Ruth Gledhill, who published a report in The Times this morning headlined Cathedral bans Carey as a ‘divisive force’, later published a blog article Asbo on Lord Carey which contains a wealth of additional detail and links to other comments on this matter.
The first story provoked Dave Walker to draw a cartoon published under Lord Carey banned from Cathedral.
Additional further links on the Bangor affair
64 CommentsAs previously noted,the Diocese of Pittsburgh will consider the issue of APO this weekend at its annual convention. But, as Lionel Deimel has noted on his blog, What Does the Diocese of Pittsburgh Really Want?
…The bigger problem is that the resolution that the diocesan convention will rubber stamp this Friday asks for alternative primatial oversight. (The actual resolution to be voted on incorporates the earlier resolution. Whoever put this together has read Robert’s Rules rather too often.) Alternative primatial oversight is what the leadership of the Pittsburgh and several other dioceses requested as an immediate reaction to the 75th General Convention. The Archbishop of Canterbury was apparently not pleased with receiving multiple requests from Network bishops — one must suspect that he was not pleased with receiving any requests at all — so he asked that the requests be consolidated. Because not all dioceses had asked for the same thing, the replacement combined request did not correspond exactly to what was asked for previously. In particular, although Pittsburgh had asked for “alternative Primatial oversight,” the combined request asked for the appointment of a “Communion Commissary.” (The Bishop of London sent representatives called commissaries to the Colonies in pre-revolutionary times. The colonists actually wanted bishops, however.) That request was dated July 20, well in advance of this week’s convention.
So, what does Pittsburgh actually want? Why is the convention being asked to endorse a request that essentially has been withdrawn, rather that supporting a request that is actually on the table? Is the Bishop of Pittsburgh just trying to confuse matters? Did no one have the energy to draw up a new resolution? Are we asking for two things, in hopes that we will get one or the other? Who knows?
One thing is clear: the militant traditionalists who are disrupting The Episcopal Church have consistently made outrageous requests, so that they can claim to be persecuted when those requests are not granted. Aren’t two outrageous requests better than one?
Other PEP briefing papers here.
7 CommentsENS reports that the new ECUSA Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori wrote on 1 November, her first day in office, to the four Global South primates who are offering to meet those dioceses seeking APO inviting them to meet her also, while they are in the USA.
The Living Church has also reported this with the headline Presiding Bishop Offers to Meet Global South Visitors.
The letter is addressed to The Most Rev. Peter Akinola, Primate of Nigeria, The Most Rev. Drexel Gomez, Primate of the West Indies, The Most Rev. Benjamin Nzimbi, Primate of Kenya, and The Most Rev. Justice Akrofi, Primate of West Africa. The text reads:
To my esteemed brothers in Christ:
While I have not yet had the privilege and honor to meet all of you, I very much look forward to working with you in the coming years as we endeavor to lead the Body of Christ in this portion called the Anglican Communion. I deeply value the possibilities we have in the Anglican Communion for addressing the mission God has given us to reconcile the world he has created. In the spirit of Lambeth 1998, the Episcopal Church has identified the Millennium Development Goals as the framework for our missional work in the coming years. I would hope we might see the common interest we all have for seeing those Goals met, as they provide a concrete image of the Reign of God in our own day, where the hungry are fed, the thirsty watered, and the prisoners of disease and oppression set free.
I understand that you will be in the United States in mid-November for a gathering at Falls Church, Virginia. Considering the difficulty and expense of such a journey, I hope that during your visit you might be willing to pay a call on me, so that we might begin to build toward such a missional relationship. If that is a possibility, I hope you will contact this office as soon as possible. I would be more than happy to alter my schedule to accommodate you.
I look forward to hearing from you, and meeting you. May God bless your ministries and your travels.
Her web pages include the following statement, dated 23 OCtober, which is curiously hidden in a PDF file:
33 Comments“What do you consider the most important priorities for the Presiding Bishop?”
From the Desk of The Rt. Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori, Bishop of NevadaThe Presiding Bishop keeps us focused on the Reign of God, through unceasing attention to mission in the context of baptismal ministry. Christians and their communities are meant to be transformative elements in this world, laboring to create something much more like God’s Reign. The church’s work is to recognize where we have not yet attained God’s dream, speak gospel to that reality, and equip and empower all the baptized to do the work of transforming those places of not-yet. There are two obvious foci for our ministry: moving our sanctuaries into the streets to encounter and transform the bad news of this world; and implementing the Millennium Development Goals, which provide a signal opportunity in this age to realize the dream of God for all creation.
This church must embrace and celebrate all the diverse cultures, languages, and origins of the many parts of the Episcopal Church – Haiti, Taiwan, Province IX, the Churches in Europe, Virgin Islands, as well as the many cultures within the U.S. – First Nations, African-American, Spanishspeaking, Asian, and all Anglo varieties. None is more important than another; all are essential to the transforming work of the Body of Christ.
Ultimately, the Presiding Bishop’s role is one of bridge-building and boundary crossing. If we are to reconcile the world, we must be bold enough to enter unfamiliar territory and partner wherever necessary to build toward the Reign of God. The Body is strengthened as all parts are honored, whatever their color or language, or liturgical, theological, or political stripe. God is to be found in that wilderness of difference, and reconciliation requires the crossing.
The Living Church published a news report on Monday 30 October which was headlined Presiding Bishop’s Chancellor Threatens Fort Worth, Quincy Dioceses.
This contained only two selected short quotes from the letter itself, but substantial comments from the Bishop of Fort Worth including the phrase: “The timing of this letter is shocking,”
Later, on the Stand Firm website, Bishop Iker wrote that:
The Beers letter is dated Oct. 19th and came by regular mail to my chancellor’s law office. When a copy was faxed to me from his office on the 27th, I then faxed it to Lambeth Palace, so the Archbishop would know what was in the works. Alas, Katharine had been there for her visit with the ABC that very day but had already departed. +JLI
[Comment: isn’t it weird that such communications are sent by ordinary mail and not electronically? I didn’t realise facsimile technology was still in common use.]
Huge dialogue ensued on the usual blogs: Jim Naughton provides all the links here, and adds some comments of his own. None of the blog commenters had of course read the full text of the letter,but nevertheless many people denounced this action in very strong terms, and generally blaming the new Presiding Bishop, whose term of office begins today, for behaving outrageously in sanctioning such a letter.
Today, a senior priest in Bishop Iker’s diocese, Chris Cantrell, has published just that. It turns out to be a piece of milk toast.
[Salutation omitted]
Several persons have told me recently that they believe that your diocese, within the past few or several years, has amended its Constitution in some way that can be read as cutting against an “unqualified accession” to the Constitution and canons of the Episcopal Church. First of all, could you please send me a copy of your Constitution so that I can have first-hand knowledge on this score.Second, if your diocese has indeed adopted such an amendment, then, on behalf of the Presiding Bishop, I want to express the hope that your diocese will promptly begin the process of amending its Constitution to declare clearly an “unqualified accession” as Article V of the Church’s Constitution plainly requires. If your diocese should decline to take that step, the Presiding Bishop will have to consider what sort of action she must take in order to bring your diocese into compliance.
With warm regards,
David Booth Beers
I shall be pleasantly surprised if anyone now apologises for their earlier remarks.
16 Comments