« October 2007 | Main | December 2007 »
November 27, 2007
Second Anglican Network in Canada bishop received into Southern Cone
“I am deeply grieved that the church I have loved and served for over 30 years, has left me no choice.” said Bishop Malcolm
Second Anglican Network in Canada bishop received into Southern Cone
22 November 2007
Anglican Network in Canada
(see also: Church of England Newspaper Online Daily Edition 23/11/07)
Bishop Malcolm Harding, retired Bishop of Brandon, has announced that he will minister under Archbishop Gregory Venables and the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone of the Americas, effective immediately.
Bishop Harding is the second Canadian bishop to make this announcement in the past week. It was announced on Friday that the Right Reverend Donald Harvey had been received under the Primatial authority of Archbishop Venables and would be free to offer episcopal oversight to biblically faithful Canadian Anglicans distressed by the seismic shift in the theology and practice of the Anglican Church of Canada.
Bishop Harding will assist Bishop Harvey in performing episcopal ministry in Western Canada.
We are thanking God that Bishop Don Harvey is now a part of this Province,” said Archbishop Venables. “We are equally delighted to receive Bishop Malcolm Harding as our co-worker. He too is a man whose very being is centred around the gospel and whom the Lord has used for the salvation of many… It is also good to be able to say that these steps we have taken are fully supported by a significant number of other orthodox Anglican provinces. There is no need for any to walk alone or step outside the Anglican family.”
"Bishop Malcolm is a highly respected and gifted man of God, whose gentle humility and passion for revival is deeply appreciated by biblically faithful Canadian Anglicans,” said Bishop Harvey. “I look forward to ministering together.”
Bishop Harding, who also has a master's degree in social work, ministered in the Anglican Church of Canada (ACC) for 30 years, retiring in 2001. Since retirement, he has served with Anglican Renewal Ministries (ARM), traveling across Canada to promote renewal in the church that he loved and served.
“I am deeply grieved that the church I have loved and served for over 30 years, has left me no choice.” said Bishop Malcolm, “My heart yearns for revival in Canada and in Anglicanism but I have lost hope for reformation within the Anglican Church of Canada.
I now realize that we cannot have unity at the expense of truth. I cannot in conscience travel the path that the Anglican Church of Canada is traveling, away from historic Christian teaching and established Anglican practice.”
The Anglican Province of the Southern Cone (Iglesia Anglicana del Cono Sur de America) is one of 38 Provinces that make up the global Anglican Communion. It encompasses much of South America and includes Bolivia, Chile, Paraguay, Peru, and Uruguay and Argentina.
The Anglican Network in Canada is currently holding its national conference in Burlington, Ontario to outline details of the new episcopal option now available to biblically faithful Canadian Anglicans who are in “serious theological dispute” with the Anglican Church of Canada and want to be recognized as “fully Anglican” and in the mainstream of global Anglicanism.
The Anglican Network in Canada is committed to remaining faithful to Holy Scripture and established Anglican doctrine and to ensuring that orthodox Canadian Anglicans are able to remain in full communion with their spiritual brothers and sisters around the world.
Contact:
Marilyn Jacobson, communications
Anglican Network in Canada
604 929-0369
Posted by latimer at 11:27 AM | Comments (0)
November 23, 2007
Bishop Ingham says Church is now in ‘full-blown schism’
The Anglican Church in Canada is in ‘full-blown schism’, the Bishop
of New Westminster, the Rt Rev Michael Ingham, has claimed.
Church of England Newspaper
WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 21, 2007 No: 226
Bishop Ingham says Church is now in ‘full-blown schism’
THE ANGLICAN Church in Canada is in ‘full-blown schism’, the Bishop
of New Westminster, the Rt Rev Michael Ingham, has claimed.
His comments, reported in a Canadian newspaper, Anglican Journal Canada come as a retired bishop announced plans to ordain two men in conservative dioceses who are linking with the Province of the Southern Cone.
Bishop Ingham has declared that only he (or another bishop to whom he
has delegated authority) can ordain priests in the diocese. He warned that if the Rt Rev Don Harvey goes ahead with the service, the
ordinations will be ‘irregular’ and he will take steps to discipline
those concerned.
The former Bishop of Eastern Newfoundland and Labrador, the Rt Rev
Don Harvey, announced last weekend that he was coming out of retirement to look after conservative Canadian Anglicans who are
opposed to the national Church’s liberal direction.
Bishop Ingham told his Diocesan Council that he had issued a warning
about the service of ordination planned for December 2 ‘not to restrain freedom, but to preserve freedom’. He said that he believes the diocese is one in which people can hold differing theological positions in an atmosphere of “generosity and tolerance and a spirit of charity.”
He said that he had written to Bishop Harvey explicitly prohibiting the planned service, and if it goes ahead he will take disciplinary
action.
The row has erupted over divisions on homosexuality, and Bishop Ingham has been at the centre of the dispute. Although the American
Church is at the top of conservatives’ concerns, because of their consecration of an openly gay man, the conservatives are also unhappy at moves in the Diocese of New Westminster to authorise gay blessings, which they say are against Christian doctrine.
Last week it was reported that the conservative Archbishop of the Southern Cone, the Rt Rev Gregory Venables, was preparing to
offer pastoral care to other dioceses in north America who felt they could no longer remain within official Anglican structures.
But last weekend the Canadian Church’s Council ruled that it would
not recognise the actions by the Southern Cone ‘purporting to extend its jurisdiction beyond its own borders.’
The Archbishop of Canterbury has been asked that he ‘make clear that such actions are not a valid expression of Anglicanism.’
Posted by latimer at 12:15 PM | Comments (0)
November 21, 2007
Carey and Tutu wade into conflict over gays
Dr Williams is to give an address entitled "Present realities and future possibilities for lesbians and gay men in the Church"
Carey and Tutu wade into conflict over gays By Jonathan Wynne-Jones
Last Updated: 4:36pm GMT 18/11/2007
The Anglican Church will be hit next week by a new row over its "obsession" with homosexuality.
