Dear Ms. Anderson,
I read with interest the ENS report of your visit to Albuquerque a few days ago. If the report is accurate, it’s shocking the veiled and not so veiled attempts you made as a guest in the Diocese of the Rio Grande to undermine the authority of their bishop and the leadership of the Diocese of the Rio Grande.
My purpose in writing, however, it to ask you to not include me or Christ Church San Antonio in your reports about the “majority” in the Episcopal Church. The talking point that you and the Presiding Bishop continuously repeat – that only “45 of the Church’s 7,500 congregations have decided to leave” – suggests that parishes like ours in San Antonio are with you. I want you to know that, even though we have not joined another Anglican body, we are emphatically not with you and we do not support the revisionist agenda that seems bound and determined to lead us away from the wider Communion.
In a letter to Bishop Gary Lillibridge (July 26, 2006) we stated: “In a unanimous vote, the clergy and [18 member] vestry of Christ Church and Christ Church in the Hill Country affirm our commitment to Jesus Christ, to the authority of Holy Scripture, and to that which binds us to our Anglican heritage. As a consequence, when the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates offer us an acceptable option, we will disassociate from the Episcopal Church. We feel that we must do this because we believe The Episcopal Church has left the Anglican Communion, and us, and now no longer lives under the authority of the Bible.”
Ms. Anderson, in the future, please report that “46 of the Church’s 7,500 congregations have decided to leave,” or at least have the intention to leave once the Primates together offer an option. If the Presiding Bishop, House of Deputies President, and the House of Bishops were to give even passing affirmation to the Tanzania Communiqué and the Windsor Report, if there was even slight movement in the direction of wanting to follow the direction of the Primates, we would feel differently. But the trajectory of the Episcopal Church appears to be set in stone, and it is a direction that clearly leads away from historic Anglicanism and the Anglican Communion.
We at Christ Church wait prayerfully and with eager expectation to see how God brings together orthodox churches and dioceses, with the support of the Primates. We are committed to our bishop who strongly upholds the Windsor Report and the Anglican Covenant as the hope for our future. Until the Episcopal Church begins to support the mind of the world-wide Anglican Communion, Christ Church San Antonio cannot be counted on to support the Episcopal Church.
Respectfully in Christ,
Chuck Collins
Rector, Christ Church
San Antonio, TX
[elves add: the T19 post of the ENS article about Bonnie Anderson’s visit to Rio Grande is here.]
I think that Bonnie, and perhaps many of the Bishops do not know of how many other churches in TEC are in the same position as Christ Church, but if they do not do something to indicate thier willingness to remain a part of the Anglican Communion, they are going to find out some very bad news. I think there are a lot in the wait and see category.
[blockquote]I think there are a lot in the wait and see category.[/blockquote]
Not to mention a few dioceses.
According to TEC math, if even one parishioner supports TEC, even in ignorance of events, then that parish is solidly in their corner.
[i]We at Christ Church wait prayerfully and with eager expectation to see how God brings together orthodox churches and dioceses, with the support of the Primates. We are committed to our bishop who strongly upholds the Windsor Report and the Anglican Covenant as the hope for our future.[/i]
As do I and a solid majority of your many friends in the Diocese of the Rio Grande. Well written Chuck!
Now, in the DRG, those that desire to stay part of TEC will have a contact to do so, and that’s good for them in the short term.
If TEC were really confident in it’s position, they would open the doors and let everyone know they are free to leave and join up with the rest of the Anglican Communion with no punishment or penalty.
They cannot, so they look to the leadership of LBJ and Richard Nixon for guidance:
“We will [strike]bomb[/strike] sue them into eternity.”
“We had to destroy the [strike]village[/strike] church in order to save the [strike]village[/strike] church”
William P: You really touched heavily on a major point, “If TEC was really confident in it’s position they would open the door!” But instead, they take the HEAVY HANDED approach, basically, “the beatings will continue until morale improves. It highlights their insincereity and weak position. Reminds me of a two year old, just moments before a temper tantrum is about to begin, the bottom lip is out, the hands are on the hips, and we are just about to throw ourselves on the floor and start screaming and flailing. So Sad!
Yikes! Holy Moses! Did that slam a door? I can here the jamb vibrating even here in Maine. LM
I hope Christ Church San Antonio is ready to be sued.
By the way, they are one of the larger parishes in the Diocese of West Texas.
Rev. J #1, I suspect that Bonnie and many of the Bishops don’t care. They want ECUSA cleansed of mainstream Christians.
[blockquote] “In a unanimous vote, the clergy and [18 member] vestry of Christ Church and Christ Church in the Hill Country affirm our commitment to Jesus Christ, to the authority of Holy Scripture, and to that which binds us to our Anglican heritage. As a consequence, when the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates offer us an acceptable option, we will disassociate from the Episcopal Church. We feel that we must do this because we believe The Episcopal Church has left the Anglican Communion, and us, and now no longer lives under the authority of the Bible.”[/blockquote]
I think Newbie is right about Christ Church being sued. In an earlier posting, Collins refuted the idea of the ABC being the center of the Anglican Communion and yet, in this posting, I quoted the part where he told his bishop that they await an option offered by the ABC and the primates. If the ABC does not offer an option but some of the primates do, what will Collins do and, more importantly, what will his bishop do to him and when?
I doubt if Bonnie is going to give this letter any attention at all.
Great letter, Fr. Collins! I believe that the rest of us need to stand up the same way and let the powers that be in ECUSA know that their numbers are WAY off!!!
Ah, Chuck! Makes me proud to have been through discernment in the DRG, ordained by +Terrence and to have my pastoral roots in the Rio Grande! Here’s praying for your “acceptable option” to TEC to come quickly.
