Showing posts with label the exodus. Show all posts
Showing posts with label the exodus. Show all posts

Wednesday, June 20, 2007

this IS interesting

The Archbishop supports the decision of the Province of Kenya to provide resident Episcopal oversight for the clergy and congregations in the United States who placed themselves under the jurisdiction of the Archbishop of Kenya after they had arrived at the conclusion that the Episcopal Church no longer offered them the assurance of continuity with “The faith once delivered to the saints.” The provision of adequate pastoral care and episcopate oversight constitutes a deliberate and intentional effort to provide stability in an environment in which Anglicanism is being severely tested and challenged.

Read it all here.

The support of Archbishop Drexel Gomez, of the West Indies, is a very telling development. He has been largely silent hitherto about the ongoing realignment. He is an Anglo-Catholic. He is a member of the Covenant Design Group (the chairman?), tasked by the Archbishop of Canterbury with presenting to the Communion a working instantiation of Anglican ecclesiology. And he has been a proponent of ACI-style Communion-mindedness (as contrasted with the more vociferously "orthodox" stance of, for example, Archbishop Akinola, et al.). The plot thickeneth.

Monday, May 14, 2007

good questions

I think the significance of what's going on now (with CANA, AMiA, etc.) is lost on most, though I and others have tried to point it out. Here is one of the first quasi-profound analyses of the ongoing saga of American Anglicanism that I've seen from the secular media. Read the whole thing here. (Via T-19.) I've often reminded myself that as bad as things may be for us now, they have been worse for others. Think of St. Athanasius and the Arian crisis of the fourth century. I've been reading a biography of St. Gregory Nazianzus, and it was much the same for him. Juridical / ecclesial chaos and political maneuverings left and right, swimming upstream culturally, at odds with secular authority, theological confusion, etc. The best we can do, I think, is to tell the truth within whatever contexts we find ourselves, and strive for personal holiness. That's really all God asks: that we turn to him, and then do our best.

___________

The reason for Akinola’s delay seems to be that he wanted there to be no doubt that the leadership of the Episcopal Church would refuse to comply with the demands of the worldwide Anglican Communion before he acted — especially the demand that it accept a “primatial vicar,” or alternative chief presiding officer, for conservatives. Once the door to a primatial vicar was closed, Akinola offered a Nigerian alternative.

Which leaves observers with certain unanswered questions. Why did Akinola establish his own Nigerian alternative rather than support the already existing Anglican Mission in America established by Archbishop Kolini? What, if anything, will mark the difference between the two missionary initiatives? Why did the Anglican Mission, for its part, send no representative to the consecration? Does this action represent a further fragmentation of the conservative opposition?

Some liberal commentators think so and point to the fact that very few congregations have actually withdrawn from the Episcopal Church. But that comment may miss the real significance of the African initiative — namely, to revitalize Anglicanism in America.

Friday, May 04, 2007

cana and the acn

Is it just me, or is CANA seemingly overtaking the Anglican Communion Network as the entity best positioned to replace ECUSA as the repository of orthodox North American Anglicanism? I haven't heard much news about the Network in quite some time, but I have of course heard more and more about CANA. Also: +Minns' rhetoric seems to indicate that he is moulding CANA into a provincial shape (with himself as its primate, I would venture to guess). I mean things like this from the LA Times (read it all here):

Minns said the convocation, which he said included about 30 parishes and 50 clergy members, was the result of a "broken relationship" between the Episcopal Church and the rest of the Anglican Communion. He said he planned to work closely with other groups of breakaway Episcopalians to try to bring them together.

"We are what the church used to be," Minns said. "Our desire is not to interfere with what [the Episcopal Church is] doing. We simply don't agree with it."



The message seems to be that ECUSA has become irrelevant with respect to the Communion. I tend to agree... but what's interesting is +Minns' implication that CANA is taking over.

What does this mean? It means, I think, that +Duncan is being sidelined as a potential primate. The tone of the rhetoric seems to indicate not only that realignment is definitely in the pipes, that it will happen sooner rather than later, but most significant with regard to my point here: that the "inside strategy" suggested by such things as Windsor, Camp Allen, the DeS Communique, +Stanton, the ACI, inter alia, has lost out to the more bellicose and evangelical.

