Today I have prepared to give witness to the Windsor Continuation Group Hearings. The “Turmoil in the USA” is one of the identified sections of their preliminary report, which bothered a number of us, as you might imagine. Troubling is the false perception that we are proclaiming alternatives to traditional Christology and soteriology. These have been extended characterizations against The Episcopal Church by those opposed to our position on human sexuality or to the broader approach to biblical interpretation. It is a surprise however to see them appear apparently uninvestigated in any extensive way. But that is what the hearings give us an opportunity to address.
We are reminded every day as we pray for those “for whatever reason” who are not here, that we are not complete as a Communion without those who stayed away or were not invited. A public statement by the Sudanese Archbishop yesterday calling on Gene Robinson to resign and excoriating The Episcopal Church reminds us that while we are being greeted at Lambeth by the very same Sudanese with whom many of us have ongoing partnerships, we must face our differences and explain ourselves to one another. Whether we can do this in the grace the Archbishop called us to in Canterbury Cathedral is a matter for all of our prayers.
Generally I would say that the focus on relationship building is at work. I have heard amazing stories of faith and courage as you might expect, and Donna has heard outrageous stories of women’s suffering which will have to become part of our focus on our return. Greetings from fellow bishops from Australia, New Zealand, Myanmar, Papua New Guinea, England and Ireland (haven’t met a Welshman yet!), the West Indies, Sri Lanka, India, Singapore, South Africa, Zimbabwe, Canada, Zambia, Tanzania, the Philippines, Sudan, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Madagascar, the Seychelles, Indian Ocean, Fiji, Melanesia, Congo, Mozambique, Cuba, Peru, Chile, Brazil, Mexico, Taiwan, Korea, Malawi, and of course Scotland, Swaziland and the United States. Greetings too from Suzanne Peterson who arrived this week as a volunteer.
[blockquote]Troubling is the false perception that we are proclaiming alternatives to traditional Christology and soteriology.[/blockquote]
I’m certain it would shock Mother Jesus. You remember her, right?…she’s a way, a truth, a life depending on one’s cultural context, historical hermeneutic and what size box you want to stuff her into.
Troubling is the false perception that we are proclaiming alternatives to traditional Christology and soteriology.
Three words: John. Shelby. Spong.
Perhaps if ECUSA could have voted for Resolution B001* the rest of the AC (and the world) wouldn’t think you are heretics. And yes, Rt. Rev. Alan Scarfe, Bishop of Iowa, you were one of those voting against – remember?
————–
*Resolved, the House of _____ concurring, That this 74th General Convention affirms that “Holy Scripture containeth all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation,” as set forth in Article VI of the Articles of Religion established by the General Convention on September 12, 1801; and be it further
Resolved, That this 74th General Convention re-affirms that “it is not lawful for the Church to ordain [that is, establish or enact] any thing that is contrary to God’s Word written, neither may it so expound one place of Scripture, that it be repugnant to another,” as set forth in Article XX of the Articles of Religion established by the General Convention on September 12, 1801; and be it further
Resolved, That this 74th General Convention affirms that every member of this Church is conscience-bound first of all to obey the teaching and direction of Our Lord Jesus Christ as set forth in Holy Scripture in any matter where a decision or action of this Church, or this General Convention, may depart from that teaching; and be it further
Resolved, That this 74th General Convention re-affirms that the statements known as the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilaterial of 1886, 1888, as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer, 1979 continue to be true and accurate statements of the faith and policy of this Church, and the Anglican Communion; and be it further
Resolved, That this 74th General Convention affirms that councils of the Church have, and sometimes will, err but that Our Lord Jesus Christ, present through the person of the Holy Spirit, can and will correct such error; and be it further
Resolved, That this 74th General Convention directs the Office of the Presiding Bishop to forward a copy of this resolution to every Diocese within the Episcopal Church.
