further news from ECUSA
on Friday, 4 August 2006 at 7.30 am by Simon Sarmiento
categorised as ECUSA
First, the Church of Nigeria has announced a date for the consecration of Martyn Minns, see CANA Bishop, 3 others to be consecrated August 20.
Second, the Living Church reports Bishop of Texas to Host Meeting of Windsor-Affirming Bishops. The meeting will be joined by two English bishops, of Winchester and Durham. Bishop Wimberly said the Archbishop of Canterbury
“has been aware of these plans from the beginning. Both bishops, having had thorough discussions with him, are coming with his blessing to discuss with us the nature of our future relation to the See of Canterbury and the Anglican Communion.”
“Windsor-Affirming” appears to be defined thus:
- Agreement that Lambeth 1.10 now constitutes the teaching of the Anglican Communion.
- Commitment to the Windsor Report as marking the way ahead for the Communion, and acceptance of its recommendations in respect to blessing same-sex unions and the ordination of persons engaged in sexual relations outside the bonds of Holy Matrimony.
- Acceptance of the Communiqué from Dromantine issued by the Meeting of the Primates in response to the Windsor Report.
- Agreement that the response of ECUSA’s General Convention to the Windsor Report does not go far enough, and the intent to find a way to be related to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates of the Communion in a way that is not impaired.
Third, in the Church Times Doug LeBlanc reports on the San Joaquin case: US bishops seek to oust FiF colleague.
Interesting that both English church newspapers ignore the Duncan ultimatum. Ah, well …..
This whole issue of “Windsor-affirming” vs. “Network” seems interesting. They’re not jumping toward a specific conclusion (alternative primatial oversight, for example) but are in consultation. I note their claim that Canterbury is in the loop; I wonder whether 815 (the American shorthand for the offices of the Episcopal Church on New York – 815 Second Avenue) – whether 815 is also in the loop. I also note the assertion “that Lambeth 1.10 now constitutes the teaching of the Anglican Communion.” One could argue with that, considering the non-legislative nature of Lambeth Resolutions. However, even accepting that it raises the awareness… Read more »
Bishop Wimberly is whistling in the dark…
From _The Living Church_ article “It is my hope that you will be able to accept this invitation and enter with fellow bishops into a consultation that can produce a way forward that both prevents some in our Church from ‘walking apart’, and others from seeking irregular means of preserving their Anglican identity,” Bishop Wimberly wrote. “I want to emphasize that this invitation is to a consultation rather than a conference.” Bishop Wimberly appears to be forming a “consultation” of Episcopal bishops that will take all the positions the Network takes — except the schismatic (“irregular,” APO-seeking) ones. Interesting. Others… Read more »
One must assess slips of the tongue or typewriter with care, but it is humorous to note the following on the site of the Church of Nigeria:
“The Revd Canon Martyn Minns will be consecrated at the National Christian Centre (formerly National Ecumenical Centre) Abuja in a service to be presided by the Primate of All Nigeria, the Most Peter Akinola.”
“the Most Peter Akinola” indeed.
The proposed gathering of “Windsor” bishops in Texas appears, in rejecting General Convention’s adoption of B033, to bypass the General Convention as the authoritative “voice” of the Episcopal Church in Communion matters; a principle laid out by Lambeth from the beginning: “The Provincial Synod — or, as it is called … in the United States the General Convention… not only provides a method for securing unity amongst the Dioceses which are thus associated, but also forms the link between these Dioceses and other Churches of the Anglican Communion…. It is the office of the Provincial Synod… to exercise… powers in… Read more »
[First, in passing: why in the world has the Church Times hired *Doug LeBlanc*, notorious conservative partisan, as a reporter? “some bishops are ready to rumble”??? Talking about lowering the tone of reputable publication! >:-/] I have no problem w/ Minns being consecrated a Nigerian bishop—in and FOR Nigeria. If he returns to the U.S. *as a bishop*, however, he gets booted from TEC, post haste! ***** Charlotte P, I find these developments—if they are as described—more *ominous* than you do, apparently. The notion of “Windsor-Affirming” looks like a backdoor way of expanding—and in practical reality, *obliterating*—the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral, in… Read more »
Well, JC, in respect of your first item, I disagree strongly. I have known Doug for a long time, and he is a first class journalist. I am delighted that the CT is using him.
I cannot help but notice that CANA is now explicitly serving as a possible nucleus for the much urged conversative mitosis in which all Anglicans are supposed to be realigned. No more pretense about CANA just being a passing African conservative effort to maintain continuity with Anglican conservative Nigerians, somehow bumbled into foreign exile among heretical, liberal, queer loving, woman following North Americans. We who have lived coming out of the closet may recognize the mirrors this holds up, including – alas – the funhouse mirrors. Oh dear. Yet we were told pretty much that all this was coming our… Read more »
Hi J.C. Good to hear from you. I don’t find Bishop Wimberly’s gathering as disturbing as you do — yet. At this point, +Wimberly’s group looks to me (as it did to Fr. Jake) to be an alternative to the Network, as a way for conservatives in the Episcopal Church to gather, exchange views, develop their theology, make arguments for their points of view, and so on. The difference between them and the Network lies in +Wimberly’s statement that his group will not resort to “irregular means of preserving their Anglican identity.” That must mean they will not seek to… Read more »
>>>persons engaged in sexual relations outside the bonds of Holy Matrimony
Does that apply to sexual relations between people in their second, third, fourth, etc. marriages?
