Yikes! Even though he calls them the “Gang of 13” and a “Rogues gallery of the invading army of bishops,” Mark Harris’ post with pictures of all the US Bishops for overseas’ provinces (AMia/Rwanda, CANA/Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda) is worth a look.
Harris has also started reflecting and speculating on what might occur at the September Common Cause Council of Bishops meeting.
WooHoo! We got Mark Harris’ panties in a knot, we must be doing something right :coolhmm:
You know, I read the article and all the speculations.
Some I agreed with, some not.
But what struck me about the article was the tone.
What a bitter man, the words just full of bile and spite.
That’s fine, but I sincerely wonder why? Both sides have been called names and such, and both sides do not believe the other’s gospel.
But I’m confused over all the high emotion and anger.
The two sides just don’t agree. And as a result, we’re not going to be together. That much has been quite clear since 2003 and the past four years have been in how that works out. But eventually the two sides won’t be together, and that’ll be fine.
One shrugs the shoulders and moves on. So why waste the energy and the words on the bile and spite? The essay would have been far shorter if he’d have let go of his anger before he wrote it.
The actual title is “The gang of 13, or so.” I have been wondering about the “or so” part for some time, wondering if there are any likely additional bishops to come? It seems that all the non-TEC major players, in terms of groups, have a full complement. Anybody spot any openings in the “org chart?”
Those still within TEC are not able to act, beyond viewing with approval, and that leaves perhaps the Continuing Churches. Individually, none would be classed as major, but collectively they represent a significant grouping. Some of the largest are represented in the Common Cause Partners, FACA, etc, and so indirectly will have have if not a seat, representation at the AC table. There are some additional moves going on, with part of the APCK, which show a willingness to work with others, so in an ideal world there might be a couple of existing CC bishops chosen to represent that community. Of course, that kind of unity in the CCs would probably require a transcendent miracle, but one can hope.
Sarah, I so agree with you about the tone. How sad to read. When you consider that Mark Harris is a leader in TEC (on the Executive Council) it makes some of TEC’s actions and words much easier to understand. Don’t public leaders have a responsibility to speak and write responsibly? (I’m so glad Kendall takes that view, at any rate.)
I just left a comment over on Mark’s blog. It seems to me he is very seriously understating the number of congregations that these bishops oversee. He has pictured AMiA and CANA bishops, but not counted those congregations in his total of 77 parishes.
AMIA has at least 114. CANA has at least 30. So the total is at least 230. Probably more like 250.
Also Bp-elect Ilgenfritz of who is due to be consecrated for FIFNA is not pictured or listed. Including FiFNA parishes would up the total even more.
2. Sarah, what we call the Reapparisers were on a roll, expecting their social gospel, with roots going back to the 1960s, to prevail, and prevail now. There was never any question about that in their minds, as the thought that it would not never occurred to them. To use +Chane’s term, all that was needed was to prune some dead wood from the church. After the usual period of denial, it is clearly sinking in that this is not going to happen. Within the period of about 5 years, that dead wood has caught fire and turned into a blazing beacon of light, changing everything. The words of denial among the Reappraisers are still there, but the actions are turning to scorched earth, and bitter anger directed to those they perceive as denying them what is rightly theirs.
When unrealistic expectations are not met, this can happen in a bad marriage, in secular politics as we have seen over the past couple of presidential elections, or even other religions such as Islam. A few Islamic leaders, who have the necessary security to keep their heads attached, have admitted that much of the rage is in fact the result that they believe that Allah promised them the world, this world, and it simply hasn’t turned out that way.
Among my reappraising friends, some clergy, some going back 40+ years, there is a general feeling that this nightmare, from their standpoint, just simply cannot be happening, unless………. And the “…..” part is very dark indeed. I am not certain whether understanding makes it any easier, but it does help to make plans.
I read Mark Harris’ discussion of ‘what ifs’ and’ possibilities.
You know, it is like someone discussing all of the possible outcomes of a chess match. Each chess move is simple to describe, but any particular game or the whole match can be far too complex for anyone to be able to predict it’s outcome.
As for the tone of Mark Harris’ article.
I think that he is whistling as he walks past the church grave yard.
“The claim that this gang is doing the will of the Holy Spirit *may* turn out to be flat out wrong.”
he has not even convinced himself of his own theory, so why would anyone else listen to him?
Mark Harris’s Preludium has a curious atmosphere to it. I was particularly struck by the stuff in block capitals at the top:
[blockquote]PRELUDIUM;from the Latin – pre (pre) ludium (sound)[/blockquote]
I mean, even [i]praeludium[/i] would be recognizable to most literate people as “prelude”, whose meaning will be luminously clear to most. To “explain” it with a homespun etymology (tracing the word’s roots to what appears to be Cod Latin) seems perversely sophisticated.