What do I think about this? On some level, I'm glad something is finally happening. All the talk was indeed frustrating. On the other hand, I've made no secret of my agreeement with the "inside strategy." I'm sorry to see that it seems to have been sidelined, and that its probably now a lost cause. I also worry that the fact that CANA is the brainchild of Nigerian Anglicanism, that unpleasant things like the 39 Articles and other exclusivist, evangelical, confessional standards will be enshrined as the benchmarks of the new North American orthodoxy. I also wonder where this leaves the FIFNA folks? Will they sign on with CANA, or will they form some other thing? I can't say what I think would be better. Probably joining CANA (and insisting on Tract 90 type interpretations of the 39 Articles), as starting a new thing would mean further division.

Also note that those carrying the day (the more vociferously orthodox) do seem to have cast aside the DeS Communique, and that it IS dividing the Primates. Note that whereas ++Williams and ++Akinola were on the same page at Dar es Salaam, they no longer seem to be. These are the dangerous waters I spoke of in a post a few days ago.

Time will tell. But has anyone else sensed this shift (ACN ---> CANA) in recent weeks / months? Other thoughts?

UPDATE (May 5) -- From Fr Kendall Harmon's liveblogging of Bp Minns' sermon at his own installation: "CANA is God’s gift to orthodox Anglicans for those who cannto find a home in TEC as it is currently led." Funny, Bp Minns describes CANA in exactly the terms I would have applied to the proposals of the DeS Communique. Read Fr Kendall's liveblogging here.

UPDATE-PRIME (May 6) -- Then there is this quote from the NY Times, which gets at how the secular world perceives CANA's doings, whatever the nuanced truth may be: "The hope among leaders of the new diocese, the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, is that it will eventually be recognized by the communion as its rightful representative in the United States, replacing an Episcopal Church they say has strayed from traditional Anglican teachings." Read the whole NY Times article here.

Friday, April 27, 2007

wars and rumors of wars

Read this from Father Dan Martins. Intriguing. Frightening. By comparison, I am totally out of the loop. A consequence of being an insignificant and very young, priest. I agree with everything Father Dan says. (You will have noticed my touting of the Anglican Communion Institute's writings in the last several weeks. Also: don't miss the latest ACI piece in the "Father WB's Shared Items" box at the bottom of the sidebar.)

Friday, April 20, 2007

dennis canon fails again

Read the whole thing.

The Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society of the Episcopal Church (abbreviated DFMS) was told by a New York supreme court judge that it could participate as little more than an observer in the property dispute lawsuit by the Episcopal Diocese of Central New York against St. Andrews Church in Syracuse. Supreme Court Justice James P. Murphy in a written decision earlier this week ruled that "DFMS only asserts that St. Andrew's property is held in trust for the benefit of the Episcopal Church as promulgated by certain Episcopal canons, and as such, the Court finds its legal interest to be insufficient." The judge allowed DFMS to intervene in the ongoing lawsuit, but "that the permissive intervention of the DFMS should be limited."

Note this is not quite a repudiation of the Dennis Canon (I.7.4-5), but it is an expression of skepticism on the part of the judge that that canon makes TEC a significant party in the lawsuit. As far as the court is concerned, it's a dispute between the parish and the diocese, and 815 may only watch. The Dennis Canon states, "All real and personal property held by or for the benefit of any Parish, Mission or Congregation is held in trust for this Church and the Diocese thereof in which such Parish, Mission or Congregation is located." This decision is typical of those to which we've drawn your attention at Whitehall - judges tend to treat the Dennis Canon with skepticism, as a rule that applies to internal squabbles and not to real legal affairs. It's as if the local Yale Club (just an example) passed a by-law that it now owned all the cars belonging to its members, without all the members actually agreeing to hand over their titles. The Dennis Canon depends only upon internal coercion, strong-arm tactics, and threats for its effectiveness. The courts don't seem to recognize it. Luckily for 815, the aforementioned activities are a well-used part of the playbook. Yessiree, we at TEC are all about eliminating oppression in the world, as per the MDG's. If it were Akinola doing to his liberal parishes what TEC's bishops are doing to their conservative ones, we'd hear plenty of squawking on behalf of the powerless.

Thursday, March 22, 2007

a great piece from father ephraim radner

Read it all here.

He seems to think its Game Over for the orthodox in ECUSA. He has been one of the most coherent and conciliatory voices among the orthodox -- definitely not a hot head. That he thinks its over says much about the gravity of the situation in light of the House of Bishops' rejection of the Primates' requests.

