TEC GENERAL CONVENTION '09

[Fr. Greg]

I am curious as to what some of the rest of you may be thinking regarding some of the following experiences thus far in the TEC General Convention '09?

- PB Schori's comments about personal faith and salvation in Jesus Christ being heretical
- ABC Rowan's comments to the TEC in urging caution not to make any decisions at GC that will push TEC further away from the Communion
- Bp. Barbara Harris' comments in her homily that basically stated (I'm paraphrasing) that the TEC should practise open baptism for all and then treat these baptisms as though they are "half-assed baptisms" by not allowing all persons access to all forms of ministry in the Church
- The passing of Resolution D025 by the House of Deputies and House of Bishops which, for all intents and purposes, rescinds B033 and allows for local option for the ordination/consecration of practising homosexuals
- What are your thoughts about the Resolution (can't remember the number) that allows for the development of liturgies for same-sex blessings

I look forward to hearing your opinions and perspectives.

Fr. Greg

[Eric]

I know that we all are not in agreement on this issue at Anglimergent, so please bear in mind that this is my opinion and belief. Anyway, here is something I wrote in another forum:

".....And another thing, the resolution also states how the entire Episcopal Church wishes to remain in full communion with the rest of the Anglican Communion. As Steven wrote, its not us kicking ourselves out, it would be them.

At first I was for some "gracious restraint" so we could wait for our other provinces to catch up to us. In fact, I was VERY much for holding back because that seemed to be the best, Christian, thing to do.

But then I realised two things that were wrong with this moratoria:

(1) These other provinces that want us to stop aren't doing it so they can "catch up with us", they want us NEVER to have equal access to the Church. The intention isn't that they wanted to listen more, but that they DIDN'T want to listen - note that a bunch of bishops did not attend Lambeth.

(2) Its one thing if the church was having issues over something inanimate - like food or circumcision that was heavily debated in the beginnings of the Early Church as recorded in the Scriptures. Its another when its real people. A real minority being devalued because of something they didn't choose. I cannot see Christ saying we should sacrifice a small group of people so we can be in the large group that is towing the line."


Eric

[Fr. Greg]

Eric:

Thank you for your response. I find your perspective interesting. Allow me to respond to your post with some comments and questions.

With regards to D025, the overwhelming majority of the Communion has been very clear about what the standards of belief and practise are, as Anglicans. To make unilateral decisions against those standards of common belief and practise is to choose not to walk with those of a common mind. There may be a desire to remain connected in some way to the Communion, but the reality is that there has been a decision not to be IN communion any longer. It seems to me that this is was has really taken place here. Can you comment to this?

As for the comment you made about other provinces catching up with TEC, I'm not sure I completely understand what you mean by that? What is it that other provinces are supposed to catch up to? Why is it that other provinces are supposed to catch up?

With regards to equal access to the Church, I'm not sure I understand why you believe there isn't equal access. If there is someone who desire to live the Christian life, it seems to be there is full and equal access to anyone who desire to live such a life. As for various ministries, and positions of ministry in the Church, there are certain standards of education, belief, life, and practise that must be adhered to. If one has no desire to strive to fully life a Christ-like life, then that person is not fit for ordained ministry in the Church. That covers a lot of ground. There has been a very long process of listening and dialogue on issues of sexuality for several decades now. It seems to me that the real issue is that there are those who do not want to abide by Scriptural injunctions against certain kinds of activity. It seems that there has been an agenda to get the Church to bless was Scripture does not bless. At some point, such listening becomes pointless if there is no willingness from some to remain faithful to Scripture and the sacred Tradition of the Church. Thoughts?

In the Early Church, the inanimate issues you refer to did have an impact on real people. The inanimate activity that seems to be the huge elephant in the room at this time is that of sexual activity outside the bonds of marriage between one man and one woman, who are real people. The Church is not saying anything about sacrificing people. The Church is simply call everyone to a life of discipleship, it seems to me. I do not know of anyone who has been devalued. On the contrary, the Church loves us enough to tell us the truth and call us to account, and to strive to be like Jesus. Thoughts?

Fr. Greg

[Eric]

I have to make this brief since I am at work Fr. Greg.