Two of the Church's most respected figures are to deepen the growing rift over gays, which already threatens the biggest split in the Anglican movement since it began four centuries ago.
In attacks that will be seen as aimed at the leadership of the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, both his predecessor, Lord Carey, and the South African archbishop Desmond Tutu take conflicting views on the issue.
advertisementThe South African Nobel Peace Prize winner accuses the Anglican movement of being "almost obsessed with questions of human sexuality". He says that under Dr Williams's leadership the church became "extraordinarily homophobic" during the debate over whether Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest, should be allowed to be the Bishop of New Hampshire.
Lord Carey accuses liberals of being "unbiblical" and undermining marriage by supporting gay partnerships.
His outspoken defence of the right of Christians to say that homosexual behaviour is wrong is in marked contrast to the tone of his successor, who has adopted a more conciliatory approach.
Insisting that he will "stand firm" against the pro-gay agenda, Lord Carey says that traditionalists should not be considered homophobic for saying that same-sex relationships are not acceptable.
His remarks will be broadcast two days before a controversial service being held by Dr Williams for gay clergy and their partners. The archbishop is due to celebrate the eucharist with them despite traditionalists claiming that this would defy Church guidelines that say that homosexual priests should be celibate. Evangelicals wrote to Dr Williams last month urging him not to preside at the service. Liberals fear Lord Carey's comments will add to the pressure on Dr Williams to pull out.
Lord Carey says: "I don't think that homosexuality is a human rights issue and one of justice. For me and many, many people, the issue is deeply theological. It has a lot to do with our humanity and how we find it and express it, to do with marriage… faithfulness and friendship."
Lord Carey and Archbishop Tutu make their comments on a Radio 4 programme, From Calvary to Lambeth. Lord Carey says: "I've never discriminated against them [homosexuals]. Having said that, I believe that the Church should have the right to make its own rules and I stand very firmly with what the Bible has to say about practising homosexuality."
He argues that the Bible is "clearly unequivocal" in stating that it is wrong, and accuses liberals in the Church who support a homosexual lifestyle of undermining marriage.
"I respect homosexuals, their right to exist, their right to set up homes and have same-sex relationships, but it's quite a different thing to say that those things should be normative within the Christian community," he says. "The Christian community has every right to say that certain behaviour is right, certain behaviour is wrong, and to hold to that without being called homophobic."
Lord Carey's interview will be broadcast at 8pm on Tuesday, November 27. Two days later, Dr Williams is to give an address entitled "Present realities and future possibilities for lesbians and gay men in the Church" during the service at St Peter's, Eaton Square. The London parish contains some of the most liberal Anglicans.
Canon Giles Goddard, chairman of Inclusive Church – a pro-gay group - said Lord Carey's comments were "seriously unhelpful" to his successor's attempts to prevent the Church from splitting. But evangelicals will welcome Lord Carey's remarks.
Dr Williams says his attendance at the service is an attempt to listen to the concerns of different groups within the Church and to try to resolve the divisions.
Posted by latimer at 03:54 PM | Comments (0)
November 20, 2007
Leader of evangelicals 'unChristian' say secularists
Dr Edwards said: "These groups have perceived that I am so intolerant that they will not tolerate my place on a body negotiating the choppy waters of 21st century tolerance."
November 14, 2007
Leader of evangelicals 'unChristian' say secularists
Ruth Gledhill Religion Correspondent of The Times
Secularists have condemned the leader of Britain's evangelicals as "unChristian" after he accused them of exhibiting intolerance of his religious views.
The National Secular Society has attacked Dr Joel Edwards, leader of the Evangelical Alliance, for remarks made at the end of an address by Chief Rabbi Dr Jonathan Sacks on the need for religious tolerance.
The row gives just one insight into the future difficulties of enforcing legislation against incitement to hatred against homosexuals and against incitement of religious hatred.
Dr Edwards, who has been appointed a commissioner on the newly-formed Equality and Human Rights Commission, has been accused of making a career out of "opposing equality for homosexuals". After news of his appointment emerged, secularists described his organisation as "one of the most homophobic in Britain, sheltering extreme anti-gay groups."
After the Chief Rabbi finished his address on the need for religious tolerance, Dr Edwards said: "These groups have perceived that I am so intolerant that they will not tolerate my place on a body negotiating the choppy waters of 21st century tolerance.
"The timing could not have been more perfect. These comments go right to the heart of the debate that we are launching with Dr Sacks’ address: where does religious conviction fit in to society’s balance of rights, responsibilities, diversity, equality and multi-culturalism? The secularist would of course answer 'it doesn’t', but this would be to betray history. As Dr Sacks has so brilliantly said, the roots of liberalism and the new found tolerance that went with it were in fact religiously inspired."
Only a few weeks ago the Evangelical Alliance was among the organisations that celebrated 360 years since the Putney Debates, which pioneered the liberal democratic settlement, where the Levellers called for equal rights irrespective of status or property, although not gender. Dr Edwards said: "It was to Genesis and the Gospels that they turned to justify their demands. "
And some of the Levellers' prayer meetings lasted for five hours, which in the Jamaican Pentecostalism from which Dr Edwards has emerged would be referred to as The Preamble.
Dr Edwards said: "To remove religious conviction from the public square is as sensible as removing the engines from an aircraft in flight. For a while the plane may glide and to all extent seem fine, but before long the altimeter will only be headed in one direction, by which time it is too late to start remembering how it was you got airborne in the first place.
"A tolerance which calls for the removal of conviction is no tolerance at all. If modern day politics seeks to silence or exclude voices, be they religious, gay or atheist, then a key pillar of an open society will have been destroyed and we will be the poorer for it. It is our task in this debate to persuade society that tolerance is not the absence of conviction, or even of conversion. It is the absence of coercion. In a liberal democracy it is more intolerant to disallow religious views based on secular prejudice: after all, secularism is just another religious position."
