We had hoped The Episcopal Church would listen to other Anglicans, including the Archbishop of Canterbury, and turn back. They have not.

TEC has been expressing its contempt for the AC and ABC for years now, and in the coldest, clearest analysis of how things have played out it’s hard to find fault in TEC’s approach.  They’ve played hardball and everyone else has huffed, puffed and…done nothing or, in the case of the ABC, actually gone repeatedly to the mat for TEC. 

Is there, in the stark reality of actual events, some reason TEC shouldn’t act with the most utter contempt for the rest of the Anglican world?  If you don’t want to be the object of contempt, don’t be contemptible.

Dear The Standing Committee
The Diocese of Quincy, Anglican Province of the Southern Cone/ACNA
Thank you so very much for statement.  I hope every diocese and parish in ACNA will make this statement.  I feel I can make this statement because I left TEC and am not in an area to join ACNA.  It is most important for folks who have stayed in TEC and NOW feel they can stay no longer, that they will be received with open hearts.  No “I told you so’s” .  And yes, there will be those who will say this is “tacky”.......So be it.  When one is foolish for our Lord, one can also be tacky…....again, thanks Quincy

Dear DioQuincy Standing Committee

Thank you for your statement, and for your stand for the faith once delivered.  I will present this to our vestry as a model for a statement we may wish to make on this side of the Mississippi!

Dee - wish you were closer!

In Christ,
Fr Darin Lovelace
St David’s Anglican (ACNA)
Durant, Iowa

In Chtist

Sorry about that typo!  Darned iPhone anyway…

Darin+

Doesn’t this article violate the SFIF ban on encouraging people to leave TEC and join ACNA?

Whew, I got confused. I forgot this is T-19 where no such ban exists!

... As we expected, actions taken by the bishops and representatives of the remaining Episcopal dioceses continue to support teaching and morality that is contrary to Christian Scriptures and practice. ...

I think this statement is correct as to “practice” and also correct as to the traditional understanding of the Scriptures—certainly my understanding up until, say, 1970, when I was 30.

But I am finding it hard to identify particular chapters in the Old and New Testaments—deliberately passing on the Apocrypha—where the subject of sexual conduct rises beyond mere mention to the thematic level.

Where should I look?  For example, while sexual conduct is mentioned in the latter part of Romans I, it is not thematic there.  Rather the theme is sin generally and turning away from God in particular.

“But I am finding it hard to identify particular chapters in the Old and New Testaments—deliberately passing on the Apocrypha—where the subject of sexual conduct rises beyond mere mention to the thematic level.

Where should I look?  For example, while sexual conduct is mentioned in the latter part of Romans I, it is not thematic there.  Rather the theme is sin generally and turning away from God in particular. “

I Corinthians Chapters 5 and 6, which is of particular interest as also being the first Apostolic injunction of excommunication.  In between expelling the sexually immoral brother and commands not to visit prostitutes there is also a rather interesting tidbit about lawsuits.

Paul’s First Epistle to Corinthians IS still canonical I believe.

Even the claim of Episcopal Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts-Schori that a focus on individual salvation through a relationship with Jesus was “heresy” ...

Is the “Anglican Diocese of Qunicy” suggesting that I can be in right relationship with God if I am indifferent to those who are poor, sick, and hungry?

The PB’s point does not work when reduced to a sound byte.  Here are three consecutive paragraphs from her Opening Address:

The decision-making we face here is an opportunity to choose the direction of our journey into God’s mission.  Will we turn our faces toward Jerusalem, or will we wander back out into the desert?  How will we engage God’s reconciling mission – in sharing the good news, healing the world, and caring for all of God’s creation?  How will we discover anew that we ARE in relationship with all that God has created, and that we’re meant to be stewards of the whole?

Lane Denson reminded us recently that stewards are wardens of the styes – keepers of the pigpens.  We’re beginning to notice that our global garden increasingly resembles an odorous sty.  But it’s not pigs who are the problem – they are neat and tidy if they have enough space.  The problem is with their keepers, who see the pigs only as bacon and ham producing machines, rather than part of God’s good creation and therefore deserving of appropriate respect.

The crisis of this moment has several parts, and like Episcopalians, particularly the ones in Mississippi, they’re all related.  The overarching connection in all of these crises has to do with the great Western heresy – that we can be saved as individuals, that any of us alone can be in right relationship with God.  It’s caricatured in some quarters by insisting that salvation depends on reciting a specific verbal formula about Jesus.  That individualist focus is a form of idolatry, for it puts me and my words in the place that only God can occupy, at the center of existence, as the ground of being.  That heresy is one reason for the theme of this Convention.

