC, but it is the reason why I can never go back. Even if found a conservative parish in a conservative diocese (not too hard here in my neck of the woods) the wider church teaches a doctrine I don’t wish to present to my children as authoritative. As long as I’m responsible for my children’s spiritual nurture, I want to rear them in a setting where sound doctrine is taught at all levels. If I can’t trust a church with my children’s Christian formation, I don’t want to be part of it.
I wish Mr. LeBlanc and those who believe as he does nothing but the best. I believe they may well be in for the shock of their lives in the next five years when “inclusivity” reigns so completely that he and his allies find themselves on the outside looking in in spite of their accommodations. I pray he is correct for the sake of the Communion and this apostate church, but Sarah’s correct analysis suggests that dark days are ahead.
No 4 – that is precisely the question I would like to have answered by our conservative leadership. So far, the only thing I’ve heard is essentially “just wait.” To me, that’s kind of like putting off chemotherapy – the cancer only spreads becoming more entrenched and tenacious.
We should all face it, as conservatives we’ve been asleep at the wheel for at least twenty years. The camel’s nose was in the tent thirty years ago. Now the whole beast is inside and taking care of bodily functions right smack in the middle of the tent.
We gave this church away long before Schori came along. In hindsight, she is predictable and fungible in that if it had not been her it would have been somebody just like her.
[blockquote]The most shocking thing to me of the past year is … the non-action of conservatives in TEC[/blockquote]Oh Sarah, I wish I could say I was shocked too. But I’m older than you, and I’ve seen it so many times before. I was hoping it would be different this time, so I am disappointed, but not shocked.
Ditto to what everybody’s written. An additional flaw in Mr. LeBlanc’s reasoning can be found in this: “Indeed, I think these two hours of audio are a good model for how conservative dioceses may stand for what they believe in.”
Really, how many “conservative dioceses” are there? I think we’ve reached the point where these can be numbered on one hand, two at most. Even in the diocese in question, LeBlanc himself recounts how close it came to being picked off by 815. And let’s not even get into the question of taking the analysis to the parish level, which are nothing more than little Dien Bien Phus – unreinforceable outposts destined to be brutally overrun, with the only question being when.
When there are this few mainstream dioceses left, 815 has the luxury of simply starving them out, and that’s exactly what it will do.
What is the point in staying?
Is it to maintain the highest level of unity? [Unity with an organization that repudiates the Faith? Why?]
Is it to bear witness within TEC so that others may take heart?
[That witness is regularly lampooned and held with the same respect as “flat-earthers” might expect amongst the educated!]
Is it to minimize lawsuits and disruption while faithful Christians continue to pursue the mission of the Church within safe dioceses?
[Your tribute paid to national TEC is being used to persecute those who have left/are leaving TEC: can you stomach that fact? Does the Great Commission include being part of an organization which denies evangelism and promotes universalism?]
Sometimes I suspect that the greatest reason we have all tarried within the denomination of TEC is our besetting sin: “Luxuria”…the sin of enjoying comfort and security, while avoiding taking up the Cross and suffering loss or deprivation because we love The Lord more than the organization.
For anyone who has catholic sensibilities, “luxuria” tempts us to hide behind the catholic preference for visible unity and suspicion of protestant separationism.
For anyone with evangelical sensibilities, “luxuria” tempts us to hide behind “sola Scriptura”/”sola Gratia”/”sola fidei” as we dismiss the importance of being united to the Larger Church and depart from clearly heretical organizations.
When I examine the Book of Acts, it seems to me the gospel spread in two ways, the diaspora and the martyrs. Both are valid methods and used by God. I have no doubt that those who fled when the “kitchen got hot” were following the directions of our Lord, thus the Gospel spread far beyond Israel’s borders. Those who stayed in the kitchen until they were burned, also were under clear orders from the Lord to stay put in Jerusalem. Maybe South Carolina has been led by the Lord to take the martyr role…staying in and being the biggest royal pain and embarrassment to 815 until Schori et al can no longer bear it and SC is killed off. Someone’s got to stand against the heresy. I’m sure God can and will use both the Diaspora and the Martyr to His Glory. Let’s not put our valid call “to flee” onto someone else’s valid call “to stay”.
Mr LeBlanc missed the point on the difficulty in getting Mark Lawrence+ approved as bishop of SC.
The sticking point wasn’t that he might take Dio of SC out of TEc but rather that TEc didn’t want a conservative as bishop, and most likely will not consent to one ever again (unless a miracle of repentance occurs and revival breaks out in the HOB).
That was the ‘problem’ with the consents.
Peace
Jim Elliott <><
Dear Doug–I know you read T19, so I am writing you an open note. I know you and you know me. I’m sorry I can’t afford to identify myself to you in what I write here.
I might have been able to take your approach two years ago (just before GC 2006). But we were both there and you must know as a reporter that “asserting our beliefs” (your theme here) made zero impact in every critical area. B033, which you might cite, was a desperate, pragmatic move to keep the new PB’s place at the big table.
