According to Cathedral Provost Canon Catherine Brall, the draft resolution was prepared over the last several months by the Cathedral Chapter and sent to all active members of the Trinity on August 22. Cathedral parish members will have a number of opportunities to discuss the resolution over the next three weeks, and then will come together for a final all-parish meeting on September 14.
Canon Brall praised the work of the Chapter, saying that the ideas encapsulated in the resolution “grew out of a very thorough and wonderful season of Chapter members seeking to envision how Trinity Cathedral might best position itself to fulfill its unique identity and destiny as a historic Penn Land Grant Church deeded to foster and preserve Anglican and Episcopal worship.”
Bishop Duncan also thanked the Chapter for their work and commended the resolution to the Cathedral parish membership. “Trinity Cathedral, more than any other church building in the diocese, belongs not just to whoever may “win” the right to administer it in our sad divisions, but to all of us, to the city, and the whole region. I see this resolution as a good initiative to acknowledge and protect that unique role and to protect the Cathedral’s future as Mother Church of all Anglicans and of the City,” he said.
Read it all and check out the full text of the resolution here also.
Neither hot, nor cold…
Now this is a [i]via media[/i] that I can understand and respect. May more grace and thoughtfulness such as this come to light.
Peace,
I think the Cathedral should belong to God, not the people…A cathedral is a holy place for holy worship of holy God. it should not be, rented out as was the Cathedral of St John the Divine for Elton John’s birthday bash and the altar used for a band.
#2 Thanks for the vote of confidence.
I encourage everyone to read, mark, learn and inwardly digest this resolution. Our actions are grounded in the conviction that together our nucleus of faithful believers (and we are a small congregation; as we like to remark: “This isn’t George [Werner’s] Cathedral any more”) still has a task to perform amidst the sound and fury all around us. Time will tell if we’re right.
I freely admit that living into the spirit of this resolution will be hard. Part of me longs for the closure that realignment and separation would bring, even if my communion conservative instincts rebel against it.
How do you serve two masters? How do you move forward when you are straddling the fence, one foot in one pasture, another in another?
I respect the desire and intent, but can’t see any future but paralysis and death.I hope I’m wrong.
I think this is the way forward. I hope the next generation of Common Cause leaders will enter into relationships like this.
At first glance, I can’t help but think, “A house divided…” But, on the other hand, if the cathedral can somehow manage both oil and water gracefully, it would go a long way toward demonstrating the ability of a new province to function alongside the old one. Still, I’d purely hate to be the dean.
So what happens when the new Dean decides to conduct same sex blessings in the Catherdral?
Please read the document. Our present provost and clergy are communion conservatives and any future appointments will have to be approved by the bishops of [b]both[/b] the realigned and the residual Dioceses of Pittsburgh. As long as this plan is operative, what you suggest cannot happen.
What if Peter Akinola is in town…will be able to preach there?
That sort of detail must await a clearer sense of whether the powers that be will go along with this arrangement. At that point we will be in a better position to assess which non-diocesan visitors we can entertain. Our first concern must be the diocesan family.
Gee whiz, if only someone had come up with this sort of arrangement in fourth-century Alexandria, when the adherents of Athanasius and George of Cappadocia could have shared the cathedral; or Donatus and Cecilian that of Carthage. After all, who could really understand the difference between “homoousios,” “homoiousios” and “homoios kat’ousian” — and even so, can one really argue that the differences between them were more “church dividing” and “communion severing” than “SS” or “not SS” (that is the question …)? No doubt, the first bishop of the “stand pat” Pittsburgh diocese will be as “orthodox” as +Lamb — but even so, he will be in full and witting communion with +VGR and +KJS, and no doubt his successor will be in board with “the agenda.”
Tighe, I hope faithful Christians aren’t quizzed by God on ancient greek when we’ve got to face him.
Practically, it may be enough to show each other some charity, even if we don’t want to.
Re#10 – if Akinola is invited by the Bishop he should preach there. Just as he did in New York nearly a decade ago.
As far as #5 goes, fortunately those involved know each other enough to trust that God has given them the power to love in spite of their intellectual flaws.
How is this idea going to grow the congregation?