Didymus (#8),
Thanks.

Anywhere else?

#10 Let’s see… If we disregard the entire book of Hosea as being symbolic and not actually saying anything about sexual ethics, and absolutely disregard the chapters in the Gospels where Jesus talks at length on marriage and adultery as being something spurious a la Jesus Seminar, as well as consider the Torah chapters on sexual ethics as being later interpolations by a person other than Moses and therefore non-binding…

Then no.  Nowhere else at all.

stabill #9:
It is good that you referenced the Presiding Bishop’s Opening Address because it may be even more divisive than the resolutions passed at General Convention.  Her address seemed to be designed to offend. For instance, who or what do you think she referring to when she says the following:
“We’re beginning to notice that our global garden increasingly resembles an odorous sty.”
My native language is English but even I have trouble believing that she was not referring to the Global Anglican Communion when she said this. I can’t imagine how a translator will translate her speech to other languages without conveying an insult.
Her statement which refers to the concept of personal salvation through Jesus Christ as heresy contradicts basic Anglican/Christian theology and belittles Christians who believe, as most Christians do,  that we can be personally forgiven of our sins through the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. This is not heresy. The Bible expresses the concept of personal salvation and I believe that Jesus demonstrated this when he said the following to the thief on the cross:
Luke 23 verse 43:  “And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To-day shalt thou be with me in paradise. “
The Presiding Bishop also contradicts the beliefs expressed throughout the Book of Common Prayer.  See page 336: “And although we are unworthy, through our manifold sins to offer unto thee any sacrifice, yet we beseech the to accept this our bounden duty and service, not weighing our merits but pardoning our offences, through Jesus Christ our Lord;”.  This is not heresy.
I don’t understand her motivation but it seems to me that the Episcopal Church will have to suffer the consequences of her statements as long as she is in power.

I’m no great theological shakes, but I stand in amazement, particularly given the short span we have on earth to contribute our mite, why the beloved K. Harmon and the Elves, or anyone else who is conscientous, continue full blown in the Episcopal Church—continue as a tither/contributer, continue as a statistic to be touted at 812 (do I have the address right?), continue to attach crucial importance to hierarchy,when they know that hierarchy has betrayed scripture.  I mean, is it sentiment, tradition, old school, Henry VIII, Seabury and the American Revolution?  I mean, the things I had to get over, when I left in ‘03, were the music, the architecture, the passion of tradition, the vestments, a wonderful rector, my social crowd etc. etc. Broke my heart, as I’ve said previously. Never mind: there is no way, at last, that I could return to ECUSA. I have gotten over the unessentials.  I simply do not understand the mindset, the hopes of those who remain, don’t understand, in the brief time we all have, what they will tell their children, grand kids, how they will take them to Summer Bible School, place them in the hands of the KJS’s who now teach. Will someone please explain why those we have come to love, through this blog, continue in ECUSA?  I don’t mean to prescribe (to each his own), but I simply do not understand when the stakes for our spiritual life, our culture and, even, our country,  seem so high.  Best. Dick

Richard Hoover (#13) - I,too, am out of TEC and had much to mourn in leaving - and also am thrilled to no longer be there.  However, I would argue the answer to your question is one of calling.  While I’m sure there are those who have stayed despite God’s call for them to leave, I’m equally sure there are those who’ve left whom God was calling to stay.  I left because I felt called to leave.  I hope that the Rev. Canon Dr. KH is staying because he is called to do so—and will leave if later called to do that.  I don’t understand God’s different calling on each of us, but I do understand He works all things for good for those who love Him who are called according to His purpose.

Montanan
I do appreciate the idea of the call; however, a call is not absolute. A call must be discerned within the context of community.I dare say a healthy one.  I am quite unsure of the claim of a call to serve in a heretical community .

#15, was Samuel’s call within the context of a community?  Moses?  Elijah’s was in a cave, wasn’t it?  Jacob in the desert?  Jesus in the desert?  St Paul on the road by himself?  I don’t think you can limit calls to a community setting.  I believe I’ve had calls back to the community, when I was very alone and calls within the community of faith after I returned from my time in the desert.

RE: “I mean, is it sentiment, tradition, old school, Henry VIII, Seabury and the American Revolution?”

Uh, yeh—yeh, that’s it. 

; > )

RE: ” I simply do not understand the mindset. . . “

Right.  We know.

RE: “Will someone please explain why those we have come to love, through this blog, continue in ECUSA?”

Already done for many years, but certain departers from TEC do not wish to accept those reasons and wish for others to affirm their own decisions to depart by departing themselves.

