GC ’06 Fallout: First Mitre Explosion
The mitre of Virginia Bishop Peter Lee is the first to explode over boundary crossings. He is in a huff over the Church of Nigeria’s election of Rev. Martyn Minns as bishop:
The election of the Rev. Martyn Minns as a Bishop of the Church of Nigeria with oversight of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America is an affront to the traditional, orthodox understanding of Anglican Provincial Autonomy.
It amuses me to see a man who publicly pronounced schism worse than heresy prate about what’s orthodox when his sacred diocesan boundaries are crossed.
More amusement to come I’m sure.
Friday, June 30, 2006
GC ’06 Fallout: More of the Same from the Bishop of West Texas
The Bishop of West Texas Gary Lillibridge issued a lengthy statement yesterday in response to the General Convention and ++Rowan’s statement. I made myself read all 28 numbered paragraphs. And there are plenty of nice words.
But it’s little more than words. He says he “cannot sit idly by and accept the status-quo.” But it’s hard to come to any other conclusion except that he is doing exactly that. I’veendured gone over his statement repeatedly, but can find no action proposed. He’s still not joining the Network. He’s certainly not calling for alternative oversight.
Oh, but wants to be prepared to make decisions!
The plain truth is that we are in a season (for an unknown period of time) when some difficult decisions are going to have to be made with regard to Anglicanism. I am committed to preparing the Diocese of West Texas, as a community, to face fully into those decisions, whatever they may be and whenever they may come.
Which decisions +Lillibridge seems determined to put off as long as possible. So “whenever” is indeed whenever.
Yes, I believe there are systemic problems with the General Convention and these problems actually hinder our mission as the Church. And you should know that I am not simply content to help manage a diseased system nor am I resigned to accepting these things as the way that they must be.
Then do something, sir! By doing little to nothing, by not even joining the Network, how can anyone come to any other conclusion but that you are doing exactly what you claim you are not doing – accepting and maintaining the status quo in the Episcopal Church? That may not be your intent, but it is your effect.
Oh the bishop does tut-tut the convention’s failure in responding to the Windsor Report, but then immediately makes excuses for it:
. . . I am of the opinion that the Convention's response to Windsor, and especially the spirit in which it was offered in the last frantic hours, was much less than what we should have done. It was however, all that we could do as a diverse church.
Ah, but General Convention wasn’t all bad. He echoes GC’s infatuation with the UN’s Millennium Goals and is excited about possible communion with another mainline denomination afflicted with liberalism, namely the United Methodist Church. Oh, joy.
And he belittles those who “bemoan the convention and the state of the church.” So those in the Diocese of West Texas who are distressed by the apostasy of the Episcopal Church, you best quit yer whinin’.
Thank God I took a hard look at the episcopal leadership (or lack thereof) in the Diocese of West Texas and decided joining an ECUSA church in it was not for me when I moved down here. The more I watch the Bishop of West Texas ininaction, the more glad I am.
The Bishop of West Texas Gary Lillibridge issued a lengthy statement yesterday in response to the General Convention and ++Rowan’s statement. I made myself read all 28 numbered paragraphs. And there are plenty of nice words.
But it’s little more than words. He says he “cannot sit idly by and accept the status-quo.” But it’s hard to come to any other conclusion except that he is doing exactly that. I’ve
Oh, but wants to be prepared to make decisions!
The plain truth is that we are in a season (for an unknown period of time) when some difficult decisions are going to have to be made with regard to Anglicanism. I am committed to preparing the Diocese of West Texas, as a community, to face fully into those decisions, whatever they may be and whenever they may come.
Which decisions +Lillibridge seems determined to put off as long as possible. So “whenever” is indeed whenever.
Yes, I believe there are systemic problems with the General Convention and these problems actually hinder our mission as the Church. And you should know that I am not simply content to help manage a diseased system nor am I resigned to accepting these things as the way that they must be.
Then do something, sir! By doing little to nothing, by not even joining the Network, how can anyone come to any other conclusion but that you are doing exactly what you claim you are not doing – accepting and maintaining the status quo in the Episcopal Church? That may not be your intent, but it is your effect.
Oh the bishop does tut-tut the convention’s failure in responding to the Windsor Report, but then immediately makes excuses for it:
. . . I am of the opinion that the Convention's response to Windsor, and especially the spirit in which it was offered in the last frantic hours, was much less than what we should have done. It was however, all that we could do as a diverse church.
Ah, but General Convention wasn’t all bad. He echoes GC’s infatuation with the UN’s Millennium Goals and is excited about possible communion with another mainline denomination afflicted with liberalism, namely the United Methodist Church. Oh, joy.
And he belittles those who “bemoan the convention and the state of the church.” So those in the Diocese of West Texas who are distressed by the apostasy of the Episcopal Church, you best quit yer whinin’.
Thank God I took a hard look at the episcopal leadership (or lack thereof) in the Diocese of West Texas and decided joining an ECUSA church in it was not for me when I moved down here. The more I watch the Bishop of West Texas in
Thursday, June 29, 2006
Wednesday, June 28, 2006
BREAKING: GC Fallout ’06: Diocese of South Carolina Asks for APO
Saying “the status quo is now impossible,” the Diocese of South Carolina has just asked for Alternative Primatial Oversight.