This is the Compromise of 1854 all over again. With the same result, I would guess.
Don
[i]if Akinola is invited by the Bishop [/i]
Which bishop?
And does anyone think the TEC bishop will tolerate a homophobic bigot like the primate of Nigeria in the cathedral?
The reference to Archbishop Akinola was strictly ironic, btw. I should have made that clear, since I have great respect for him. The point is that TEC bishops do not play well with others.
#12 and #14,
The only alternative would be that the Cathedral would cease to be an active congregation. That may still happen. If we were not the diocesan cathedral, I would imagine that we would have been reduced to mission status several years ago. The realigned diocese will not have the resources to invest in a Downtown location and the residual diocese will have other priorities.
If we succeed, our ministries to the arts community and the homeless population will continue, and we may eventually be able to reach out to the inhabitants of the new condominiums that are presently being built. Here at Trinity, we have all been radically transformed by our mutual dependence on God’s providence and each other. Casting that aside we deem premature; we leave it to others to take the steps that will make our venture impossible.
Jeremy: I wish you and the cathedral well. Maybe it could be used as an example for other parishes in the diocese and other so-called realignning dioceses. Afterall I am sure that the realignment will shatter some of the small rural churches that are split on the issue. For some reason I have not found any of the realignment group that has spoken about what their wish to form “pure dioceses” will do to the small parishes. I guess they will just move on and let the collateral damage happen!
But why go to all this trouble? Why try to keep cats and mice in the same cage simply because it’s a nice cage? The damage has been done. Unity is clearly a wishfulfillment, nothing more. But why should anyone WANT to stay in good odor with TEC? What is to be gained? We all have seen evidence of what is to be lost. Larry
Larry, the lamb will lie down with the lion. If you want there to be war, then there will be. The people at the cathedral want something different than you do.
Phrases like “the damage has been done” are pat phrases that exist in the internet. When individuals decide to live with each other’s different perspectives, they can. They have neither a false unity demanding everyone think the same, nor are they separate.
When you use the phrase “odor” you demonstrate that this is more about “smelling good” and purity than the Gospel. What will be gained? We don’t know – perhaps more love, and a witness to the world that the Gospel is true.
As far as evidence of what has been lost, um. No, we haven’t.
I’ve just seen angry, bickering people claiming some are Christians and some aren’t. This proposal demonstrates a belief that charity is worthy.
Larry,
I’m not sure the Presiding Bishop will be very happy with how we’re trying to square the circle. That’s the first test of whether this is indeed workable.
Words Matter (#5),
[blockquote]
How do you serve two masters? How do you move forward when you are straddling the fence, one foot in one pasture, another in another?
I respect the desire and intent, but can’t see any future but paralysis and death.I hope I’m wrong.
[/blockquote]
Of course, there is only one Master.
This approach by Trinity Cathedral with its look toward eventual reunification has a loose historical parallel in the way TEC split and then eventually came back together around the time of the Civil War (1861-1865).
Near the end Jesus prayed to the Father (John 17:18-23):
[blockquote]
As thou hast sent me into the world, even so have I also sent them into the world. And for their sakes I sanctify myself, that they also might be sanctified through the truth. Neither pray I for these alone, but for them also which shall believe on me through their word; That they all may be one; as thou, Father, art in me, and I in thee, that they also may be one in us: that the world may believe that thou hast sent me. And the glory which thou gavest me I have given them; that they may be one, even as we are one: I in them, and thou in me, that they may be made perfect in one; and that the world may know that thou hast sent me, and hast loved them, as thou hast loved me.
[/blockquote]
The master holds Christian unity to be important. Every splintering diminishes His witness.
The “them” in His prayer includes ALL the baptized.
No Biblical Christian can take this lightly.
I pray that Pittsburgh, Fort Worth, and Quincy will honor Jesus’ prayer by declining to walk separately.