So what now? In my view, the Communion MUST establish the Pastoral Council / Primatial Vicar, now clearly without the help or input of the ECUSA hierarchy. If the councils of the Communion do nothing, then Anglicanism in American will be lost... for years or decades, if not forever. The orthodox will continue to bleed off into a myriad independent and incoherent jurisdictions, or will simply move away from Anglicanism altogether, to Roman Catholicism, Orthodoxy, etc. Moreover, if ECUSA is allowed to get away with their intractable arrogance, then Anglicanism will be betrayed as an incoherent theological joke -- one in which a thousand mutually exclusive doctrines are held and taught in the name of plurality.

The ONLY way forward, I believe, is for the Primates and the ABC to act NOW (by which I mean something like "by the end of this year") 1) to allow ECUSA to go its on way, apart from the Communion, and 2) to provide a coherent place / primatial jurisdiction for the orthodox who wish to remain in communion with Canterbury and the rest. Lastly (and this will be the most difficult and unlikely): the American orthodox -- Network dioceses, CANA, AMiA, etc. -- must band together and agree to abide by the Primates and the ABC's decisions.

There are a lot of if's and unknowns here. But they must be sorted out very quickly, in my view, or American Anglicanism will be lost.

PS: Now is the time for action by the orthodox BISHOPS in ECUSA. Its time for them to stand up and start acting like orthodox bishops. Its time for them to act concertedly, coherently, unitedly, and humbly -- as the shepherds God has called them to be, and to whom He has given His Holy Spirit for that purpose. The orthodox bishops must come together and show bold leadership. If they do, their priests and laity will follow them. If they don't, all will almost certainly be lost.

Saturday, March 03, 2007

this is fantastic

I was at St. Andrew's-in-the-Pines, south of Atlanta, for Christmas Eve mass. Read below what they have done.

I have to say: well done. This is edifying and courageous. I wish all the orthodox would rather suffer wrong than be sucked by ECUSA into lawsuits before secular courts. ECUSA has clearly given up attempting to edify anyone and cares more about property and money than about God's law. But we don't have to play by their rules. Thank you dear brothers and sisters in Peachtree City. You are living in God's power.

I will not criticize parishes (such as the CANA parishes in Virginia) for defending themselves in civil courts. But I
will praise others for not defending themselves.

"Do not resist one who is evil... if any one would sue you and take your coat, let him have your cloak as well... " (Matthew 5.39-40)

"To have lawsuits at all with one another is defeat for you. Why not rather suffer wrong? Why not rather be defrauded? But you yourselves wrong and defraud, and that even your own brethren." (1 Corinthians 6.7-8)

"God chose what is foolish in the world to shame the wise, God chose what is weak in the world to shame the strong..." (1 Corinthians 1.27)

-----------

Atlanta: New Anglican church severs ties with Peachtree City's St. Andrew's

By John Munford, from The Citizen

A congregation that split away from the Episcopal Diocese of Atlanta is dropping its legal claims to any of the property from its former church, St. Andrew’s-in-the-Pines in Peachtree City.

Instead, the newly-christened Anglican Church of Fayette County will meet temporarily at Huddleston Elementary School for the time being, with a few services slated for the nearby Gathering Place senior citizen’s center, said parishioner Fred Burdeshaw.

The previous week’s service was shared by both the new Anglican church and those who elected to stay with St. Andrew’s-in-the-Pines Episcopal Church as they met together side-by-side.

The Anglican Church of Fayette County celebrated its inaugural service at the Gathering Place Sunday with 125 members celebrating Holy Communion with Canon David Anderson of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America.

Anglican Church leaders said they split away from the Episcopal Diocese because of concerns over the “increasingly liberal interpretation of scripture.” The church tried to work with the Episcopal Diocese to settle property issues, as only one of three parcels on the St. Andrews campus is actually deeded to the diocese, but those efforts were ultimately abandoned, Burdeshaw said.

Georgia law tends to favor established churches like the Episcopal Diocese in these types of cases, Burdeshaw said.

Instead, the decision was to abandon any potential conflict, and “we were better off to walk away, which is disappointing but reality,” Burdeshaw said.

The church is limited in the amount of dates it can rent the Gathering Place but has reserved it for Palm Sunday and Easter services, Burdeshaw said.

Nationwide, similar Episcopal congregations have also faced the growing issue of scripture interpretation, particularly in light of the national Episcopal Church appointing an openly gay bishop in 2003. Such actions have created a theological schism between those who wish for the scripture to be interpreted more traditionally and those who support the current church leadership.

