(Received via email–KSH)
A STATEMENT TO THE PARISH
Concerning Actions Relating to The Episcopal Church
At its retreat last February, the Vestry discussed the numerous actions taken by The Episcopal Church (TEC) and many of its leaders that are contrary to traditional Christian faith, and which have marginalized TEC with many of its sister churches in the Anglican Communion. Building on a letter to the congregation from the Vestry dated July 26, 2006, a process of discernment was begun to explore how Christ Church can today best differentiate itself with its core values and beliefs from the theological innovations being pursued by TEC. Five options were identified that ranged from accepting the authority of TEC and submitting to its teachings and leadership, to making a full break with TEC and becoming an independent church with no denominational affiliation. The option which was chosen to pursue at this time, and which the Vestry has acted upon, is:
to disassociate from TEC’s false teachings without disconnecting from the Anglican Communion and the Diocese of West Texas.
During this time we have kept Bishop Lillibridge fully informed of our process. Vestry teams have met with him on three occasions, and we have had numerous email correspondence with him as well. With his knowledge and considering his counsel, at its meeting on October 21, 2008, the Vestry passed the following resolutions concerning Christ Church’s relationship to The Episcopal Church and the Diocese of West Texas:
1. AFFIRMED: that Christ Episcopal Church is apostolically connected to the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church of Jesus Christ directly through the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury and our diocesan bishop, the Rt. Rev. Gary Lillibridge. This apostolic connection is not through the provincial structure of The Episcopal Church or its Presiding Bishop;
2. RESOLVED: to continue to participate fully in the life of the Diocese of West Texas and to pay its full diocesan apportionment;
3. RESOLVED: that Christ Episcopal Church disassociates itself
”¢ from those actions of The Episcopal Church’s General Convention that impair The Episcopal Church’s relationships with other provinces of the Anglican Communion;
Ӣ from those statements and actions made by the Presiding Bishop and other leaders within The Episcopal Church that support positions that have not been tested or accepted by the Anglican Communion or the wider Christian community;
Ӣ from the failure of the Presiding Bishop and other bishops and leaders to live within the guidelines of the Windsor Report.
For his part, Bishop Lillibridge assured us that he is, and will continue:
”¢ to be a “Windsor” bishop, affirming the Windsor Report;
Ӣ to support a diocesan policy that allows congregations and individuals to redirect their portion of TEC funds to other ministries outside the diocese;
”¢ to support CEC’s relationships with the wider communion, such as with Uganda and Nigeria.
We believe that this statement and these actions allow our parish to affirm the historic Christian faith that we proclaim, yet reject the erroneous teachings that are accepted by many in TEC.
Unanimously Approved October 21, 2008
Good work, Revd Collins and CEC. At issue is declaring dioceses united against lawlessness and canonical overreach; asserting the polity of TEC as historically of such a nature that the PB, General Convention, and ‘national church’ are not in a position of hierarchy; but dioceses in free association, whose constitutions and canons declare the allegiance to the Anglican Communion, and communion with the See of Canterbury. It is the effort to create a PB/national church hierarchy that must be opposed as unture to the nature of the polity of this church. The covenant, then, can become the means by which a genuine wider Communion order can be maintained. This is all worth fighting for. Thanks for the hard work represented by this decision.
Translation: We respectfully disagree and want our disagreement on the record. But we do not consider this to be heresy (which would of course require severing communion).
Under the mercy,
[url=http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/]John[/url]
An [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj4pUphDitA]Orthodox [/url] Christian
Pretty sensible action, in my view.
But what about the money? Are they redirecting their money form the Diocese and 815? Otherwise its much ado about nothing. 2 has the rights of this.
Respectfully disagree with #2 and #4. The statement rightly infers that the heresies of 815 are not in the apostolic (faith) link. Dioceses and Diocesan Bishops are not compelled to embrace the innovations unless they so choose. CEC is “safe” as long as Bishop Lillibridge remains “safe.” The statement indicates parishes and/or individuals can redirect the TEC asking to other ministries.
Re # 5
Red Bird,
Within the catholic tradition there is an old adage about heresy. You are who you are in communion with. You don’t maintain communion with heretics. By remaining in communion with TEC one states that while there may be disagreement, nothing TEC has done is beyond the pale.
Under the mercy,
[url=http://ad-orientem.blogspot.com/]John[/url]
An [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Gj4pUphDitA]Orthodox [/url] Christian
Dr. Seitz (#1),
I’ve forgotten, but is big Christ Church, San Antonio one of the parishes in your Communion Partners group? It’s certainly a bellwether, flagship parish, and Fr. Collins is greatly respected by many, many people as an outstanding leader and a marvelous pastor.
I’m glad the Diocese of West Texas permits parishes to designate that none of their contributions to the diocesan budget go to TEC, but instead go to much worthier causes. I haven’t checked to see what the parish budget is, but I’m sure it’s quite large, and so the amount of money involved would be substantial. I trust that the diocese doesn’t just shuffle funds around and still end up paying the same assessment to 815 in the end. If I were a parishioner there in San Antonio, I’d want to be sure that not one penny of the congregation’s giving to the diocese was forwarded on to the national headquarters.
They are fortunate to have the noble +Gary Lillibridge for their bishop. I respect him. But I put no trust whatsoever in the Windsor Continuation Group, of which he is an important part.
David Handy+
There may be more hope of impact in individual parishes issuing these resolutions than one might think. It is a no confidence vote which undercuts TEC’s mind-grip. Liberty is always local. It is also hard to dismiss with the typical media moves of TEC. The last thing i the world TEC really wants is anything like a popular vote.
5, with respect, but so what? We have been through this all before. How is this going to make any differance beyond throwing a pebble in the ocean? And Dr. Seitz I am still waiting for the ACI to do something decisive, semi-decisive, or anything? Ah yes, the covenant. Well, maybe in 400 years or so.
This is simply a fantasy. “We object” . . . but we’ll send you our money along with our full support. I’m glad these folks weren’t in charge of England when the Nazis invaded Poland. And I guarantee their “mission partners” in the Global South will have something to say. Once the new province is launched . . . there’s no more fence to sit on.