Keith Porteus-Wood, of the National Secular Society, told The Times that Dr Edwards' remarks were not an accurate reflection of what is going on and accused him of being "unChristian" in his attack on secularism.
He pointed out that the Evangelical Alliance website has a report on it entitled Faith, Hope and Homosexuality which reads: “We opposed moves within certain churches to accept and/or endorse sexually active homosexual partnerships as legitimate form of Christian relationship.” The report also says: “We do not accept that to reject homoerotic sexual practice on biblical grounds is itself homophobic.” And it encourages evangelical congregations to welcome gay people – only on the understanding that they are seeking to “renounce same-sex sexual relationships.”
Mr Porteus-Wood said his objection was not to Mr Edwards’ religious convictions, but to his seeking to impose them on to a commission that is there to serve everyone – not just Christians.
Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: “Joel Edwards’ definition of tolerance, rights and homophobia are very different to those of the body on which he serves. He seems to think religious freedom means the freedom to take rights away from other people. He must not be permitted to remain on this commission in a role that will allow him to compromise its aims.”
In his address, Dr Sacks warned that society was in danger of losing its great traditions of tolerance.
He said: "We are witnessing the death of respect and you see it everywhere from road rage itself, to football hooliganism, to street crime, to the fact - I find almost unbelievable - the number of teachers who get assaulted by pupils or nurses by patients. This is an age in which people speak without listening, condemn without understanding and even the media sometimes seem unable to understand anything more complicated than a sound bite.
"This new intolerance is threatening Christian societies on campus, people who wear crucifixes and happen to work at airports, there are bans on public displays of Christian symbols and sometimes even Christmas itself is the festival that dare not speak its name.
"How did this happen? We were supposed to be so tolerant so open minded, so accepting of diversity. How come we are measurably a less tolerant society than we were 20 years ago?"
He suggested it was because of the loss of a shared moral code. "What then happens when two views clash? The answer is the loudest or the angriest voice wins. If I can’t refute you then I can ridicule you, I can intimidate you and even, if need be, ban you. That is how the old tolerance which made Britain so special and so beloved to all of us has mutated into the new intolerance, or as I called it in my book in one of the chapters, ‘the death of freedom in the name of freedom’."
Dr Sacks said: "That is why I believe that all of us Muslims, Jews, Hindus, Christians and Sikhs must work together to recreate a tolerant society on the religious base that tolerance was born in this country three and a half centuries ago."
Posted by latimer at 01:30 PM | Comments (0)
November 14, 2007
A letter from Bishop Iker to the Presiding Bishop
"I have received your letter of November 8th ... The threatening tone of your open letter makes no attempt to promote reconciliation, mediation, or even dialogue about our profound theological differences." Bishop Iker
A letter from Bishop Iker to the Presiding Bishop
November 12, 2007
The Most Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori
815 Second Avenue
New York, NY 10017
Dear Katharine,
I have received your letter of November 8th and am rather surprised by your suggestion that I have somehow abandoned the communion of the church and may be subject to ecclesiastical discipline. Such a charge is baseless. I have abandoned nothing, and I have violated no canons. Every year at our Chrism Mass, I very happily reaffirm my ordination vows, along with all our clergy, that I will be “loyal to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of Christ as this Church has received them.” (BCP, pages 526 and 538)
It is highly inappropriate for you to attempt to interfere in the internal life of this diocese as we prayerfully prepare to gather in Convention. The threatening tone of your open letter makes no attempt to promote reconciliation, mediation, or even dialogue about our profound theological differences. Instead, it appears designed to intimidate our delegates and me, in an attempt to deter us from taking any action that opposes the direction in which you are leading our Church. It is deeply troubling that you would have me prevent the clergy and laity of this diocese from openly discussing our future place in the life of the wider Anglican Communion, as we debate a variety of proposals. As you well know, the polity of this Church requires the full participation of the clergy and lay orders, not just bishops, in the decision making process. It grieves me that as the Presiding Bishop you would misuse your office in an attempt to intimidate and manipulate this diocese.
While I do not wish to meet antagonism with antagonism, I must remind you that 25 years ago this month, the newly formed Diocese of Fort Worth voluntarily voted to enter into union with the General Convention of the Episcopal Church. If circumstances warrant it, we can likewise, by voluntary vote, terminate that relationship. Your aggressive, dictatorial posturing has no place in that decision. Sadly, however, your missive will now be one of the factors that our Convention will consider as we determine the future course of this diocese for the next 25 years and beyond, under God’s grace and guidance.
In closing, let me be very clear. While your threats deeply sadden us, they do not frighten us. We will continue to stand firm for the unchanging truth of the Holy Scriptures and the redeeming Gospel of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, whatever the costs. I shall continue to pray for you, as I trust you will pray for me, in the difficult days ahead.
Faithfully in Christ,
The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth
The Presiding Bishop’s letter
8 November 2007
The Rt. Rev. Jack Iker
The Episcopal Diocese of Ft. Worth
2900 Alemeda Street
Fort Worth, TX 76108
Dear Jack,
As you are undoubtedly aware, it is my view that recent amendments to your Diocese's constitution violate the Constitutional requirement that the Diocese maintain an "unqualified accession" to the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church. I have now reviewed several proposed constitutional amendments that will be considered at your forthcoming diocesan convention. It is evident to me that several of these proposed changes would further violate the Church's Constitution, while some other proposed changes would undo the problems created by the earlier amendments. It is clear from your public statements and from what I understand your position to be regarding these matters that you endorse the first set of changes. Your statements and actions in recent months demonstrate an intention to lead your diocese into a position that would purportedly permit it to depart from the Episcopal Church. All these efforts, in my view, display a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between The Episcopal Church and its dioceses.
I call upon you to recede from this direction and to lead your diocese on a new course that recognizes the interdependent and hierarchical relationship between the national Church and its dioceses and parishes. That relationship is at the heart of our mission, as expressed in our polity. Specifically, I sincerely hope that you will change your position and urge your diocese at its forthcoming convention to adopt the proposed amendments that will bring the Diocese's constitution into agreement with the Church's Constitution and Canons.