Will you be covering GC 2009 (I call it the Disneyland GC)? What you write here is from your heart as a still-hopeful church member, not as the objective, smart reporter you are. I’ll be looking for your report from Anaheim. Let us know how well “asserting our beliefs” goes there. But I may be reading your dispatches as a former member of TEC.
Blessings as you carry on.
My comment in #2 didn’t mean to “pile on” or say that Doug was wrong in his desire for conservative Episcopalians to assert their beliefs.
My point is that that is not enough. Unlike some here, I think that there is *plenty* to be done while still in TEC, and almost every day I chat with folks in other dioceses and parishes who are doing just that.
But asserting our beliefs isn’t enough, and I remain troubled that our Fearless Leaders don’t even do that much anymore, much less the many many activities they ought to be undertaking.
I agree with trimom — I don’t think “all people must leave now” — but of those who have stayed, for goodness sake’s they ought to be actually doing something, in unity and strategically with others.
Stuart Smith,
I hear what you’re saying, yet it seems to me that leaving is the easy thing to do, the comfortable, “luxurious” thing to do. I stay in part because it is so difficult. In fact, I often wonder if the best thing might be for me to become a bishop. The thought frightens me terribly because it would be exactly the opposite of nurturing [i]luxuria[/i]. I sometimes wonder if I am like Jonah, called to stay and preach in a place whose sins grieve me; I wonder if I’m to be like Esther, called to be in an ungodly place at just the right time to bring succor to God’s people.
Let us all pray for one another, that we might hear what God is calling us to, and that we might respond faithfully.
Wherever God leads you, the peace of Jesus Christ be with you, Stuart.
Laocoon
“ . . . but Sarah’s correct analysis suggests that dark days are ahead.†I disagree. I think there is a bright future for the new Anglican Church in America. As one who left, I am looking forward to returning to a faithful Anglican church. It is just a matter of time. I am finally beginning to feel encouraged. Please do everything possible to hasten that day. I am a former Senior Warden, Parish and Diocesan Treasurer, choir member, and so on. I do not wish to ever belong to TEC again, and cannot see any way for reconciliation. Quite frankly, I am astonished by the apostasy of the leaders of TEC. No other organization in existence, religious or secular, would stand for their leadership disavowing the fundamentals on which the organization is based.
RE: ““ . . . but Sarah’s correct analysis suggests that dark days are ahead.†I disagree. I think there is a bright future for the new Anglican Church in America.”
Hi CharlesB, my comments were for those of us in TEC, not who have left for other Anglican entities or other denominations. I’m sure that those who have converted to Roman Catholicism are quite happy, for instance, and I was certainly not commenting on them.
I have no desire to be a part of some “new Anglican Church in America” although I am sure that those who are a part of such a thing will be most happy. Again, my comments were entirely about those of us within TEC needing to do more within TEC than simply “assert beliefs.”
I found Doug’s article encouraging. I share the frustrations of many who have good reasons to leave TEC. At this point I cannot. I grew up in the Episcopal Church, but never met Jesus. After a period of agnosticism and atheism, I was led to the Lord by a member of the AOG. Not long after that I was led by the Lord back into the Episcopal Church and found that it was all there in the 1928 BCP. I found the faith also in the 1979 BCP when it came out sometime later.
Ever since that time I have felt myself to be called as a missionary in the Episcopal Church. Missionaries don’t give up just because the people they are trying to reach abuse or even kill them. I have received no permission from the Lord to even think about leaving TEC. I pray God’s blessing on the many friends who have left for CANA, AMIA, Uganda, the Southern Cone, and the Roman Catholic Church. I miss their fellowship and support in TEC, but I believe God has led them to do what they are doing.
I think about TEC in terms of the seeming victory of Arianism for a time. I also think about TEC in terms of the supremacy of the Latitudinarians in 1700 in the C of E. Near as I can tell no person who believed in Jesus was eligible to become a bishop at that time. But then came the Evangelical Revival and things changed.
[blockquote]The weapons we fight with are not the weapons of the world. On the contrary, they have divine power to demolish strongholds. – 2 Corinthians 10:4[/blockquote]
I believe that at this time TEC is under the judgment of God. I am fairly sure things are going to become much for difficult for believers still in TEC. I don’t know how the Lord is going to work things out for the faithful remnant in TEC. I have doubts that it will be in my lifetime. Nevertheless, I believe I am called to remain in this mission field until the Lord who called me says otherwise.
God did not bless us with children so I am safe there. I thank God that my parish and diocese allow me to not fund TEC with my tithes. The Diocese only forwards what parishes designate for TEC and the parish designated 0% for TEC. I’m not sure what I would do if that were not allowed.
—A Protestant— Catholic— Pentecostal priest still in TEC and praying for revival