"With regards to D025, the overwhelming majority of the Communion has been very clear about what the standards of belief and practise are, as Anglicans. To make unilateral decisions against those standards of common belief and practise is to choose not to walk with those of a common mind. There may be a desire to remain connected in some way to the Communion, but the reality is that there has been a decision not to be IN communion any longer. It seems to me that this is was has really taken place here. Can you comment to this?"

Maybe overwhelmingly, but not entirely Fr. Greg. This is not the only issue that the communion is not in full agreement with Greg. The communion is not about all taking the same stand on the issues. To walk with others as if we are one mind on this issue is to live a lie about who we are. What D025 does is admit exactly where we are at as the Episcopal Church. The parts of the resolution are (with a big emphasis on the first and last part):

The resolution:

* reaffirms the continued participation of the Episcopal Church in the Anglican Communion;
* encourages dioceses, congregations and members to be involved in work throughout the communion;
* reaffirms the Episcopal Church's financial support of the Anglican Communion;
* acknowledges that the Listening Process with gay and lesbian people has resulted in General Convention's recognition that same-sex relationships represent fidelity and holy love;
* recognizes that gays and lesbians in such same-sex relationships have exercised ministry in the church;
* acknowledges that God has called and may call any individual in the church to any ordained ministry in the Episcopal Church, in accordance with the discernment process set forth in the Constitution and Canons of the church; and
* acknowledges that the Anglican Communion is not of one mind on these matters.

From your writing it appears that because we have chosen to be honest that to you that is equivalent with wishing to abandon our brothers and sisters in the communion, and maybe even the faith itself. If that is true, then you need to rethink things!

"As for the comment you made about other provinces catching up with TEC, I'm not sure I completely understand what you mean by that? What is it that other provinces are supposed to catch up to? Why is it that other provinces are supposed to catch up?"

The phrase "catch up" was a term I believe the ABC used last year sometime.


"With regards to equal access to the Church, I'm not sure I understand why you believe there isn't equal access. If there is someone who desire to live the Christian life, it seems to be there is full and equal access to anyone who desire to live such a life. As for various ministries, and positions of ministry in the Church, there are certain standards of education, belief, life, and practise that must be adhered to. If one has no desire to strive to fully life a Christ-like life, then that person is not fit for ordained ministry in the Church. That covers a lot of ground. There has been a very long process of listening and dialogue on issues of sexuality for several decades now. It seems to me that the real issue is that there are those who do not want to abide by Scriptural injunctions against certain kinds of activity. It seems that there has been an agenda to get the Church to bless was Scripture does not bless. At some point, such listening becomes pointless if there is no willingness from some to remain faithful to Scripture and the sacred Tradition of the Church. Thoughts?"

Again, we do not all believe that Scripture is against faithful, committed partnerships Greg. I know you do, and your mind, as many others minds are made up. But, ours aren't. We read scripture differently than you when it comes to homosexuality. You implying that we are not being faithful to Scripture and Tradition is a little arrogant. When we do not agree with the traditional understanding, we are not being faithful anymore? The Anglican Church is a broad church of people with different traditions and beliefs that are informed by Scripture, Tradition, and Reason. A thought for you: do you think that is why the leaders of the early Reformed Episcopal Church broke off, cause they did not like the fact that there was more than one way to interpret?

"In the Early Church, the inanimate issues you refer to did have an impact on real people. The inanimate activity that seems to be the huge elephant in the room at this time is that of sexual activity outside the bonds of marriage between one man and one woman, who are real people. The Church is not saying anything about sacrificing people. The Church is simply call everyone to a life of discipleship, it seems to me. I do not know of anyone who has been devalued. On the contrary, the Church loves us enough to tell us the truth and call us to account, and to strive to be like Jesus. Thoughts?"

The truth is there are many faithful, loving, accountable Christians whose relationships reflect the love of God - regardless of their gender. They strive to be selfless and compassionate loving God with their whole hearts, and their neighbors as themselves - which is the way of Christ.

Peace,

Eric

[Fr. Greg]

My dear brother in Christ, Eric:

I understand the language that has been used by some with TEC about striving to be authentic in being who TEC has become, and where TEC is currently at. I admit that I struggle greatly with that kind of language because it seems to negate the call of Jesus for us to be like Him in all things. To be authentic is to state exactly who we are, in relation to God, which is to be sinners who are saved by grace. At the same time, whilst we are redeemed sinners, we are also to stive to live into integrity as sanctified persons. None of this can happen without repentance. It is that kind of language I'm not hearing, which is rather frightening.