If your course does not change, I shall regrettably be compelled to see that appropriate canonical steps are promptly taken to consider whether you have abandoned the Communion of this Church -- by actions and substantive statements, however, they may be phrased -- and whether you have committed canonical offences that warrant disciplinary action.
It grieves me that any bishop of this Church would seek to lead any of its members out of it. I would remind you of my open offer of an Episcopal Visitor if you wish to receive pastoral care from another bishop. I continue to pray for reconciliation of this situation, and I remain
Your servant in Christ,
Katharine Jefferts Schori
Posted by latimer at 10:32 AM | Comments (0)
Pittsburgh Episcopal Diocese votes to leave & letter from Katharine Jefferts Schori
* Pittsburgh Episcopal Diocese votes to leave and will realign with theologically conservative Anglican province in another nation
* If your course does not change, I shall regrettably be compelled to see that appropriate canonical steps are promptly taken to consider whether you have abandoned the Communion of this Church ...and whether you have committed canonical offences that warrant disciplinary action." Katharine Jefferts Schori
Pittsburgh Episcopal Diocese votes to leave
Pittsburgh will realign with theologically conservative Anglican province in another nation
Bishop Robert Duncan -- "We have a tough road ahead. We will be faithful and charitable and do everything we can to help those congregations who are uneasy about this, or who may be very opposed to this, to be part of our fellowship."
In yet another ecclesiastical earthquake to rock the Episcopal Church, the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh has voted to leave that denomination and realign with a theologically conservative Anglican province in another, yet to be chosen, nation.
At their annual convention in Johnstown, laity voted, 118-58, and clergy voted, 109-24, to join another Anglican province, and to allow like-minded parishes outside the 11-county territory to become part of the Diocese of Pittsburgh. The vote came two days after Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori of the Episcopal Church warned that such action could cause the denomination to remove Bishop Robert Duncan from office as bishop of Pittsburgh.
"We have a tough road ahead. We will be faithful and charitable and do everything we can to help those congregations who are uneasy about this, or who may be very opposed to this, to be part of our fellowship," Bishop Duncan said after the vote. During his speech prior to the vote, he proposed finding ways for two local Anglican dioceses, one of which would be the minority still aligned with the Episcopal Church, to share important assets such as Trinity Cathedral and Sheldon Calvary Camp.
He read the brief reply to Bishop Jefferts Schori. The first of its three lines was a famous quote from Martin Luther when he broke with the Catholic Church: "Here I stand. I can do no other." It continued, "I will neither compromise the faith once and for all delivered to the saints, nor will I abandon the sheep who elected me to protect them."
So far, he said later, three Anglican provinces have "expressed willingness" to welcome the Diocese of Pittsburgh, but he did not name them. The resolution adopted yesterday cannot be adopted unless the convention approves it again at next year's convention. A choice about which province to join will not be made until after that vote. The Anglican provinces that are best known for taking in conservative U.S. parishes are in Africa.
Because of the requirement to vote again next year, "Today's action of the Diocese of Pittsburgh is not final," said Robert Williams, director of communications for the Episcopal Church. "But, more to the point, dioceses do not leave the Episcopal Church. Dioceses are set in place by the churchwide general convention."
The divisions between liberal and conservative Episcopalians, and between many of the U.S. bishops and their counterparts in the global South, derive from differences over biblical authority and interpretation. Many conservatives say their main concern is that some bishops do not believe that Jesus was God incarnate.
But the differences reached a breaking point in 2003 with the consecration of a partnered gay bishop in New Hampshire. The Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh, with about 20,000 members in 71 churches, is part of the 2.2 million-member Episcopal Church, the U.S. branch of the 72 million-member Anglican Communion. At least three other dioceses have initiated or are contemplating measures similar to Pittsburgh's.
The Rev. George Werner, a former dean of Trinity Cathedral, Downtown, and a former top official of the Episcopal Church, told the assembly that Bishop Jefferts Schori was not trying to intimidate them, as some speakers had said. "Her heart is filled with Jesus," he said, saying that it was her legal and moral responsibility to exercise governance over the church and the property that was entrusted to the denomination.
After the vote, the Rev. Werner predicted "chaos" in the Diocese of Pittsburgh as parishes are pitted against each other and against the national church in property lawsuits. Joan Gunderson, a member of Church of the Redeemer, Squirrel Hill, had presented a counter-resolution to keep the diocese in the Episcopal Church. "I think it's been a tragic mistake. The Episcopal Church is not what it has been called [by those who want to leave]. I mourn the division and its consequences," she said after the vote.
In his speech, Bishop Duncan said that diocese had come to a fork in the theological road. "The matter finally comes down to an unavoidable choice between cultures. There is the culture of the wider Episcopal Church: Theologically innovative, at the edge of mainstream Christianity, secularly attuned, declining ... and ready to sue or depose to obtain its way," he said. "By contrast there is the culture of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh: Scripturally centered, critiquing the secular agenda, among the fastest and few growing dioceses of the Episcopal Church, relative to the population decline ... allowing vast freedoms in the form and manner of ministry."
Debate was fraught with talk of litigation and of loss of pensions and cuts in salary for clergy who left the Episcopal Church. Many supporters of the resolution said those were sacrifices they were prepared to make.
"At the end of the day, the issues before us aren't about canons and conventions and procedures and lawsuits. They are about the centrality of the cross of Christ," said the Rev. Jonathan Millard, rector of Ascension parish, Oakland, who introduced the resolution.
Not all theological conservatives advocated breaking now. The Rev. Daniel Hall, an Episcopalian working at First Lutheran Church, Downtown, said he shared Bishop Duncan's theological concerns, but that the primates of the Anglican Communion should be allowed more time to try to resolve the situation.
