One statement produced four different headlines: \u201cEpiscopal Bishops stand their ground\u201d\u009d (The Times- Picayune, New Orleans), \u201cEpiscopal Bishops reject Anglican Church\u2019s orders\u201d\u009d (New York Times), \u201cEpiscopal Bishops make concessions for the sake of unity\u201d\u009d (USA Today), and \u201cEpiscopal leaders pledge \u201d\u02dcrestraint\u2019 on gay support\u201d\u009d (Des Moines Register). As one who was there and engaged in the discussion and response, I would write \u201cEpiscopal Bishops seek to offer clarity and transparency to the Anglican Communion\u201d\u009d.<\/p>\n
In our statement in response to the Primates\u2019 Communiqu\u00c3\u00a9 the House of Bishops reinforced first that we would not consent to any one elected as bishop whose manner of life was a challenge to the Communion, and we clarified that this resolution (General Convention resolution B003) pertained to non-celibate gay and lesbian persons. We underscored how this response from General Convention had been accepted by the ACC\u2019s own Working Sub Group set up to evaluate our responses to the Windsor Report. Second, we upheld that we have never and will not in the current time authorize any official rites for same sex blessings. We added that a majority of bishops do not allow their clergy to offer the local pastoral option for same sex couples of an unofficial or private rite, even though the Primates own statement from 2003 indicates that such offerings are pastorally sensitive. We were also clear that some bishops do permit their clergy to make local pastoral provisions for such couples. All in all it struck me that this statement alone was an indication of a serious roll back from 2003, as I am sure some bishops of that majority have ceased such permissions since that time. The distinction of practice between authorizing rites and local option allowance was something the ACC representatives wanted to know about. It was a clarity that allowed for greater unity across the floor of the House of Bishops.<\/p>\n
The third area concerned the refusal in March and then in June by the Executive Council for a pastoral council made up of representatives from beyond this Province to overview the concerns of the dioceses who could not accept the Presiding Bishop\u2019s authority. We upheld our position, but asked the Presiding Bishop to explore ways to create such a sounding board through which the Communion could engage us in regular conversation about things that come up that might be potentially problematic. The Presiding Bishop announced a team of Episcopal visitors \u201d\u201c all bishops on the conservative spectrum of the House \u201d\u201c including for example the Bishop of Dallas whom it was hoped would be acceptable to a bishop like his neighbor in Fort Worth. The ACC representatives assured us that a pastoral council would not infringe on our autonomous polity but be a source for preliminary conversation for things that might come up of a challenging nature which could then be marked as such. We hoped that such a council might include radar that swings 360 degrees and is not only pointed at The Episcopal Church. The council would be made up of all the ministry orders: lay, non episcopal clergy and bishops.<\/p>\n
In these responses, I believe that we did what we were asked, and then went further to speak about jurisdictional boundary crossings, the ongoing listening process for gay and lesbian believers, our ongoing support as a Communion to the rights of gay and lesbians around the world, and a request to explore Gene Robinson\u2019s potential invitation to the Lambeth Conference. The complete statement was accepted by the House of Bishops with only one nay vote, and that from a bishop who was standing by his GC vote against B033. Bishops who had been unable to sign on to our statement from the March House of Bishops, and Bishops who had rose to distance themselves from B033 at its passing at General Convention 2006, and Bishops who had risen to protest the inability simply to pass the Windsor report at that same Convention all declared themselves of one mind in our response to the Primates. One mind did not mean of the same opinion on the matters at hand, but that we had stated our positions as clearly and openly as we could. Only those who had already decided on the outcome and seemed to be there only to be heard by the Archbishop of Canterbury \u201d\u201c Pittsburgh, West Kansas and Quincy \u201d\u201c leaving when he did, as well as those who did not attend at all\u201d\u201c Fort Worth, San Joaquin and Springfield \u201d\u201c exempted themselves from the response process altogether.<\/p>\n
The Bishop of Rio Grande, however, was in a class by himself, as with great emotion and humility he announced his resignation from The Episcopal Church and his desire to enter the Roman Catholic Church. His profound, personal theological statement and his warmth of feeling for his fellow Bishops as he explained his reasons, was a highlight. In one sense it was the Church at its best in a most sorrowful time, and the standing ovation and embraces he received afterwards will never be forgotten. It was a marked contrast to the arrogance that has been a part of our dispute.<\/p>\n
As with most historical and critical times, there was drama. An early draft of where we might be, provided by a selected Writing Committee, was rejected from both sides as non representative, unclear and unhelpful. That draft unfortunately was released as \u201cour statement\u201d\u009d by an unknown source as we worked on the process in open session. Even the New York Times \u201cbit\u201d\u009d early and Bishops had to send out disclaimers through their diocesan communications officers, warning against premature reactivity among their people.
\nWhether our own statement will be sufficient for the Archbishop and for those who assess it officially is to be seen. Certainly we were left in no doubt about the seriousness of the requests upon us. The Archbishop ended his statements by stating on the one hand that we were not under any deadline or facing an ultimatum, but went on to say, on the other, that \u201cwhat happens in these next few days will enable growth to go forward or not.\u201d\u009d<\/p>\n
For me, three things were very clear. There was not a soul in the place that did not with great affection and passion appreciate their fellowship in the Anglican Communion, and we have to a large extent sought to make space for the broader conversation if members of the Communion really want it. The Archbishop and the members of the Joint Standing Committees of the ACC and the Primates indicated by their presence how much they seek that conversation. We are not however as a Church going to embrace a perspective on gay and lesbian believers which excludes them. That is a missional stance for many of us. And finally through our engagement with the city and people of New Orleans and of the Mississippi Coastal communities, and witnessing their efforts to come back from the devastation of Katrina and the breaking of the levees, we received an incredible charge to be restorers of paths to dwell in. In addition we were challenged by Dr Paul Farmer who works in his volunteer time to bring about the eradication of poverty and disease around the world to see that our constituency as bishops is equal to that of the public representatives of our cities and states and our voices and energy need to be displayed in the public arena. I was reminded that this is the conversation that was going on in the House of Bishops as I joined it, and one that caught my imagination then and still does today.<\/p>\n
Out of the breaking of our Communion\u2019s levees, I believe that the Holy Spirit is bringing us back around to God\u2019s great and continuous agenda. It is the agenda of God\u2019s mission which we can do in the unique relationships across the globe called the Anglican Communion, and it is an agenda I know we will continue with our partners already made around the globe. In fact it is also really an agenda we need to seek to carry out in an ever expanding communion of all of Christ\u2019s followers regardless of our diverse and particular ecclesiological personalities. For there is never a shortage of opportunity to be united in mission, if we have the will. In fact life is too short to have it any other way, and the need for God\u2019s love and care too great and too urgent.<\/p>\n
–(The Rt. Rev.) Alan Scarfe is Bishop of Iowa<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"
One statement produced four different headlines: \u201cEpiscopal Bishops stand their ground\u201d\u009d (The Times- Picayune, New Orleans), \u201cEpiscopal Bishops reject Anglican Church\u2019s orders\u201d\u009d (New York Times), \u201cEpiscopal Bishops make concessions for the sake of unity\u201d\u009d (USA Today), and \u201cEpiscopal leaders pledge…<\/span><\/p>\n