Explanation:
Recent General Conventions have been asked to consider significant changes affecting matter of historic faith, morals, and discipline in our Church, in some cases bringing public ridicule to our Church. Some members have therefore become discouraged, and others have left this Church. Many Members who remain faithful to this Church seek reassurance that they will not be coerced to act against conscience in matter of historic belief and practice, seeking healing rather than further fragmentation or our Church. The resolution re-affirms Holy Scripture as the foundation of authority in our Church, re-affirms historic positions adopted by previous General Conventions and affirms that no member of this Church shall be forced to practice anything contrary to the clear meaning of holy scripture.
Why are any real Christians at Lambeth. This is absurd as well as unproductive. LM
Larry
Why were any real Christians at Nicea or Constantinople? The absurdity there probably surpassed our own. Even after Nicea, there were arian bishops and arian emperors.
While I desire a doctrinally pure church with doctrinally pure bishops, priest, and deacons, the only way to find that is to spend so much time in hunting heresy that we can’t make disciples.
Real Christians are at Lambeth to witness to the Truth and to Jesus Christ (who is the Truth). We remain in TECUSA because there is always need for a faithful remnant to witness to God’s actions in and thru Jesus Christ.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
When the Presiding Bishop goes out of her way to deny that Jesus is the only way to the Father, it sounds like she believes in an alternative to traditional soteriology — namely that there is salvation in something or someone other than Jesus.
It’s not a false perception at all.
Phil, t hey were at Nicaea because there were problems to be solved. A gentlemen of some substance called it and everyone there prepared to duke it out. They were after solutions! Not listening! How long would Constantine have put up with the proposition that conclusions were to be avoided, that they were together just of build interpersonal relations. WE are not after doctrinal purity from Lambeth. Lambeth is a political arena where important battles are meant to take place, the result of which should be solid resolutions instead of: Hey Dude, let the Arians be, there not hurting you are they? Let’s just Witness the Truth and forget this Creed business because if we write it down, somebody’s going to be left out and, like, that’s a violation of their civil rights.
This won’t do. The comparison you suggest simply doesn’t hold water. Nicaea had a real leader and it was about business. Lambeth is about learning how to shrug significantly. LM
When does a faithful remnant become a masochistic group of enablers? Sometimes it seems like a severly dysfunctional family where the abused children cannot bring themselves to call in an intervention expert. Do you have to stay in the family and be abused to provide a witness? In all honesty, what would it take to make faithful remnant members leave? Is there anything?
Phil Snyder,
Your “faithful remnant” approach to remaining in TEC tempted me greatly in the months between VGR’s election and consecration, back in ’03. I left, however, as it became clear that my presence and contributions would only add to the self-inflating statistics compiled by the “unfaithful majority” (what else to call them, given the “faithful remnant” you posit?). Since it appeared to me that my staying behind, to fight it out, heart and soul, would only inflict pain in the community I loved, I did not know how else to fight the evil, but to depart. At length, I found a modicum of peace of mind.
We all know of the spectacular and successful examples of both resistance and departure, e.g. in Pennsylvania, Texas and Northern Virginia–but I don’t have a feel, even from this blog, of how it’s going with the “faithful remnant” which stayed in parishes firmly tied to the established Episcopal order. Im guessing it’s been some hell for them, particularly for those who, by temperament and conviction, are unable to remain silent. I really pray for them.
RE: “Im guessing it’s been some hell for them, particularly for those who, by temperament and conviction, are unable to remain silent.”
Hi Richard,
I’m one of those who has both remained and by conviction will not be silent — although by temperament I like being outdoors, reading, and hanging out with my dog!
And it has been a privilege and a blessing. God has poured out gifts on me, including dear friends, and allies, along with understanding, an ability to use my gifts, and a very calm, sure sense of His calling and leading.
Thank you for your prayers, however! Maybe God has chosen to answer them in an odd way, by providing deep purpose and energy for those who are remaining.
What is it with Episcopalians and the adjective, “deep”? They’re always living into deep tensions and deep truths and deep purposes. One begins to suspect that some deep overcompensation is going on.
well, Phil, they do believe in piling it DEEP and high, y’know.
🙂
Jim Elliott <><