"I cannot support this resolution because of this time of spiritual desolation in which I find myself ... St. Ignatius commends us to refrain from making significant decisions when we find ourselves so desolated," he said.
Supporters and opponents of the resolution spoke alternately and in equal numbers. "As a lesbian, I have found the Episcopal Church to be embracing. I have been transformed by the love in this church," said Mary Pat Donegan from Church of the Redeemer, Squirrel Hill, who wanted to keep the diocese in the denomination.
Joan Morris, a member of St. Andrew's Church, Highland Park, spoke against breaking apart. "None of us has a full understanding or could divine the full truth, but we do have a divine call to search together as one body in Jesus Christ, regardless of the differences among us. Without each other we each see a smaller truth and lose the corrections that we need from each other," she said.
After the vote, the Rev. Werner said he believed that Bishop Jefferts Schori was willing to talk, but that simply allowing local Episcopalians to leave the denomination taking millions of dollars of Episcopal property was not a legal option.
"On a case-by-case basis, all things are possible. The presiding bishop will carry out her fiduciary responsibility. She will keep the door unlocked. She will welcome people back," he said.
Bishop Duncan said he was proud of the way people on all sides had conducted themselves. "This is the most wonderful diocese in the church," he said. "There is no reason that we cannot continue being this way with each other" even as different members choose different provinces.
"Maybe some day God will put us back together," he said.
Letter from the Presiding Bishop to Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan
31.10.07
The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan
Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA
Dear Bob,
There have been numerous public references in recent weeks regarding resolutions to be introduced at your forthcoming diocesan convention. Those resolutions, if adopted, would amend several of your diocesan canons and begin the process of amending one or more provisions of your diocesan Constitution. I have reviewed a number of these proposed resolutions, and it is evident to me that they would violate the Constitutional requirement that the Diocese conform to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church. It is apparent from your pre-convention report that you endorse these proposed changes. I am also aware of other of your statements and actions in recent months that demonstrate an intention to lead your diocese into a position that would purportedly permit it to depart from The Episcopal Church. All these efforts, in my view, display a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between The Episcopal Church and its dioceses. Our Constitution explicitly provides that a diocese must accede to the Constitution and Canons of the Church.
I call upon you to recede from this direction and to lead your diocese on a new course that recognizes the interdependent and hierarchical relationship between the national Church and its dioceses and parishes. That relationship is at the heart of our mission, as expressed in our polity. Specifically, I sincerely hope that you will change your position and urge your diocese at its forthcoming convention not to adopt the resolutions that you have until now supported.
If your course does not change, I shall regrettably be compelled to see that appropriate canonical steps are promptly taken to consider whether you have abandoned the Communion of this Church -- by actions and substantive statements, however they may be phrased -- and whether you have committed canonical offences that warrant disciplinary action.
It grieves me that any bishop of this Church would seek to lead any of its members out of it. I would remind you of my open offer of an Episcopal Visitor if you wish to receive pastoral care from another bishop. I continue to pray for reconciliation of this situation, and I remain
Your servant in Christ,
Katharine Jefferts Schori
Letter to the Presiding Bishop from the Bishop of Pittsburgh
1st November, A.D. 2007
The Feast of All Saints
The Most Revd Katharine Jefferts Schori
Episcopal Church Center
New York, New York
Dear Katharine,
Here I stand. I can do no other. I will neither compromise the Faith once delivered to the saints, nor will I abandon the sheep who elected me to protect them.
Pax et bonum in Christ Jesus our Lord,
+Bob Pittsburgh
Posted by latimer at 10:17 AM | Comments (0)
November 08, 2007
Global South Archbishops call for postponement of Lambeth
Today nine Primates, including Nigeria's Peter Akinola, Uganda's Luke Orombi and South East Asia's John Chew, said the conference should be postponed until all bishops could meet "in a spirit of true collegiality and unity in the faith."
Ruth Gledhill Religion Correspondent of The Times
7 November 2007
The evangelical Archbishops who head the "Global South" grouping have called on the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, to postpone next year's Lambeth Conference.
Several senior bishops, including the Bishop of Rochester, Dr Michael Nazir-Ali, have already warned they could boycott the conference, the ten-yearly gathering of Anglican Communion bishops from across the globe, because of the row over gays.
Today nine Primates, including Nigeria's Peter Akinola, Uganda's Luke Orombi and South East Asia's John Chew, said the conference should be postponed until all bishops could meet "in a spirit of true collegiality and unity in the faith."
Their call came just days after the 490th anniversary of the day Martin Luther nailed his 95 theses to the door of the Cathedral in Wittenberg, prompting the Reformation. This week, organisers of the Lambeth Conference are meeting to agree the agenda and other matters regarding the July meeting at Kent University. Dr Williams has previously indicated that he has no intention of acceding to calls to postpone it.
In a letter to all the Church's Primates, Dr Akinola said: "The world needs to understand that the situation that we now confront is not primarily about structure or conferences but about irreconcilable truth claims. It is worth remembering that in the Biblical narratives religious structures have often been the enemy of revealed truth."
Meanwhile, Britain's lesbian and gay Christian community community have launched a protest against the appointment of evangelical leader Joel Edwards to be a protector of gay rights.
The appointment of Joel Edwards, head of the Evangelical Alliance, as commissioner to the new human rights and equality "superquango" was also condemned by secularists as a "slap in the face" to the gay community.
The National Secular Society called for an "urgent rethink” of the appointment of Mr Edwards as commissioner to the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
The Evangelical Alliance is among the Christian bodies that have opposed aspects of the Sexual Orientation Regulations. The legislation outlaws discrimination against gay people in the area of goods and services.
Terry Sanderson, president of the National Secular Society, said: “This appointment must be reversed immediately.
“Mr Edwards comes to the job with a pre-formed agenda that is based on a literalist reading of the Bible. How on earth is he going to look objectively at gay issues when he has made a career out of opposing equality for homosexuals?”