RE: “Never mind: there is no way, at last, that I could return to ECUSA.”

Thanks for sharing.

RE: “I am quite unsure of the claim of a call to serve in a heretical community .”

Tell that to Joseph and Daniel.

RE: “I am quite unsure of the claim of a call to serve in a heretical community .”

Tell that to Joseph and Daniel.

Or Athanasius (who, as is well-known, had no objection to serving in an Arian church) or Cyril of Alexandria (likewise, but among the Nestorians)—or, for those who find him an inspirational figure, Zwingli (whose loyalty to Catholicism, until the Zurich magistracy changed the city’s religion, is too well-known to need mentioning).

bettcee (#12),

  “We’re beginning to notice that our global garden
  increasingly resembles an odorous sty.”
My native language is English but even I have trouble believing that she was not referring to the Global Anglican Communion when she said this.

I take this as an entirely secular reference to mankind’s spoiling of the environment.

Stabill, post 19:
You may be right but she is not very precise and her statements can be taken to mean different things to different people.
I have refrained from commenting about her reference to Mississippi because I live in that state, but I wonder if you can explain what the Presiding Bishop was referring to when she said the following: “The crisis of this moment has several parts, and like Episcopalians, particularly the ones in Mississippi, they’re all related.”?

#20, I originally took offense at that as well.  Then I remembered that the last present Bishop of MS is the son of the prior Bishop, who was the son of the prior Bishop - Duncan Gray, then Jr., and now the third.  I believe she was making a joke, though not sure how it was received.

Billy, It seems to me that it can be perceived as a joke or as a warning, it certainly leaves me wondering why she included that remark in her Opening Address to the Episcopal Church’s General Convention.

Sorry Sarah, I’m just catching up (1/28).  Thanks for your response but, respectfully,  I still do not understand the quality of attachment of many reasserters to a heretical Christian community. And the notion of a “calling” as reason enough to do so is new to me in that I can’t remember seeing it articulated on T19 (tho’ I may have missed it). You suggest Joseph and Daniel as models for those who remain in TEC, but I don’t find parallels there, unless (in Daniel’s case) you are comparing TEC followers, say, to Babylonians. In fact, am not sure if there are any NT prescriptions for remaining among Christian heretics—maybe St. Paul reading the riot act to backsliding/misguided Christian communities?  I note the wide-ranging discussions (1/27) on a “Third Way.”  Still, there is abundant comment that this is not workable, that bad money drives out the good, that “a house divided against itself cannot stand” (my example), etc. etc.  It seems to me that, for the sake of enlightening, for the sake of the candidness which characterizes T19,  those who are staying within TEC need to let everyone know why they stand where they do and how they plan to proceed. This is particularly needed now, in the wake of the just concluded General Convention. If it is a “call,” as one has suggested,  fine. I just wish the called would lift the curtain a bit.  One Episcopalian told me Sunday that he remains just because he likes the architecture! Because that suits him, I could not quarrel. That’s fine too.  Best.  Dick

#19, I am going to put in below what I wrote on SF a few days ago, to let you know how I am proceeding in TEC and will continue for as long as I feel the “calling.”  I can certainly be criticized for my way of proceeding; but it is what I understand the Lord to be telling me to do at this time.  (By the way, have I met you long ago in Macon, GA at the house of Mike and Lynn - all of us being Sewanee people?)

“We are all grappling with our own individual circumstances, wanting to be able to cling together in this time of instability and power-grabbing by those in supposedly responsible positions in our church. 

It is fairly clear that there is little we can do as a national group - there must be a leader for such a group, and no one has stepped forward, who has remained in TEC, to lead the conservatives on a national level.  So what can we do? 

As Sarah points out, on a micro local level we can make our churches as strong spiritually and theologically as possible, by our own studiousness.  And we can keep them strong.  Participate in Sunday School and in advising and helping youth groups.  Take an active part of whatever men’s or women’s groups are in your parish.  Watch your clergy and ensure they toe the line on their theology and ecclesiology.  Evangelize for your local church - not necessarily for the diocese or the national church, but for your local church - and bring in new members and help it grow.

On a diocesan level, we can participate - run for office, even when we know we are going to lose; be on committees, even when we know our voices will be minorities; contribute and work with organizations within the diocese in which some conservative influence can be made - there are some:  ECW; DOK; Brotherhood of St Andrew (almost any men’s club is generally more conservative); acolytes guild; vergers guild; altar guild; cursillo, etc.  These organizations are generally filled with people who do not hold with these new ways of our national church or our dioceses, but they are keeping their heads down, as Sarah points out.  Help them raise their heads. 

