The Chicago Consultation Responds to the Alexandria Primates Communique

The Chicago Consultation issued this statement from its co-convener, Ruth Meyers, in response to the communiqué of the Anglican primates on the final day of their meeting in Egypt:

“Christ calls us to practice both compassion and justice. We reject the false choice suggested by the Primates communiqué that God asks Episcopalians to deny either faithful mission with the worldwide Anglican Communion or full inclusion of our gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered sisters and brothers,” said Meyers, who is professor of liturgics at Seabury-Western Theological Seminary in Evanston, Illinois.

“We look toward General Convention 2009, where we will work with a broad coalition of allies to achieve full inclusion of all the baptized in The Episcopal Church and to be a voice of witness with gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people across the Anglican Communion,” continued Meyers.

“The Chicago Consultation believes that the Anglican Communion is, at its best, a manifestation of the body of Christ in which the Holy Spirit blesses members from different cultures and contexts with various gifts. As Christians, we are called to live in communion with one another, but also to embrace all of the Spirit’s gifts””graciously and fearlessly.”

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Anglican Primates, Episcopal Church (TEC), General Convention, Primates Meeting Alexandria Egypt, February 2009, Same-sex blessings, Sexuality Debate (in Anglican Communion), TEC Conflicts

31 comments on “The Chicago Consultation Responds to the Alexandria Primates Communique

  1. The_Archer_of_the_Forest says:

    2009 is shaping up to be a watershed event.

  2. mannainthewilderness says:

    Guess the liberals will never get that it is “compassion and justice” which compels the orthodox to fight to prevent the Episcopal church from allowing God to turn the GBLT’s over to their passions and depravities and reject His kingdom.

  3. Anastasios says:

    I don’t quite get it: “the full inclusion of all the baptised…” But aren’t these many of the same folks who are saying Baptism isn’t really necessary anymore? “Is a puzzlement.”

  4. Philip Snyder says:

    “Full Inclusion”
    We include persons. We exclude no one. However, we discern that certain behaviors put a rift between a person and God – even if that person does not recognize the rift. It is possible to sin and not know you are sinning.

    The question is not “full inclusion” nor it is “rights.” The question is “Righteousness.” How does living in right relationship with God affect our moral behaviors? What behaviors are allowable and what does God bless?

    YBIC,
    Phil Snyder

  5. Calvin says:

    Am I the only one who finds it noteworthy and appropriate that the named spokesperson for this group is a professor at Seabury-Western — a seminary that is, last I checked, closing if not closed? Witness with clarity the destination of TEC and the destination of all theological systems that extract from the Gospel the notion of new and transformed life.

    As Christ calls all of humanity to new life — life that looks radically different from the patterns of life found in this fallen world and radically different from our fallen nature — I really do wish to include all peoples. Wherever you are, come and be loved; leave behind your old life and be transformed in His Resurrection!

  6. Brian from T19 says:

    Has the number of groups who have responded reached 10,000 yet? It seems that ACNA has no central info-so they have each CCP member respond?

  7. palagious says:

    “We look toward General Convention 2009, where we will work with a broad coalition of allies to achieve full inclusion of all the baptized in The Episcopal Church and to be a voice of witness with gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered people across the Anglican Communion,” continued Meyers.

    [i] Slightly edited by elf. [/i]

  8. Albany+ says:

    [i]“Christ calls us to practice both compassion and justice. We reject the false choice suggested by the Primates communiqué that God asks Episcopalians to deny either faithful mission with the worldwide Anglican Communion or full inclusion of our gay, lesbian, bisexual and transgendered sisters and brothers,” said Meyers…[/i]

    I know Meyer is repeating the party line, but exactly how many times did Jesus even use the word “justice”?

    In my count in the Gospel, it is exactly once — just once in a manner even remotely like the way it is employed by Meyer’s above. When will someone simply say this use of “justice” above is not a central theme of Jesus’ ministry?

  9. Albany+ says:

    It’s Meyers — sorry. Bad proof-reading.

  10. Anastasios says:

    [i] Off topic comment deleted by elf. [/i]

  11. The_Archer_of_the_Forest says:

    Calvin,
    As a member of one of the last M.Div. classes to graduate from Seabury, the irony did not escape me nor was I surprised she was involved.

    I was surprised by the existence of a “Chicago Consultation.” I don’t believe I have ever heard of the group, and I don’t know exactly what they do or are. I can make an educated guess as to the usual suspects involved. I did find the name ironic, as many seminary professors I know, not just at Seabury and regardless of ideology, get very cranky when they are not consulted.

    Does anyone have any more information of the Chicago Consultation?