The Rev Richard Kirker, of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, said: “I was stunned when Joel told me personally he was to be a commissioner on the Equality and Human Rights Commission.”
“Holding such a key role in the organisation charged with supporting gay equality will put him at loggerheads with many in his own fundamentalist constituency. I am delighted he now seems to have “seen the light” and can embrace and support all the recent pro-gay legislation without exception, and with a clear conscience. I can only hope his late conversion to equality is genuine, deep-rooted and sincere."
Posted by latimer at 10:18 AM | Comments (0)
Pittsburgh Episcopal Diocese Votes to Leave the Church
By more than a two-to-one vote, members of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh voted Friday in favor of separating from the national church because of a theological rift that began with the consecration of an openly gay bishop in 2003.
Pittsburgh Episcopal Diocese Votes to Leave the Church
By SEAN D. HAMILL
Published: November 3, 2007
New York Times
JOHNSTOWN, Pa., Nov. 2 — By more than a two-to-one vote, members of the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh voted Friday in favor of separating from the national church because of a theological rift that began with the consecration of an openly gay bishop in 2003.
The vote sets the stage for what could become a protracted legal battle between the diocese and the Episcopal Church U.S.A., which had warned Pittsburgh’s bishop not to go forward with the vote.
After passionate appeals from both sides of the debate, clergy members and lay people voted 227 to 82 to “realign” the conservative diocese.
If Friday’s vote is approved again in a year, the diocese will begin steps to remove itself from the American church and join with another province in the worldwide Anglican Communion.
After the vote, Bishop Robert W. Duncan of Pittsburgh, who is also moderator of the Anglican Communion Network, an alliance of conservative dioceses and parishes, defended the decision.
“What we’re trying to do is state clearly in the United States for the authority of Scripture,” Bishop Duncan said after the vote, taken during the diocese’s annual convention in this city about 50 miles east of Pittsburgh.
The vote was necessary, he said, because the more liberal bishops now in the majority in the national church “have hijacked my church, and that’s how most of the people here feel.”
Some who opposed separation said it would create nothing but chaos for the diocese.
“I think it was tragic,” said Joan Gunderson, president of Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh and a lay deputy who voted against the resolution. “I’m concerned what will follow.”
A day earlier, the head of the Episcopal Church U.S.A., Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, sent Bishop Duncan a letter, warning him that he could face discipline and civil suits if he “committed canonical offenses” including overseeing approval of the resolution.
A spokesman for Bishop Jefferts Schori referred questions to the Rev. George Werner, president of the House of Deputies for the national church until last year.
“Katharine Schori is extremely clear,” Mr. Werner said. “If a diocese like this chooses to claim $30 million in trust funds and 70 churches, she’d be negligent in her duty to let them leave. She can’t back down.”
Mr. Werner was referring to the possibility that the diocese would try to retain control of its resources, buildings and land if it separates from the national church. Bishop Duncan said he was willing to face whatever action the national church takes.
“We may face more legal action, and I may face action myself, but it is clear from our leaders that they’re willing to pay the price of their position, and so am I,” he said.
Pittsburgh joins one other diocese, San Joaquin in Fresno, Calif., to have a preliminary vote to separate from the national church. San Joaquin’s annual convention is in December, when it could vote a second time to make its decision formal. At least one other diocese, in Fort Worth, is considering a similar preliminary vote.
In 2003, the Episcopal Church ordained an openly gay man, V. Gene Robinson, as bishop of New Hampshire.
Posted by latimer at 10:12 AM | Comments (0)
November 06, 2007
Rally to keep spirit of Christmas alive
"Members of both faiths found it offensive when people downplayed the festival in the mistaken belief it could upset minorities" the Christian Muslim Forum said.
Rally to keep spirit of Christmas alive
By Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent
Last Updated: 6:20am GMT 05/11/2007
An influential coalition of Christian and Muslim leaders defended Christmas yesterday after a Labour think-tank suggested that it be downgraded to improve community relations.
Members of both faiths found it offensive when people downplayed the festival in the mistaken belief it could upset minorities, the Christian Muslim Forum said.
The vast majority of Britons want to preserve the country's Christian heritage, says the Rt Rev David Gillett, joint forum president and the Bishop of Bolton.
A controversial report by the Institute of Public Policy Research argues that, while it might be difficult to ban Christmas entirely, it should only be celebrated if other religious groups' festivals are given similar prominence in order to treat all communities equally.
The forum had repeatedly emphasised the need for all religious traditions to be accorded their rightful place, said Bishop Gillett.
Sheikh Ibrahim Mogra, a Leicester imam and joint head of the forum's community and public affairs, said: "We would not be happy with the downplaying of any festival. We don't believe that equality is achieved by downgrading anyone."
There might be one or two Muslims who object to Christmas but the vast majority want religion in all its forms to be celebrated, he says.
There is growing concern among faiths that secularists are attempting to push religion to the margins of public life.
Politicians increasingly avoid Christmas cards with a religious theme and town halls often try to airbrush Christianity out of Christmas.
In 1998, Birmingham renamed its celebration Winterval and, in 2001, Luton created a Harry Potter-themed event called Luminos.
Posted by latimer at 10:16 AM | Comments (0)
November 02, 2007
US Presiding Bishop "reaches out" to bishops attempting to withdraw dioceses
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori is making public a letter of warning that is being sent to a bishop who is actively seeking to withdraw his diocese from the Episcopal Church, and has stated that letters to other bishops will follow.
"In this way the Presiding Bishop is reaching out with open arms once more to those bishops contemplating realignments for their dioceses, while also warning them of the consequences should they choose to follow through with their proposed actions," said the Rev. Dr. Charles Robertson, Canon to the Presiding Bishop.
The full text of the first of these letters, addressed to Bishop Robert Duncan of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, is included below.
Presiding Bishop reaches out to bishops attempting to withdraw dioceses
By Jan Nunley, October 31, 2007
Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori is making public a letter of warning that is being sent to a bishop who is actively seeking to withdraw his diocese from the Episcopal Church, and has stated that letters to other bishops will follow.