All of us have to be authentic about who we are right at this very moment. At the same time, God does not leave us there. God calls us to follow His Son, Jesus, in all things along the path of discipleship. To do so is to move into greater integrity; into greater authenticity in who you were really created to be, not what we have allowed ourselves to become. There is a huge difference.

The only kind of loving relationships that can fully reflect the love of God are those within the sacramental bond of marriage between one man and one wife. This is how God created us, and this is what Jesus even tells us in the Gospels. Other kinds of relationships may exhibit various elements of appropriate relationships, but they fall short of that which God has given us in creation, and calls us to live through Scripture.

My heart breaks for those currently in TEC who are watching the diminution of a once great branch of Christ's Church. I fear that TEC has crossed a line with the rest of the Anglican Communion that will further alienate TEC. My heart also breaks for our brothers and sisters who experience any degree of same-sex attraction who have not lovingly been told the truth about what it means to be authenticly human, whether it be from the fundamentalist types who bash people with the Scriptures and guilt, or those on the other extreme who have abdicated their responsibility to call all of us to be obedient to the authority of Scripture. Of course, that is really is whole crux of the entire problem that is being faced at this time.

I love you my brother, and I do want you to know that. I pray I haven't offended you in any way. I look forward to chatting again.

Fr. Greg

[Eric]

Fr. Greg,

No you have not offended me. But, I do not feel that you understand where I am coming from.

Many in TEC, but not everyone, do not see in any of Jesus' teachings nor in the rest of Holy Scripture animosity for homosexuals or same-sex unions that show the same qualities I have described above. We have studied the same parts of Scripture as you and through lots of prayer, reflection and repentance for our wrongdoings, this is where we feel the living God, the Holy Spirit, leading us.

I think there is concern within TEC that the phrase "authority of Scripture" really means "authority to a Law-based life", instead of bowing to the authority of the Spirit which is informed by Holy Scripture.

Your brother in Christ,

Eric

[Bill Stoker]

i find that we often tell folks they ought to live in humility. but the conversation is usually both parties demanding the same from the other:

: you need to see where i am coming from, and then you'd understand and change your ways
:: well, you need to be humble and accept what we're trying to say
: yes, but if you'd just listen with a humble heart, you would accept what we're trying to say
:: you're living in defiance, you need humility
: you're just abusing your power and not walking humbly!

and it continues, like a bad game of pong or tennis

so, i close with two remarks, and an observation:
1) i wouldn't call myself "Roman Catholic" (or Anglican, or Lutheran, or Episcopalian, or "what-ever") if i a) was not received, or b) if i had serious disagreements....just because. in other words, if i've been received, and i affirm the faith, then so be it. if not, so be it.
2) a community's leadership is still a part of the community. in other words, the mayor lives on a street next to some guy and his family, yet the title or position doesn't make the mayor "above" his neighbor.

O) i think ABC has shown many considerable strengths in such a time. but the global anglican community isn't really set-up to handle such things as serious shizm, or so it seems to me. it's been hard for all, for some harder than others. so much beating, so much accusing, so much critique from all sides. let our prayer be that in 25 years (sounds like a round number), all can still authentically say and affirm the Creed(s).

[Eric]

I guess I am not following your remarks. Could you elaborate?

[Bill Stoker]

eric,
it's kind of like this: when in a serious dialogue when one or more party is feeling pain, distrust, anger, or other emotion, there often isn't an authentic desire to be molded, shaped, or trimmed - but a desire to be heard, and to have the other party mold their perspective to ours.

"humility" is often thrown into the mix as a means to "ask" the other party to hear us, but it is more often not a plea, but emerges as a demand. however, humility cannot be asked or demanded. it is something that simply is.

community is a hard thing sometimes.

it's hard for the individual & it's difficult for the body. it's often uneasy to be an individual who feels they posses grave concerns to be molded by the community. and it's difficult for the body to bear witness to individuals whom they perceive as going in a direction contrary to the ethos to slow down and listen.

::
i'm not sure what to make of all this eric. but in the end, i hope that ecusa remains faithful to the anglican community at large, continues to hold to the apostles teaching(s), to the breaking of bread, and to prayer. and i hope that the community (both local, and global) continues to rend itself to the cries of the desperate.

pax