I had not seen this diocese mentioned as one likely to do so. The Diocese of Fort Worth is now looking like the forerunner to several others.
Saying “the status quo is now impossible,” the Diocese of South Carolina has just asked for Alternative Primatial Oversight.
I had not seen this diocese mentioned as one likely to do so. The Diocese of Fort Worth is now looking like the forerunner to several others.
GC ’06 Fallout: Diocese of Pittsburgh Requests "Immediate Alternative Primatial Oversight" and Calls for Orthodox Tenth Province Within TEC
Just when I thought it was going to be a slow day, just when I wasn’t looking, this big news comes out.
It seems the near term Network strategy has been revealed: stay within the Episcopal Church, but otherwise separate from it and form a new orthodox province of the Anglican Communion.
I can see both pluses and minuses to this strategy. But I’ll at least have a good think and a good sleep before commenting further.
Just when I thought it was going to be a slow day, just when I wasn’t looking, this big news comes out.
It seems the near term Network strategy has been revealed: stay within the Episcopal Church, but otherwise separate from it and form a new orthodox province of the Anglican Communion.
I can see both pluses and minuses to this strategy. But I’ll at least have a good think and a good sleep before commenting further.
Tuesday, June 27, 2006
GC ’06 Fallout: The Archbishop of Canterbury Reflects
Well, just about everything causes the Archbishop to reflect, but, anyway, he issued an important, perhaps historic statement today.
There’s quite a bit to digest and, frankly, my brain is not functioning at its best as revealed by some really bad chess last night, so my initial observations are partial at best.
I think Matt+ Kennedy’s initial analysis is on target. I’m particularly encouraged that the Archbishop has finally acknowledged that it might be necessary for the North American provinces (TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada) to split. I think this is the first time he has publicly said such.
My first response is that ++Rowan’s proposal of an opt-in Anglican covenant is a good proposal for the long term. I am concerned that he says very little about the near term. And something must be done very near term. The orthodox should not be asked to endure apostate leadership for years and years while a covenant is being formed.
But I suspect ++Rowan is deferring near term responses to the Primates. And he may be saying as much in an accompanying statement to the Primates.
++Rowan does, with Anglican understatement of course, concede that the Episcopal Church has fallen short of Windsor, and that is an important development.
Now, there is a problem with an assumption ++Rowan makes: “. . . to strict evangelical Protestantism, to Roman Catholicism, to religious liberalism. To accept that each of these has a place in the church’s life . . . .” Many orthodox Anglicans do not accept that religious liberalism has a place in the church’s life. And I’m one of them.
Perhaps I’ll say more on that in due time. But overall I’m encouraged by the Archbishop’s statement.
MORE: I also find the Empty Church’s take on ++Rowan’s statement very interesting. It concludes:
Practically, this is completely uncharted territory; theologically, the orthodox have definitely won.
Dr Williams says that "it isn’t a question of throwing people into outer darkness, but of recognising that actions have consequences – and that actions believed in good faith to be ‘prophetic’ in their radicalism are likely to have costly consequences." ECUSA has finally gone too far.
Well, just about everything causes the Archbishop to reflect, but, anyway, he issued an important, perhaps historic statement today.
There’s quite a bit to digest and, frankly, my brain is not functioning at its best as revealed by some really bad chess last night, so my initial observations are partial at best.
I think Matt+ Kennedy’s initial analysis is on target. I’m particularly encouraged that the Archbishop has finally acknowledged that it might be necessary for the North American provinces (TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada) to split. I think this is the first time he has publicly said such.
My first response is that ++Rowan’s proposal of an opt-in Anglican covenant is a good proposal for the long term. I am concerned that he says very little about the near term. And something must be done very near term. The orthodox should not be asked to endure apostate leadership for years and years while a covenant is being formed.
But I suspect ++Rowan is deferring near term responses to the Primates. And he may be saying as much in an accompanying statement to the Primates.
++Rowan does, with Anglican understatement of course, concede that the Episcopal Church has fallen short of Windsor, and that is an important development.
Now, there is a problem with an assumption ++Rowan makes: “. . . to strict evangelical Protestantism, to Roman Catholicism, to religious liberalism. To accept that each of these has a place in the church’s life . . . .” Many orthodox Anglicans do not accept that religious liberalism has a place in the church’s life. And I’m one of them.
Perhaps I’ll say more on that in due time. But overall I’m encouraged by the Archbishop’s statement.
MORE: I also find the Empty Church’s take on ++Rowan’s statement very interesting. It concludes:
Practically, this is completely uncharted territory; theologically, the orthodox have definitely won.
Dr Williams says that "it isn’t a question of throwing people into outer darkness, but of recognising that actions have consequences – and that actions believed in good faith to be ‘prophetic’ in their radicalism are likely to have costly consequences." ECUSA has finally gone too far.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)