The fact that Bonnie and her cronies at the Episcopal Church Center want to purge the Church of all of us reasserters is glaringly evident. Her words are fooling no one!
Let’s see – those churches that left the Diocese of Virginia are being sued by not only the Diocese but the national church. hmmmm – how come the churches in the Diocese of Dallas and the Diocese of Kansas, who left aren’t being sued by TEC….could it be that TEC can’t get the bishops of those diocese to go along……..if everything I have read about the Bishop of The Diocese of West Texas is true, I doubt that he will cave to sue requests from TEC/Beers…….should Christ Church, San Antonio take leave…..also, note – large churches, who seem to be leaving when the bishop is reasonable, are named “Christ Church”. Christ Church Anglican sounds like a good denomination name to me………
Dee in Iowa, my prediction is that Collins will not have the support of the bishop or of the parish should he attempt to take Christ Church out of the diocese. His predecessor, an outsider to that diocese whom I have met, tried running against the diocese before and failed. He is now, last I heard, at a non-denominational church in Florida. Collins, also an outsider, is making similar protests as did his predecessor. It will be interesting to see if Collins prevails where his predecessor failed but I don’t think history, nor his position as rector, is on his side. From what I know, he holds no power position in the diocese, not even as delegate to convention. Thus my bet is that we won’t be hearing of a Christ Anglican Church in San Antonio anytime soon.
Let me see if I get his logic…..he and his parish will leave because the Episcopal Church has already left the Communion? Somehow that doesn’t make much sense to me.
#16:
He means that the Episcopal Church has left the Anglican Communion and he and his parish will not leave with them. The Episcopal Church will go where it may, but Rev. Collins and Christ Church San Antonio will remain in the Anglican Communion. To remain in the Anglican Communion entails leaving the Episcopal Church.
Frankly, it isn’t all that complicated.
Does anyone know what Rev. Collins is referring to when he talks about Bonnie Anderson attempting to undermine the Bishop of the Diocese of the Rio Grande’s authority when she was in Albuquerque? What did she do on her little visit there?
I wonder if she had any Sandia extra hot green chili while she was in town. Probably burned her twice.
RE: “Dee in Iowa, my prediction is that Collins will not have the support of the bishop or of the parish should he attempt to take Christ Church out of the diocese.”
I don’t see any evidence or sign that Father Collins wishes to “take Christ Church out of the diocese” so why the diocese or bishop should be upset with him I don’t know. In fact, I suspect that they are not. I suspect that the diocese and bishop are smiling.
I sure did over this letter! ; > )
Re: #’s 5,6,7: Imagine re-writing Luke 15: “Then the younger son said, ‘Father, I want to go.’ But the father replied, ‘Um, that door’s not really open right now. What if, instead of leaving, we engaged in a long listening process?’ ‘No, thanks. I’m leaving.’ ‘Okay, you’ll be hearing from my attorneys. You’d better not take any of _my_ property with you when you go.'”
TEC not only does not seem “confident in its position” (unless by ‘its position’ we mean its ability to hire legal counsel) it even seems that our church leadership has forgotten the story of the Prodigal.
Speaking as someone who has no desire to leave TEC and no intention of leaving TEC, let me say that I believe that if parishes or even whole dioceses wish to leave, we ought to do all we can to imitate our Father, showing them as much grace as we can. Do you want to take the property and the endowment with you? Take it, then. We will not miss it at all in comparison to how much we will miss you. Do you want to go and maybe never return? Go then with our blessing, and may you prosper in all you do. May God multiply your good works; may God be glorified in you; and God grant that we may one day be reunited in true faith.
Ms. Anderson’s performance in Albuquerque and our continued lawsuits against breakaway congregations are analogous to very bad parenting—the sort that first locks the children in and then, once they have dared to venture out on their own, locks them out.
This, anyway, is my view. I have written to ++Schori asking her to take the same view, and I will continue to do so. I ask that if there are others who agree with me in this that you do the same.
Laocoon,
A very Christian response/suggestion. If the two sides were able to go the soft approach – both might emerge healthier. The Anglican Communion might even stay intact with two American jurisdictions. On a Diocese/Parish basis workable solutions to provide pastoral care could be provided for dissenters on both sides: 1) where two Churches of differing philosphies are near they could both merge the likeminded; 2) two groups could share the facilities; and/or 3) the majority could “buy out” the minoities pro-rata interest giving the smaller group seed money to buy a new facility. I fear hoewever that TEC is more afraid of letting people actually have a relatively pain free decision – I think TEC knows that its message/brand is not as popular among the rank and file as it is with the activists in the drivers seat.
Chips,
I think you’re right about TEC’s fears. Which is very telling. What a shame if we fear loss of property more than we fear God or more than we fear failing to seek the lost. The father of the ‘prodigal’ spent his time watching the road, not counting his money. Even if we were to view the Scriptures as mere morality tales, you’d think the story of King David counting the fighting men or the many stories of Jesus about those who place their faith in wealth and property would teach us something. But perhaps the Scriptures do not matter even that little to our current decision makers. It seems sometimes that they’re so excited about those cool new wooden horses parked outside the gates that they don’t give a rip about the warnings they’ve received concerning Greeks bearing gifts. Meanwhile, I’ll continue warning them; but I won’t try to hinder those who believe the horse is already inside the walls and all of us asleep. Laocoon’s warnings to see things as they really are (not as we want them to be) and Aeneas’ cry to wake up and get out both aim at the same thing by slightly different means: the salvation of the people. I’d like to save the city walls, too, if possible — but I refuse to do so by suing those who recognize that salvation of walls is far less important than salvation of souls.