"In this way the Presiding Bishop is reaching out with open arms once more to those bishops contemplating realignments for their dioceses, while also warning them of the consequences should they choose to follow through with their proposed actions," said the Rev. Dr. Charles Robertson, Canon to the Presiding Bishop.
The full text of the first of these letters, addressed to Bishop Robert Duncan of the Diocese of Pittsburgh, is included below.
In a private session of the Executive Council, meeting in Dearborn, Michigan, October 26-28, the Presiding Bishop's Chancellor, David Booth Beers, gave an extensive review of the state of property litigation and other legal issues and related disciplinary considerations confronting the Episcopal Church and articulated the policies of Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori regarding those issues.
"This is hard. The concepts are hard," said Beers. "It is costly. And it requires a lot of pastoral care of those involved."
Beers talked about three types of situations confronting the church:
* When a group of congregants decides it no longer wants to be part of the Episcopal Church but intend to retain the church building and other parish assets;
* When a bishop and diocesan leadership determine to allow such a group to retain Episcopal Church property under certain circumstances;
* When a bishop and other diocesan leadership decide they no longer want to be part of the Episcopal Church.
In the first group of cases, Beers said, litigation has recently been successfully concluded in the dioceses of Missouri, East Carolina, and Rochester, while other court decisions in recent years favoring the Episcopal Church have been made in Colorado, Massachusetts, New Jersey, Virginia, New York, and several other dioceses.
Favorable lower court decisions have been issued by a trial court in the Diocese of South Carolina and by an intermediate appeals court in three cases from the Diocese of Los Angeles. All of those decisions are being appealed. In Long Island, a decision is expected within a month in the case of a parish that sued the Episcopal Church and the diocese. Lawsuits are also pending in the Dioceses of Colorado, Connecticut, Northwest Texas, San Diego, and Virginia.
The Presiding Bishop has been asked to file an amicus brief in a lawsuit involving the Diocese of Colorado, where the dispute is complicated by the fact that the congregation's rector has been accused and found guilty by a diocesan court of embezzlement.
The lawsuit against a group of 11 breakaway Virginia groups is "robust" litigation, said Beers, which has raised interesting questions about the nature of the Anglican Communion itself.
Lawsuits could conceivably be forthcoming in Georgia, Nebraska, Northern California, Ohio, South Dakota, Southern Virginia and a few other dioceses, Beers said.
There have been several settlements, including one in Central New York, where the departing group promised not to invite a bishop from another Anglican jurisdiction until it had secured its own space.
Another settlement in the Diocese of Olympia is being revisited by the incoming bishop.
"What we do for the dioceses in these cases is to provide legal research and other materials such as expert statements, briefs, and advice on litigation strategy. Then we hold a conference with the bishop and other leaders of the diocese such as the chancellor and standing committee officers," said Beers. "We talk to them about what to do about the departing group, how to help those who remain with the Episcopal Church, what to do about the clergy involved, what to do if another Anglican bishop is involved, when it's best to settle, when to pursue litigation, and what works and what doesn't in litigation."
The costs are "heavy," said Beers, but national expenses generally have not exceeded those of some single dioceses in the church. By contrast, he said, it has been reported that the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA) congregations in Virginia have spent at least $1 million to date on the pending litigation.
Beers predicted another year or so of lawsuits.
"The total number of parishes in active litigation is probably 20-25, at the outside," he said.
The second category of cases involves diocesan leadership negotiating with congregants who wish to leave with Episcopal Church property. Agreements have been made with congregations in Dallas, Kansas, Olympia, Quincy, Rhode Island, and Virginia.
Critical to these negotiations, in the Presiding Bishop's estimation, are the requirements that congregations not invite a primate or bishop from another province of the Anglican Communion to assume jurisdiction over the departing group and that the diocese be fairly compensated for the value of the real and personal property to be retained by the group of departing members.
And then there are the dioceses seeking to disaffiliate.
Beers stated that it is important for "the disciplinary process of the church to speak to the issues." Something like that has already been attempted with respect to Bishop John-David Schofield of San Joaquin, after a group of California bishops claimed canonical violations when the diocese voted to take the first step to change its constitution in 2006 to qualify its agreement to submit to the Episcopal Church's Constitution and Canons. Article V, Section 1, of the Constitution says that a diocese's constitution must contain an “unqualified accession" to the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church.
If approved at its second reading slated for the upcoming December 7-8 convention, the diocesan constitution would delete all references to The Episcopal Church and state that the diocese is "a constituent member of the Anglican Communion and in full communion with the See of Canterbury."
If the Title IV Review Committee, which serves as a kind of "grand jury" in such cases, had determined that Schofield had abandoned the Communion of the Church under the terms of Canon IV.9, its decision would have begun a process that could have resulted in Schofield being liable to deposition and removal from office. But the committee agreed that the actions of the bishop at that time "did not constitute abandonment of the communion, as it is defined in the canon."
Appointed to the 2007-2009 Title IV Review Committee are Bishop Suffragan Bavi E. Rivera of Olympia, Bishop Suffragan David C. Jones of Virginia, Bishop C. Wallis Ohl Jr. of Northwest Texas, the Rev. Carolyn Kuhr of Montana, the Very Rev. Scott Kirby of Eau Claire, J.P. Causey Jr. of Virginia and Deborah J. Stokes of Southern Ohio. Causey, Kirby, Kuhr and Stokes served on the 2003-2006 Review Committee.
A charge of abandonment of the communion of the Episcopal Church is determined by vote in the House of Bishops. There is no appeal and no right of formal trial outside of a hearing before the House of Bishops. A proposed revision of Title IV would have changed that, but those provisions were not passed by General Convention 2006.
Of those dioceses considering "realignment," Springfield appears not to have yet acted, and Quincy declined in its recent diocesan convention to pass a proposed canonical revision.