Thursday, February 08, 2007

to cleave or to cleave? the primates meeting in tanzania

Here is a very thoughtful piece on the upcoming primates' meeting from the Rev'd Canon Graham Kings. One of the article's strengths is that it gests at the polychromatic aspect of ECUSA and the Communion. I.e. that the situation is really much more complex, at both levels, than a mere division of "liberals" from "conservatives." Kings identifies "at least five...'streams' " within ECUSA.

Texanglican has some good comments on the piece. For my part, I don't think Kings lays quite enough stress on the need for something to be done NOW. Everyone knows that anything done now will necessarily be a stopgap measure. But such a measure is necessary. It is urgent. As Yeats put it:

...
Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.
Surely some revelation is at hand;
Surely the Second Coming is at hand.

I don't know about the Second Coming, but some definite relief, even if only provisional, for orthodox Anglicans in North America must be at hand. I agree that the Windsor and Covenant process(es) are the best hope for the Communion. And I understand that they will necessarily take some years to be devloped, submitted, and received by the Communion. That will be a process which, in order to have moral weight and authority, must involve Lambeth, etc. But between now and then, it is urgent that provision be made for the orthodox. And by "provision" I mean that orthodox dioceses must be (provisionally) relieved from the oversight of the Presiding Bishop, from the authority of 815, and indeed from the General Convention. The authority formerly exercised by the PB and the General Convention should be invested in the interim in either a (provisional) primate, or as Kings suggests, in a college of Windsor-compliant or (better) Network bishops. The latter (a college of bishops) is probably a better stopgap solution.

Tuesday, December 19, 2006

the situation in the diocese of virginia

Yesterday, (Sunday) nearly one out of five church-going Episcopalians in the Diocese of Virginia voted to leave the Episcopal Denomination. (Everything you ever wanted to know about it -- so far -- can be found here.) I am conflicted about this kind of thing. On the one hand, the New Religion of ECUSA is a dead-end; it does not nourish; and it is antithetical to the gospel of Christ. On the other hand, I'm not sure what it means to "leave a diocese." As our own Fr Thorpus has intimated in the past, it seems like a better approach would be to band together and elect a rival bishop, and to set up shop as the (real) Diocese of Virginia. That's the way Gregory of Nazianzus and Athanasius handled things in Constantinople and Alexandria in the 4th century. Oh well. Gregory and Athanasius weren't big-e Evangelicals.

I wonder what it means, legally, that Falls Church and Truro both antedate not only the Episcopal Denomination, but the Diocese of Virginia as well... Probably nothing. But it should mean something. And I have to say, trying as hard as I can to look at this dispassionately, Bishop Lee does not look good. First, he's exhibiting ++++++Jefforts-Schori levels of litigiousness, including threatening vestry members individually. Bad form. Bp. Lee goes on to say:

The votes today have compromised these discussions and have created Nigerian congregations occupying Episcopal churches. This is not the future of the Episcopal Church envisioned by our forebears.

Right. Seriously: did Samuel Seabury create a situation with Scottish congregations occupying American churches in the 18th century? Think about it. (The answer is no.) And speaking of "the future... envisioned by our forebears," I'm sure George Washington's Episcopal dream wasn't all about gay pride parades, tie-dyed chasubles, and being on an equal theological footing with Hindoos and Jains. Let's be honest. If your going to invoke what "our forbears" envisioned, be consistent. And anyway, ought we automatically embrace everything our forbears envisioned just because they envisioned it? On that score, Bp. Lee should remember that the capital of the Confederacy was in his diocese. They probably wouldn't have wanted Nigerians in their churches either.

Read all of Bp. Lee's sabre rattling here. I think he's the wrong kind of conservative.

Saturday, December 16, 2006

diocese of virginia

Tomorrow the Diocese of Virginia (the largest diocese in ECUSA) could lose about 17% of its church-going population.

Bp. Lee said of the churches voting to leave, "The diocese owns their property." What a strange way of putting it, Bishop. If the diocese owns it, how is it "their" property? And if it's "theirs", how does the diocese own it? Oh well. Civil courts will decide; the secular world will snigger at the scandal; and ECUSA will continue to wither on the vine.

Read about the Diocese of Virginia here.

By the way, ECUSA lost 36,000 people in both 2003 and 2004, and 42,000 in 2005. Go here for details.