I ask because the “reasserters” seem to have a curious blind spot when it comes to divorce and remarriage. They can shout about scripture and tradition and church teaching ’til the cows come home when homosexuals are at issue, but when it comes to heterosexuals disobeying Christ’s own words and two millenia of tradition by abandoning their marriage vows, they are strangely silent.
It looks a lot like rank hypocrisy from here.
As far as Lambeth Palace is concerned this consultative gathering in Texas must represent a vast improvement on the Duncan group with their threats and ultimatum. It offers a genuine alternative to the Network whose machinations developed with “foreign powers” are unacceptable. By such visible support for this initiative Canterbury can hope that those who share the views outlined but are not willing to support a coup d’etat can now find a viable alternative to the Network structure. Up to now the Network has offered the only real leadership for those who have become disillusioned with TEC. But has this… Read more »
Wrote Fr. Tobias Haller: “I am distressed that Canterbury appears to be participating in this event by proxy. Rather, he should, by Lambeth’s own standards, be dealing with the (at present) legitimate constituent of the Anglican Communion (per the Constitution of the Anglican Consultative Council) on our shores, the Episcopal Church — not with conventicles or special interest groups, however exalted their membership, or however much the special interests of these groups coincide with his own views, or the purported views of the ‘majority of the Anglican Communion.'” I strongly agree. For a long time I have found ++Rowan Cantuar’s… Read more »
In response to New on Here. If there are instances of willy nilly allowing divorce and remarriage then I would agree with you that it would be hypocrisy to ignore them. However most conservatives would actually say that those are important issues too. The issue is whether 1 Corinthians 7 v 15 read in conjunction with v 39 defines what it means for a divorced (in effect deserted) wife may remarry. Some would say not at all. Others would say in are circumstances. This is very different from saying tht divorce and re -marriage doesn’t matter.
Dave, you can’t have it both ways. If conservatives are denying gays a nuanced rfeading of Scripture in favor of a “plain sense” reading, then they can’t claim a nuanced reading for themselves.
Tobias Haller’s concerns noted above can be read at greater length here:
http://jintoku.blogspot.com/2006/08/canterburial-insertions-unhelpful.html
and there are also interesting comments there which I recommend to TA readers.
The Rebellion folks are reporting that Jack Iker of Fort Worth plans to attend Bp. Wimberly’s gathering of the like-minded at Camp Allen next month. My question for Bp. Wimberly would be: How can someone who has abandoned the communion of the church be welcomed at this gathering of Episcopal Church bishops? Since there is no formal entity known as the Anglican Communion, seeking alternative oversight to avoid a woman Presiding Bishop constitutes renunciation of ordination vows and the abandoning the communion. So again, Bp. Wimberly, why would you allow Jack Iker, or Bob Duncan, or even Jim Stanton to… Read more »
“Since there is no formal entity known as the Anglican Communion, seeking alternative oversight to avoid a woman Presiding Bishop constitutes renunciation of ordination vows and the abandoning the communion.”
Only someone from ECUSA could come up with this kind of twisted logic.
Let’s see: there is no Anglican Communion? Strangely there were a large number of ECUSA bishops in England in 1998 and I saw many of them at the Garden Party. Does that count as abandonment of the communion?
Alan, So sorry. Could you give me the name and address of Anglican Communion Church? Also, could you refer me to the articles of incorporation for Anglican Communion Church, its Constitution and Canons, and the information pertaining to its tax-exempt status. Also, I’d love to get a copy of Anglican Communion Church’s prayer book? Do you have one? I assume the gathering of bishops in 1998 you attended must have been that voluntary gathering of bishops of the Anglican Communion (not Anglican Communion Church) that takes place every ten years, and that has no binding authority on any of the… Read more »
Pete,
Hear Hear. Interesting that we’ve not seen anyone else spell it out quite that way. Thanks.
“We worship our Canons, all glorious above, O gratefully speak of their power and their love…” So, let’s hear it from you – there is no Anglican Communion, no Anglican Communion Office, no Primates’ meeting, no Archbishop of Canterbury, no Lambeth Conference… There is just ECUSA – and its canons. No need for anyone from ECUSA to attend the 2008 Lambeth Conference, then. It is not in the Canons, ergo it does not exist. I think FTG might not share that view. BTW – you need to look at the ECUSA title deeds which refer to its relationship with the… Read more »
“We worship our Canons,
all glorious above,
O gratefully speak
of their power and their love…”
Well, I did take promises about obeying Church discipline, and there’s plenty of NT material about church order….