#20. You are right in this. I DO want war and with good reason. We have taken a snake into our bosom abd now the venom is in the system. I want the snake dead. TEC will NOT change its nature. Remember the story of the girl who picked up the frozen snake? So it is. If you won’t fight, you deserve what you get. And #21 has put the matter correctly although he may not have so intended: You CANNOT square the circle. It is not Christian charity that causes one to see that when you lie down with dogs, you rise with fleas, it the understanding that fleas are best killed before they do any more harm. TEC is a flea and it carries the plague. What has made the communion so sick if it is not something it has caught from TEC, from thinking that loving one’s neighbor means allowing yourself to be screwed by him? The evidence is everywhere,e.g., American bishops saying they intend to pay no attention to moratoria. You won’t see it because you do not want to, but the rest of us see it like a toadstool in pure aspic. Larry
Larry,
The situation angers and depresses me too, but if your diagnosis is correct then strict separation with the minimum of disputation is surely the answer not war. Such an approach includes abandonment of property unless an informal arrangement can be worked out. I’m up for that but very few federal conservatives seem to want it. Rather they want their “day in court” and vindication in the court of public opinion. I’m sorry but I don’t find that very persuasive as a strategy (indeed I got into a heated dispute with Robroy on the subject on another thread). Fighting will not change minds that are already fixed; all it will do will injure some on the periphery whose faith is grounded in those whom they trust (wisely or unwisely).
GAFCON chose to avoid the option of formal separation – at least for the moment – though I gather from Henry Scriven that John Rodgers argued strongly for pursuing that course. If GAFCON is prepared to continue its shadow confessional existence for a while, why can’t the rest of us find working arrangements for the short term?
#23 – Larry, I think you feel like a lot of reasserters.
Let me slow down a bit.
You say “I want the snake dead. TEC will NOT change its nature.”
I’m not sure I understand what TEC’s nature is. It’s a pat phrase. But more closely, TEC does change. Isn’t that the problem?
“Remember the story of the girl who picked up the frozen snake? So it is. If you won’t fight, you deserve what you get.”
I wonder where the scriptural warrant is for that.
You say, “You CANNOT square the circle” although Jesus did say we could move mountains, if we had faith of a mustard seed.
“It is not Christian charity that causes one to see that when you lie down with dogs, you rise with fleas, it the understanding that fleas are best killed before they do any more harm.” Scripture has little mention of fleas.
“TEC is a flea and it carries the plague.” It’s a nice metaphor, but it only conveys your anger, and I see none of the gospel. Could you quote Jesus for me?
“What has made the communion so sick if it is not something it has caught from TEC, from thinking that loving one’s neighbor means allowing yourself to be screwed by him?” You misunderstand TEC’s position. If anything, TEC argues you don’t need to be gay if you don’t want to. Its about mutual consent. Reasserters seem to imply reappraisers want everyone to be gay.
25. John Wilkins:
Do you WANT to understand? I don’t assume that you do because it is all clear to me. And I have no preference with TEC – I’m an outsider. If you want to understand – I would like to help, but if you don’t want to understand then I have no suggestion for you.
Don
Hi Don, I’m not sure what you are trying to ask. Do you have some information I’m not privy to? It sounds dramatic. Are you a therapist?
I do want to understand your perspective. But… usually I hear a lot of emotion and not a lot of analysis.
I, myself, have a critique of TEC. It became fairly democratic and moved toward a therapeutic model of ministry. It was reactive, instead of proactive, during the 60’s, making it difficult to find ways to respond to serious changes in the culture. It did not fund ministry in education; it did not articulate a comprehensive view of leadership. When reports came out about the state of the church, it did not respond. I don’t think this has much to do with theology: there are plenty of good and bad leaders in all sides.
However, I do think God gives us the power to overcome each other’s flaws, if we really believe that Jesus Christ died for our sins, which is why I don’t have any problem extending my hand to you, or taking communion in your church. And I think it is OK for you to be angry at TEC. But I don’t confuse your anger with God’s anger.
27. John Wilkins:
Well, that sounds promising.
In an above comment to another poster you say that “I’m not sure I understand what TEC’s nature is. It’s a pat phrase. But more closely, TEC does change. Isn’t that the problem? ”
We apparently agree that TEC has changed. Do we agree that it has changed in the foundations of the faith? How would our christian grandfathers view TEC?
In your post to me above, you state, “However, I do think God gives us the power to overcome each other’s flaws, if we really believe that Jesus Christ died for our sins”.
I very much agree. How does one know what those “sins” are/were?