  12. Jon says:

    #10… great question, Anastasios. I noticed the same thing.

    Are there any reappraisers on this thread who can answer A’s question? Brian from T19, do you have any thoughts?

  13. Jon says:

    Nice to see you on the thread, Susan. Perhaps you can answer A’s question (#10).

    Can you explain how the emphasis on the blessing of bisexual relationships is logically squared with monogamy?

    Also your thoughts on A’s second point about the transgendered?

  14. Brian from T19 says:

    Jon and Anastasios,

    I can’t give you the date that G&L;issues became LGBT or even LGBTI or LGBTQ. However, Anastasios’ presumptions are patently incorrect.

    The first [Gay and Lesbian] presumes multiple partners…

    It actually presumes no such thing. Same-sex relationships have the same chance of monogamy or even serial monogamy as any modern heterosexual couple.

    …the second [Bisexual and Transgendered] presumes God make a terrible mistake that needs to be rectified…

    First, bisexuals would not view their sexuality as a mistake.

    Second, Transgendered individuals would not consider their gender identity a mistake, and certainly not one that God made.

    Here is the link: In all LGBT individuals, the issue is identity. It is not behavior, feelings, mistakes, etc. It all comes down to identity.

  15. libraryjim says:

    [i] Comment directed at another commenter deleted as off topic. [/i]

  16. libraryjim says:

    By the way, for a Christian, the identity is not what we are but what/who we become in Christ. Our identity is ‘seeking to have in us the mind of Christ’. Something none of us have achieved yet.

    “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.”
    –Galatians 2:20

    That’s our identity. Nor our gender, not our sexuality, not even our nationality.

    “There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither slave nor free man, there is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Christ Jesus.”
    –Galatinas 3:28

    In His Peace
    Jim Elliott <>< Florida

  17. mannainthewilderness says:

    [i] Sarcastic comment deleted by elf. [/i]

  18. Jon says:

    Hi Brian from T19. Would you mind reading A’s comment at #10 again — but with the notes that LibraryJim supplied to you? LJ may be able to help you grasp what A was saying.

  19. Brian from T19 says:

    [i] Off topic comment deleted by elf. [/i]

  20. libraryjim says:

    Yet, strangely, that is what the propaganda from the LGBT groups are saying. Are you contending that they are — gasp! — lying to us?

  21. Brian from T19 says:

    No. I am contending that you do not understand what they are saying because you choose not to hear it. You only want to frame their identity in terms that you can understand. That works for you, but unfortunately not for them and not for God.

  22. libraryjim says:

    By the way, I do believe in Original Sin and do believe I am broken, God didn’t make me broken, but sadly, the human condition is broken, which I and every other human has inherited. IF you think that God has made us broken because of Original Sin, then you have a poor grasp of the theology of which Chesterton stated ” is the only part of Christian theology which can really be proved,” (Orthodoxy, chap. 2)..

    God has, however, provided a fix, a patch, a 2.0 version, if you will. It’s called “relationship atonement” and the Maker’s son Himself provides it for us, and the Holy Spirit installs it better than any IT technician.

    We don’t need a sex change operation, just a relationship with Jesus to fix us to how He intended us to be — One with Him.

    If I may repeat myself:

    “I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live, but Christ lives in me; and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave Himself up for me.”
    –Galatians 2:20

    In His redeeming love
    Jim Elliott <><

  23. libraryjim says:

    What works for them — and us — is the only solution God provided. See my post 23.

  24. Brian from T19 says:

    As I said-you’re not interested in understanding, just preaching. Which is fine, but I’m not into that. Sorry.

  25. libraryjim says:

    [i] Comment deleted by elf. [/i]

  26. libraryjim says:

    One correction:
    [b]1984[/b] not 1884. Slip of the fingers.

  27. Cennydd says:

    Bisexal = Option A and Option B

  28. nwlayman says:

    “Full inclusion….” Meaning that unless you are in those specified categories you are “Fully excluded”. Very simple, so simple even…Well, most Traditional Anglicans *can’t* understand it, but given just a little more time it will become much, much clearer to them. It gets harder to sympathize with the normal people who stay the longer time goes by. But people keep rebuilding houses where a hurricaine is certain to destroy their home next season.

  29. libraryjim says:

    My apologies to the elves. It must have been the fever typing.

  30. Gator says:

    Jon–I believe the line for bisexuals is that they have to choose one or the other to commit to a monogamous relationship that would seek the church’s blessing. I’m not defending this, just answering your question the best I remember an authoritative answer I got once.

    I can’t help you on transgender; the possibilities there turn my brain inside out.