Well, like Sarah, I agree with some parts of Harris’ predictions, and with others not. The big thing, that the orthodox bishops in the Network are likely going to need to do something after September 30 is easy to see. Harris appears to think that they won’t. I am not so sure. I see these folks as working together despite their differences more than ever in the past. Harris also thinks it has become clear that diocese cannot leave with property. I must have missed the case between the national church and a diocese. I do believe it has become clear that the national church will sue. Litigation is, after all, the raison d’etre of TEC. I don’t know who would win. But if the bishop is going to be deposed anyway, I don’t know what the threat of litigation would do. It’s America, anyone can sue, and you can never be sure who will win. That is why we have so many trial lawyers.
Of course, Harris also talks of the growth in TEC that lies, as ever, just around the corner. Right. Evidence of it is everywhere. Undoubtedly 5 to 10 more years of litigation against every orthodox priest and vestryperson will help it along nicely.
And finally, it is hypocritical of ECUSAns to complain about all of these bishops. TEC, with its many miniscule and shrinking diocese (I seem to recall someone pointing out how many TEC diocese were smaller than CANA in terms of membership) is hardly in a position to accuse anyone of having too many bishops.
With too much time on my hands over the holiday I reviewed the Wikepedia and related continuing church websites – very interesting. I have yet to fiqure out how FACA fits into the emerging realignment as it is not listed as Common Cause but contains jurisdictions which are – it includes the Episcopal Missionary Church and the Anglican Church in America in addition to AMiA, REC and APA the Dicoese of the Holy Cross has made application. Futher Forward in Faith also includes the Diocese of the Holy Spirit as a full communion partner and involvement by the Anglican Catholic Church and EMC. In fact all of the 8 or nine continuing churches with substantial number of parishes seem to be making unification overtures or at least joining organizations which are (except Anglican Province of Christ the King). Taking the combined totals of the listed in order of greater participation in the Commom Cause APA, REC, EMC, DHC, ACC and UEC (ACC and UEC signed a full communion agreement in May) that is roughly 500 parishes. Mr. Harris did not seem to factor them into the discussion but there does seem to be activity afoot there – any thoughts from those who are not rank outsiders like me? I appoligize for any entity I may have left out.
[i]”The claim that this gang is doing the will of the Holy Spirit *may* turn out to be flat out wrong.†[/i]
Yet isn’t this what the reappraisers ask us to accept without question, that the Holy Spirit is doing a new thing through them? Hypocracy in action!
But I’m confused over all the high emotion and anger.
The two sides just don’t agree.
I’m afraid I don’t agree with the second statement. Sarah, homosexualist ideologues, like all ideologues, are not just people who happen to disagree. These folks are True Believers: they have been to the Mountain and Seen the Light. Certainly not all homosexualist reappraisers fall into this category, but many do, apparently Mark Harris among them.
As noted in a comment above, these folks were on a roll. They have gained control of TEC and, like all such folks when they gain power, have grown to expect compliance and obesiance. Tantrum behavior is precisely the behavior to expect when they are crossed.
According to the Oxford English Dictionary, the English word preludium (in English from 1563) derives from the post-classical Latin word praeludium (in British sources from c1177), which derives from a combination of the verb praeludere plus –ium, the suffix used to transform i- and e-stem Latin verbs into nouns denoting acts. If ludium was a classical term (I find it, among the dictionaries I happen to have here at home, only in Blaise’s Lexicon Latinitatis Medii Aevi, where it means something like play/game/sport, joust/tilt), it would have had something to do with play, I think (ludius, an actor; ludo, to play; ludus, play, game, sport, pastime), not sound.
This is also the etymology given in Webster’s Third New International, so I, too, am a bit puzzled by Harris’ etymology.
Are we missing something?
While I fully agree with Sarah’s assessment of Harris’ unhappy/bitter tone, I believe #8 & #13 have more of the Metro bus driver trained response to road rage, they’ll smile and wave.
In that spirit, maybe we can have some fun come up with the “Gang of 13” trivia game :coolhmm:
Okay, what do +Barnam & +Minns have in common other than being in the middle row of Harris’ collage?
Middle column, rows go horizontal … no I don’t work with Excel a lot … why do you ask :shut:
Why is Harris even troubling himself about the Common Cause Council of Bishops? I thought the official “All Is Wellâ„¢” talking point was that only the tiniest, mostest insignificantest fraction of TEC parishes are disaffected, and those outside of TEC aren’t his business anyway.
#8 (CPKS): Fr. Harris has very graciously acknowledged the point at #13, and even adjusted his header to come our way quite a bit (though he still breaks it down as pre- + ludium, rather than preludere + -ium).
#17, thanks for noting Fr. Harris’ adjustments. Our experience is that Mark+ has been quite open to constructive feedback and will make corrections with some frequency. That’s good to see.
I agree, a gracious response to a gracious correction.