Good work, Revd Collins and CEC. At issue is declaring dioceses united against lawlessness and canonical overreach; asserting the polity of TEC as historically of such a nature that the PB, General Convention, and ‘national church’ are not in a position of hierarchy; but dioceses in free association, whose constitutions and canons declare the allegiance to the Anglican Communion, and communion with the See of Canterbury. It is the effort to create a PB/national church hierarchy that must be opposed as unture to the nature of the polity of this church. The covenant, then, can become the means by which a genuine wider Communion order can be maintained. This is all worth fighting for. Thanks for the hard work represented by this decision.

Translation:  We respectfully disagree and want our disagreement on the record.  But we do not consider this to be heresy (which would of course require severing communion).

Under the mercy,
John

An Orthodox Christian

Pretty sensible action, in my view.

But what about the money?  Are they redirecting their money form the Diocese and 815?  Otherwise its much ado about nothing.  2 has the rights of this.

Respectfully disagree with #2 and #4.  The statement rightly infers that the heresies of 815 are not in the apostolic (faith) link.  Dioceses and Diocesan Bishops are not compelled to embrace the innovations unless they so choose.  CEC is “safe” as long as Bishop Lillibridge remains “safe.”  The statement indicates parishes and/or individuals can redirect the TEC asking to other ministries.

Re # 5
Red Bird,
Within the catholic tradition there is an old adage about heresy.  You are who you are in communion with.  You don’t maintain communion with heretics.  By remaining in communion with TEC one states that while there may be disagreement, nothing TEC has done is beyond the pale.

Under the mercy,
John

An Orthodox Christian

Dr. Seitz (#1),

I’ve forgotten, but is big Christ Church, San Antonio one of the parishes in your Communion Partners group?  It’s certainly a bellwether, flagship parish, and Fr. Collins is greatly respected by many, many people as an outstanding leader and a marvelous pastor.

I’m glad the Diocese of West Texas permits parishes to designate that none of their contributions to the diocesan budget go to TEC, but instead go to much worthier causes.  I haven’t checked to see what the parish budget is, but I’m sure it’s quite large, and so the amount of money involved would be substantial.  I trust that the diocese doesn’t just shuffle funds around and still end up paying the same assessment to 815 in the end.  If I were a parishioner there in San Antonio, I’d want to be sure that not one penny of the congregation’s giving to the diocese was forwarded on to the national headquarters.

They are fortunate to have the noble +Gary Lillibridge for their bishop.  I respect him.  But I put no trust whatsoever in the Windsor Continuation Group, of which he is an important part.

David Handy+

There may be more hope of impact in individual parishes issuing these resolutions than one might think. It is a no confidence vote which undercuts TEC’s mind-grip. Liberty is always local. It is also hard to dismiss with the typical media moves of TEC. The last thing i the world TEC really wants is anything like a popular vote.

5, with respect, but so what?  We have been through this all before.  How is this going to make any differance beyond throwing a pebble in the ocean?  And Dr. Seitz I am still waiting for the ACI to do something decisive, semi-decisive, or anything?  Ah yes, the covenant.  Well, maybe in 400 years or so.

This is simply a fantasy. “We object” . . . but we’ll send you our money along with our full support. I’m glad these folks weren’t in charge of England when the Nazis invaded Poland. And I guarantee their “mission partners” in the Global South will have something to say. Once the new province is launched . . . there’s no more fence to sit on.