Dr. Alley makes a distinction between seeking reform and making a faithful witness. He seems to see Reform as the goal of the AAC and the Common Cause folks and faithful witness as the goal of the Communion Partners folks.  I don’t see the distinction.  Reform is the result of faithful witness. An example is the Catholic Renewal which was the goal of the Catholic Movement. The Tracts, the liturgical renewal, the revival of the reigious orders, the establishment of seminaries - all served as faithful witness and led to reform. 

Like Dr. Alley I have not yet felt a divine call to renounce the authority of General Convention, but I count friends among those who have done so and among some Anglicans who have never accepted that authority. I think the General Convention and its officers have made some serious mistakes and continue on a path that may well lead to a bad result for the Anglican witness in the United States and the other areas under the authority of General Convention, but the mistakes are not yet in my judgment of necessity church dividing. But I may be wrong and other right.

In the mean time I want to treat others with the same tender charity and grace with which I hope to be treated.

Charles Alley’s article is very perceptive.

I have attempted to outline the significance of this coming week, concerning the approaches of the ‘Communion Partners’ and the ‘Common Cause Partnership’, at the end of my ‘Allusions and Illusions: Advent Reflections’ on Fulcrum and in the Church of England Newspaper.

Thank you Dr Alley and ACI for posting this on ACI and Kendall for posting this here.  I do not find the description of the two goals here to match my own goals.  That may explain why I continue to pursue relationships with those both in CCP and CP.

My goals include:
To glorify God by preaching Jesus Christ as our only hope of salvation as revealed in the Scriptures, inspired by the Holy Spirit (not authored by the church as some reappraisers would argue);  and
To remain within the Anglican Tradition.

TEC is fast abandoning that Tradition which was anchored historically in the Scriptures (e.g. the apostolic teaching and succession), while the Communion has reasserted the Scriptures (I.10) and desires to press ahead with the Gospel as revealed there.  In short, as I see it, the time is fast approaching when to remain true to my ordination vows within TEC, as part of the Anglican Communion, it will be incumbent on me to leave TEC to remain within the Communion.  This is neither reforming nor witnessing within.  It is remaining faithful to my vows and to the faith which has been passed down to me.

I’m struck by the fact that it’s only when I read something by ACI that I hear about: “The brewing conflict between Common Cause Partners and Communion Partner Bishops and Rectors . . .”  Is there really a brewing conflict?  What is the evidence?  I completely concur that there must be charity on all sides, but I haven’t seen any public evidence of a lack of charity by Common Cause or the forthcoming ACNA.  Most of the noise frankly seems to be coming from “Communion Partners” who seem miffed at the decision of Common Cause to move forward (with the vast majority of the Communion—their own “Communion Partners,” I suppose).  I personally don’t grasp the point of going down with the Titanic as an act of witness, but I respect the decision to do so.  I find a much more hopeful, positive, and compelling message in the path chosen by Common Cause.  I understand that others may not understand this path, but I hope that they too would respect it.  Where there is a genuine lack of charity, on either side, let’s be frank and honest about it, but let’s also be quite specific about it.  To read vague statements like: “The brewing conflict between Common Cause Partners and Communion Partner Bishops and Rectors” is not helpful.  Whenever Common Cause does something SPECIFIC that does not reflect Christian charity vis-a-vis Communion Partners call them out on it—but let’s skip vague innuendo like this.

Several comments seem appropriate to me. St Matthew is a wealthy parish with $800,000 (in 2007) in Plate & Pledge alone. Funding at this level provides options that are completely unavailable to small parishes, such as leaving TEC. It also appears a bit insincere when one professes compassion for those leaving TEC and then provides funds to Bishop Lee and PB Schori to sue them.  Statmann

Look, you can talk about remaining in TEC from now until the cows come home, if that’s what you want, but the fact is that TEC is not going to reform, because the powers-that-be will not permit it!  Staying behind and fighting the good fight is commendable, but there comes a point when it should be clear to everyone, including those who are doing the fighting, that it’s time to move on.  That’s what those of us who have left TEC did, and I, for one, am glad that I did.

With due respect, Kendall, I doubt that charity is what is needed, but forbearance. Now it may be that the two words in this context mean the same thing, but they do not so mean to me. Forbearance is the refusal to apply power one legitimately holds in the name of a greater good. Presiding Bishop Schori et al cannot be said to know what it means to forbear.

  How can we not conclude that TEC is an enemy - THE enemy - if we consider what behavior characterizes an enemy. TEC seeks to destroy us. Is that not clear? Shall we love them therefore? I must say I prefer Confucius’s articulation of right behavior in this context. He asked, “If we treat our enemies with love, with what do we treat our friends? No, we give our friends love, and our enemies justice.”
(I have forgotten the number in the Analects.)

  We need to forbear in our dealings with TEC because only thereby will we carry the moral high ground. Let TEC do what it will; we will with hold whatever power we might have to punish because justice in this case requires that we separate ourselves from those in the family whose principles deserve condemnation and isolation - for so Paul tells us in Corinthians.  Larry

Slightly edited - Elf

I would respectfully request that Chuck Alley do all in his power to call off the attacks by his Diocese and Bishop on the faithful Christians who have been called to leave.  I would really like to see more action and less lip service to “charity” in that regard. 

It is very hard for us to hear these calls of “peace, peace” when you are part of an apostate denomination which is attacking us.

For several years I have been following all of this controversy in the Episcopal Church but what do Priests like me do???  I am retired and, until recently have been serving as interim in small parishes without clergy.  Now, because of age and illness I can no longer serve that way.  I do not agree with what has been going on in the National Church and find that my own Theology & Training is apparently out of date but I do not see how it would be of any benefit to leave the Church.  Yes, I have to be concerned with my Pension as I do like to have a place to live and to eat.

Re:  “.... but there comes a point when it should be clear to everyone, including those who are doing the fighting, that it’s time to move on.”

Cennydd, You are making the assumption that God’s will for every ‘reasserter’ is to leave TEC.  This is an assumption that I would never dare to make.  I fail to understand why you are so sure that everyone must leave.  Why? 
I’ve been reading (and making occasional small comments) ti9 and SF for about three years now and the ‘To Leave or Not to Leave’ question has been a very frequent topic of discussion on both sites in post after post.  My position has always been that the Holy Spirit speaks uniquely to each heart, mind and soul.  Some are called to leave TEC and some are called to remain and work within TEC.  How can we claim to know God’s call to another person? 
The ‘brewing conflict’ is one that has gone on for a long time now with sniping on both sides and that is what Dr. Allen is writing about.  We may disagree, from a CCP perspective, about the ‘rationale’ behind the stand taken by a CP bloke -and vice versa -and that is a healthy thing but we cannot accuse the other of following the wrong route.  I’ve heard far too much of that. 
I agree with Dr. Allen that more charity is needed here. 
Most importantly, I agree with the two goals stated by LCF+.  Ultimately that is what must be central in each of our hearts:  God’s call to us there is certainly exactly the same.

It will be a conflict ONLY if we let BE a conflict.

Bob+Retired: Consult a professional, but I don’t think anyone can touch your pension now that you are retired. The retired rector of Bruton Parish VA joined the UUs. But, again, ask a lawyer if you want.

Bob+Retired: Just remembered that the American Anglican Council or a group allied with them have expert lawyers in these matters.

Bill C: I remain confused. How can the two groups share the same mission when one grroup is suing the other? For to stay in TEC does in some manner and to some degree further the TEC legal actions.
Statmann