Work with your bishop - don’t put your conservatism in his face everytime you see him; give him reason to think you are interested in helping the diocese grow and spreading the Word.  He’ll either leave you alone (which is ok, if he’s revisionist) or he’ll occasionally help you, and he may help you get elected to a diocesan post, if he thinks you will work well with him.  Then you can begin to make your presence really mean something.

Tithing - here is something you can do that may have a tangible effect.  Diocesan payments from parishes are almost uniformly based on certain percentage of parish budgets - often average of some number of prior years.  If you decrease your pledge to your local church, but then give the remainder of what you would have given in other ways - such as to the altar guild for flowers or communion wine or bread, to any other organization in the church (which is off budget), to fund stain glass window, to fund the beneficent funds of the clergy for the needy, to fund a soup kitchen or whatever outreach your community needs and your church wants to do - you decrease you local church’s budget, decrease what goes to your revisionist diocese and to the national church, but you may not necessarily hurt your local church’s finances, since your other gifts off-budget may make up for the decrease in your pledge. 

On a national level, we can also give money to national organizations which are not revisionist - such as the two conservative seminaries - Trinity and Nashotah House (both of which, like all seminaries, are having money problems).  Eventually, if some of the other seminaries have to shut down (and some already are), bishops will have no choice but to send postulants to the conservative ones.  Also, give to conservative organizations within TEC - Acts 29; Brotherhood of St Andrew; DOK; I know there are others.  If the revisionist elements begin to run short of cash and the conservative elements have more money, what is going to happen?  In order to get money from the conservative side, the revisionist side is going to have to make compromises.  Then the pendulum begins to swing the other way.  If the healthiest strongest churches in a diocese are the conservative ones, then where does the bishop have to go to get his money and help?  And to get it, what does he have to do - compromise. 

I belong to a conservative church in a revisionist diocese.  We have used everything I have written above to get our bishop to let us be independent; to allow us to have conservative priests in our search for new ones; to not oppose things we are trying to do in the diocese to participate as a conservative voice and rally other conservative churches.  In exchange we have paid our pledge (when the revisionist churches can’t); we’ve grown our numbers and our budget; we’ve presented more people for confirmation than other churches our size and larger; we have raised money for outreach projects in the diocese beyond our 4 walls; and we have not put GC or other revisionist things in his face when he has come for visits, other than as general questions, when he has raised the issues.

One last thing:  I have looked around at ACNA churches in my area - and there are many.  They are as eclectic as a virgin forest.  Some use no liturgy but lots of electric guitars and strobe lights; others hardly any music but by the book (1928 PB) liturgy; and all sorts in between.  Most are in school buildings.  As Bp Lawrence said in his post GC interview, these folks are not necessarily in a deep committed relationship with each other, not based on liturgy or necessarily the same basics of theology and faith.  There is a lot more going on in ACNA than meets the eye, based on my review of websites and site visits (and I have always been and still am a supporter of recognition of ACNA as a province by AbofC, ACC, and the Primates).  So while I have never and will never question anyone leaving TEC, if one does depart, I would urge him/her to look very carefully for your landing place before you depart.”

Sorry, my question as to who you were and my #24, were meant for Dick Hoover in #23.  I apologize.

Billy & Sarah
Billy wrote:

#15, was Samuel’s call within the context of a community?  Moses?  Elijah’s was in a cave, wasn’t it?  Jacob in the desert?  Jesus in the desert?  St Paul on the road by himself?  I don’t think you can limit calls to a community setting.
I said said discerned and calls are not absolute. All of the above most certainly “discerned” their calls within a healthy community.
Sarah wrote:
“Tell that to Joseph and Daniel”  Remember both were in exile.  Tec then must become not my land living among a people who are not my people.

Dr. William Tighe wrote
Or Athanasius (who, as is well-known, had no objection to serving in an Arian church)...
I think that is the issue: Did Athansasius, Cyril and Zwingli have a choice between a heretical and an orthodox body?

24 and 25—Sorry Billy, just now realized your post was in response to mine. Nope, while I’ve had a dear Sewanee friend,  I was not part of your Macon group long ago.

You laid out your strategy very well—how to remain, contribute and respond to what you feel is God’s call, while facing the most difficult of situations- a shifting of theological ground all around. As I indicated, that was the most difficult for me, far worse than anything else could be—e.g. clashing personalities, a cold congregation, lack of mission and direction, an unpopular rector—that’s all small stuff, compared to shifting theological ground. Am really anxious to see what the Dio. of South Carolina has decided, coming up on the 13th. Best to You.  Dick