And, as an aside, I am not angry at TEC; sad, amazed, disappointed, perplexed, and more, but not angry.
Don
Hi Don,
I think we could get somewhere with this dialogue. I do think contours of the “faith” have changed, but these “contours” have little to do with TEC and everything to do with our culture. I also think that what have seemed like foundations to you, don’t seem like foundations to me; and that some of the problem arises from the difference.
I would find it hard to recognize a Christianity that did not have some sense that Jesus was divine in a way that was different than the pagan sense. I would find it odd to have a Christianity that rejected the resurrection. I would find a rejection of God’s grace to be antithetical to Christianity.
What I think has changed is that the gradual realization that people who are truly built differently in their desires are not “disordered” and that the tradition of grace challenges this previous definition. I think people see that an abstract sexual practice is foundational to Christianity. I think this has been shaken.
I do think that our grandfathers would find much odd about the church but to be honest, they would find lots in our culture odd: moving pictures; the Wii; the internet; rock music. My great grandfather would have probably shot at stop lights and found women in short skirts immodest (or perhaps liked them a little too much).
He also didn’t like priests in the first place. I think that the culture has changed so much that we barely recognize ourselves: and that there are deeper issues the church must confront than the symbol of homosexuality.
As far as sins go: I think we only know once we understand the forgiveness of the risen lord. We’re usually unaware before we know Him. That said, I don’t know what your sins are, and can’t tell you. You know, yourself, and you probably keep them in secret. As most of us do. Perhaps recognizing that God still loves you allows you to manage your sins and find new ways to be a human being without them. But I don’t know what other people’s sins are, and don’t make a habit of telling them. I take Jesus seriously when he says Judge not, and look at the log in my own eye.
Don, I only know you through the internet. For this reason, its easy for me to pigeonhole you, and make you into an abstract object of my own anger and sin. I have a list of names I’m tempted to call you (and most reasserters). Yet, do I know you? No. You are a human being with feelings, hopes, and fears.
Yet, in the internet, lots of us get irrationally angry toward each other, electronic caricatures of what is real. It is important for me to recognize how easy it is for me to sin in this environment: to reduce you, in my mind, to an angry, homophobic prude who has little understanding of human desire, joy and self-control. My judgment, in this fashion, just reflects my own distance from who Jesus was and is. In the end, it is only the face to face work in the Eucharist that represents what Jesus has in store for us.
#25. I asked if you remember the story of the girl who picks up the frozen sanke. Do you indeed remember it? Scriptural reference? Well, John, how about this: Faced with Satan and his temptations, Jesus did NOT say, “We, let’s dialogue this. For the sake of compromise, let’s give squaring the circle a bit of a go. You and I ought to be able to get along with each other in t he same church as long as we agree not to trespass on each other’s beliefs, for our “church” is an inclusive one, and diversity is our strength.” My recollection is that he told the Dark Side of the Force to get behind him; in short, he told him to go to hell, and he did this precisely because he knew Satan’s nature could not change. And this is the moral of the tale of the girl and the snake.
There is NO sign, none whatsoever, that TEC is about to change its spots. Chane has made it quite clear and so has Schori. Now, Jeremy Bonner wants a “no-fault” divorce, if divorce is unavoidable.
No fighting, just amicable separation. But TEC does not WANT and amicable divorce; its court actions say t hat it is going for the jugular. How does one get an amicable divorce if one party wants blood? The only answer is: You prepare to fight back. We didn’t start this fight, but by God – and I say that in all honesty – we will finish it. John and Jeremy: This isn’t about religion; it’s politics and power and money. Religion is the only scabbard. ‘Ware the knife. LM
Fighting words Larry, but when we “win” (assuming we do) what do we gain? No one outside the Anglican discourse will change their perspective. Those who’ve supported us prior to this will still do so; those who haven’t will still regard us as inimical.
If we walk away, we are doing the counter-cultural, unAmerican thing and people will note and remark. Christ’s admonition to Peter in Gethsemane when he strove to [i]finish the fight that he had not started[/i] suggest that his promise to bring not peace but a sword has limits for us (though not for Him).