Fort Worth's convention, meeting November 14-15,is set to consider the first reading of a constitutional amendment that would remove accession to the Constitution and Canons of the church, as well several canonical amendments that eliminate mention of the name of the Episcopal Church. Jefferts Schori intends to send a letter to Bishop Jack Iker, who advocates these changes, before the convention notifying him that such a step would force her to take action to bring the diocese and its leadership into line with the mandates of the national Church.
A similar canonical change is set to come before the Diocese of Pittsburgh's convention November 2-3, and Jefferts Schori has written to Pittsburgh's bishop in this regard (see link to letter cited above).
In December the Diocese of San Joaquin is scheduled to hear the second and final reading of its constitutional accession amendment, a proposed act that may prompt "more dramatic action" beforehand.
At some point, assuming that all these and other constitutional changes go forward, the Presiding Bishop could ask the Title IV Review Committee to consider whether the three diocesan bishops who have proposed and supported these changes have abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church.
Presentment charges were filed in 2005 against Connecticut Bishop Drew Smith, because he deposed a priest on the ground that he had abandoned the communion of the Episcopal Church in rejecting the bishop's authority. The Title IV Review Committee upheld Smith's action, and Beers said the decision is "an important road map to where we are going."
If the Presiding Bishop were to present materials to the Review Committee regarding potential abandonment by the bishops in question, and if the Committee were to agree that abandonment had taken place, the bishops would have two months to recant their positions. If they failed to do so, the matter would go to the full House of Bishops.
If the House concurred, the Presiding Bishop would depose the bishops and declare the episcopates of those dioceses vacant. Those remaining in the Episcopal Church would be gathered to organize a new diocesan convention and elect a replacement Standing Committee, if necessary.
An assisting bishop would be appointed to provide episcopal ministry until a new diocesan bishop search process could be initiated and a new bishop elected and consecrated.
A lawsuit would be filed against the departed leadership and a representative sample of departing congregations if they attempted to retain Episcopal Church property.
"These are consequences, not punishments," Robertson said, "consequences that have long been clear, and are now being reiterated by the Presiding Bishop in the letters of warning. The goal is reconciliation, but also accountability."
Beers added, "The consequences can easily be avoided. But the Episcopal Church has the obligation to discipline its leaders under circumstances like this."
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Letter from the Presiding Bishop to Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan
The Rt. Rev. Robert Duncan
Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh
Pittsburgh, PA
Dear Bob,
There have been numerous public references in recent weeks regarding resolutions to be introduced at your forthcoming diocesan convention. Those resolutions, if adopted, would amend several of your diocesan canons and begin the process of amending one or more provisions of your diocesan Constitution. I have reviewed a number of these proposed resolutions, and it is evident to me that they would violate the Constitutional requirement that the Diocese conform to the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church. It is apparent from your pre-convention report that you endorse these proposed changes. I am also aware of other of your statements and actions in recent months that demonstrate an intention to lead your diocese into a position that would purportedly permit it to depart from The Episcopal Church. All these efforts, in my view, display a fundamental misunderstanding of the relationship between The Episcopal Church and its dioceses. Our Constitution explicitly provides that a diocese must accede to the Constitution and Canons of the Church.
I call upon you to recede from this direction and to lead your diocese on a new course that recognizes the interdependent and hierarchical relationship between the national Church and its dioceses and parishes. That relationship is at the heart of our mission, as expressed in our polity. Specifically, I sincerely hope that you will change your position and urge your diocese at its forthcoming convention not to adopt the resolutions that you have until now supported.
If your course does not change, I shall regrettably be compelled to see that appropriate canonical steps are promptly taken to consider whether you have abandoned the Communion of this Church -- by actions and substantive statements, however they may be phrased -- and whether you have committed canonical offences that warrant disciplinary action.
It grieves me that any bishop of this Church would seek to lead any of its members out of it. I would remind you of my open offer of an Episcopal Visitor if you wish to receive pastoral care from another bishop. I continue to pray for reconciliation of this situation, and I remain
Your servant in Christ,
Katharine Jefferts Schori
-- The Rev. Jan Nunley is executive editor of Episcopal Life Media.
Posted by latimer at 10:54 AM | Comments (0)
November 01, 2007
UK Anglican parishes to ordain own clergy
Dozens of conservative parishes will start ordaining their own clergy in an open revolt against their bishops if the Church of England continues its liberal drift, the Archbishop of Canterbury has warned.
Anglican parishes to ordain own clergy
By Jonathan Petre, Religion Correspondent
Last Updated: 3:01am BST 20/10/2007
www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/10/18/nchurch118.xml
Dozens of conservative parishes will start ordaining their own clergy in an open revolt against their bishops if the Church of England continues its liberal drift, the Archbishop of Canterbury has warned.
Dr Rowan Williams was told that evangelicals would increasingly defy Church rules and their own bishops by parachuting in outsiders to carry out irregular ordinations of "orthodox" candidates.
The warning came from Reform, a 1,700-strong evangelical network, which is setting up structures to allow it operate as a resistance movement within the Church.
The Rev Rod Thomas, Reform's chairman, said that members must prepare for "courageous action" as the Church became driven by an increasingly pro-gay agenda.
Speaking to the network's annual conference in London, he urged Dr Williams to withdraw the invitations he has issued to the liberal American bishops for next year's showcase Lambeth Conference.
"Failure to do this will seal the division of the Communion, end all idea of a covenant, leave the Archbishop's role in tatters and rapidly spread fractures through the Church of England," he said.
He claimed the pro-gay lobby in this country was likely to become more overt and persistent, citing the same-sex blessing reportedly conducted by the Anglican provost of Glasgow cathedral last month.
"As the formal Church institutions and councils become paralysed or dysfunctional we must get more serious about devoting time and money to the reforms we seek," Mr Thomas added.
"But the good news is that there has never been a better time to do this. Evangelicals are becoming clearer about the issues that have to be fought and more determined to do the fighting."
Posted by latimer at 11:05 AM | Comments (0)