29. John Wilkins:
Well, john, now I know some of your mind but you have told me nothing of the mind of God. It is that one thing that matters above all else. It is He that defines sin. Sin is not our being offended. Two people co-operating in the proccess of fornication are in no way offended by each other yet Scripture tells us plainly that God is very much offended.
John, until you can see sin from God’s point of view, you won’t understand the stress caused to the broader Church by TEC.
I’m praying for you.
Don
Don, I think scripture reminds us to be humble before supposing our mind is God’s mind. Perhaps you are like God in your knowledge. In that case, God bless you. You are a better, more holy, and more righteous person than I am. I am a sinner, while you are a bit more perfect in your knowledge, clearly. I hope that you worship a God who still loves sinners like me. Perhaps you want God to send me to hell.
I admit, I don’t see things from God’s point of view. I can’t. You, because you re blessed, and perhaps more holy than I am, can. You are the holy one, and I am the sinner. Still, I know Jesus Christ.
I think the “stress” isn’t caused by TEC. We are the scapegoat for issues the broader church can’t deal with within their walls because they are too frightened.
I also think that scripture indicates it takes a long time before God is offended. We are offended and easily kill each other: and that is the cross – people were offended by Jesus Christ. It is because we are offended we leave God easily. Being offended indicates our own personal weakness, not God’s.
33. John Wilkins:
John, I ask again, how do you (me, or anyone else) know that an act or attitude is a sin?
Don
John W.,
Hint, hint, the correct answer to #34 is “It’s in the Bible.”
As a member of the clergy at Trinity Cathedral, Pittsburgh, I can say that discerning the way is complicated. We are not serving two masters; we are trying to serve the one Master and not lose too many of the sheep he’s put in our care.
Yes, our unity is in Christ. Yet, there are always those who invoke his name to whom he will say, “I don’t know you”–people whom Jesus, in one of his less diplomatic moments, called “goats.” Yes, God doesn’t give up. Love never gives up. Yet, Jesus warns those of us who work for him that situations arise in which we should let our peace return to us, shake the dust off our feet, and move on. Navigating between these rumble strips on the road is what hopefully will keep us all in the world but not of the world.
Because of the brokenness of the People of God, the time may well come when Elijah’s question will call or cleave our Cathedral: “How long will you stumble between two opinions?” But look at Don and John above. They are, with difficulty, starting to engage a gulf of differences with biblical arguments and holding each other accountable for the quality of their appeals to Scripture. This is something which the vast company of bishops have, with ++Rowan’s modeling at Lambeth, studiously failed to do. It’s not for lack of some trying, but I see failure on both sides.
So, at the moment, in this dark night, you can understand how some of us feel reduced to this–to just watch and pray. Maybe we should gird on our swords now. But first we’re daring the Zealots, Essenes, Pharisees, and (most frustrating of all!) the Sadducees of the current struggle to prove to our people how naive and unrealistic are their hopes to continue in our present and hard-won growth in maturity and unity and mission-mindedness under the Gospel. Is that asking too much?
Hi Don – can’t you answer your own question? Why are you asking me? Scripture describes sin with a variety of different metaphors. The tradition (in Christian meta-ethics) indicates it is a state of slavery: an inability to have control or freedom. That’s a good place to start. Otherwise, you have the power to understand that yourself. I hope.
Larry – remember bless, love your enemies? Jesus said so.
37. John Wilkins:
Tradition of the Church can not reveal the mind of God but for the fact that God had first revealed His mind to the Church and the tradition follows that revelation. Your answer is not bad but didn’t Eve wish to be “free” to know good and evil way back in the garden? I would contend that your answer is inadequate because most people are servants of sin but consider themselves free. Jesus dealt with that very issue:
Jhn 8:32 And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.
Jhn 8:33 They answered him, We be Abraham’s seed, and were never in bondage to any man: how sayest thou, Ye shall be made free?
Jhn 8:34 Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever committeth sin is the servant of sin.
So your logic is reversed. It is not bondage that makes sin – it is sin that makes bondage. My being crucified with Christ gives me life; being a servant of Jesus Christ makes me free. But I can no more understand what sin is than Eve in the Garden could. God must tell me what sin is – and He has done so. God has revealed His mind in Holy Scripture.
Don