From Matt’s piece I get the impression that “the fix was in.” I am also reminded about Grizwold++‘s panicky actions toward the end GC2006 when a last-minute resolution was passed with its curious wording. He was so desperate to please Lambeth Palace. This latest TEC statement is as if people are saying “let us let the ambiguities of language cover our sins.” Then there is my church friend Veronica, a devout Episcopalian and former kindergarten teacher, now in her eighth decade, who so wants to experience the church without people arguing about things and is still in my old parish, once one of the leading lights of the Oxford Movement and now flirting with affirming catholicism. The breach in the church is about behaviors as much as theologies, but how to express these things without causing upset—-without causing discord in the kindergarten, as it were? How to explain that church offerings are being used to persecute the orthodox. But isn’t much of the ministry we are called to that of witnessing to the Truth to our old Episcopal friends? May God supply us with the words and actions he needs to spread his kingdom.

No need to be dissappointed with the “Windsor Bishops”. If they were REAL Windsor Bishops, they would have already guided their flock out of TEC. The fight was lost in 2003 when the vote count was published. No matter how hard you “fight”, if you don’t have the votes, you loose. Matt is right, they hung around to save their jobs. No true Christian could be a part of TEC. Fighting to fix TEC by staying in for years and years is akin to joining a house of ill repute, and participating, all the while trying to SAVE the workers.

The problem extends to posts like the one above: from Adam 12. He does not want to upset anybody. And still says, “are we not supposed to save our fellow Episcopalians?” Well…if you want to be a witness, show it with your actions, not words. Get out. Not upset anybody? Sounds like the wife who gets beat every night, and stays with the husband because she does not want to upset anybody..

bl

I would hugely appreciate some feed-back discussion here.

Kendall wisely said that responses within 24 hours cannot adequately assess the real situation, but we are, in fact,  beginning to process the events now.  And of course, we need to begin that process.

Let me try to summarize Matt’s take on this——do I have this correctly:  The HoB Response was crafted in cahoots with the Joint Standing Committee of the ACC & the Primates.  These folks vetted and approved the language, with some shadowy probable feedback from Cantuar himself (can we know if this is actually true?).  Therefore, the Windsor bishops willingly agreed to the statement because it accomplished their goal of remaining tightly within the Anglican Communion?

I would very much like to know:  is this assessment accurate?  Is there good evidence to conclude that this is the way it all went down?

If so, then orthodox Anglicans in North America and throughout the world have been sold down the river, and the Anglican Communion itself has ceased to be a faithful genuinely Christian Church.

On the other hand, if the GS Primates don’t swallow the fudge, then we may well hope for what Achbp. Orombi hinted at obliquely the other day:  the renewal of the Alexandrian Patriarchate.

I for one, would be more than glad to be an Alexandrian Christian.

What say ye all the rest of this clan?  I truly want to begin to figure out where we actually stand.  If our Windsor/Network bishops return home to tell us that all is well, we CAN indeed remain in both TEC and the Anglican Communion, I want to be able to have some kind of coherent (not a popular Anglican word) and Christ-faithful response. 

Help me out here, ok?

#3 - we need to hear from the Primates - then how the ABC reacts to that. But with Lambeth becoming something of an Anglican lovefest I have my doubts. As my childhood mentor said, “If you want to find God go where good people are.” I don’t think we will ever give up the good fight, but I agree with #2 about the compromising nature of our current working conditions.

I am not able to imagine a Lambeth 2008 which includes both TEC and all the “GS” Primates.  Either they all give in——which is hardly likely, or TEC is out, or the Anglican Communion itself splits up.

If fudge were capable of saving the AC, we would all be fat and happy by now.

However, in terms of parishes and dioceses having an easy way out—well, a full Communion breakdown will make things not only harder but hugely messier.  Getting out of TEC will require a real surrender of worldly goods of all sorts.

Is it possible that TEC is simply trying to salvage all the real estate it can, writing off the losses of members?  When the chips are down, money, sex and power are the real gods.

But, still I would love some feedback on my original questions

You have it right, Lumen :”Getting out of TEC will require a real surrender of worldly goods of all sorts.

This statement is the heart of the whole matter.
Pay attention.

bl

What did Dietrich Bonhoeffer or Maximillian Kolbe do when they were faced with choices?

Isn’t Lambeth 2008 supposed to be some kind of gathering where bishops talk about what it is like to be bishops and no church business is done? And if so isn’t it irrelevant…kind of like being invited by Queen Elizabeth to tea?

Yeah, Adam.  But sherry and biscuits (as opposed to actual sacramental elements) are the glue which has been holding this mess together up until now.

If Lambeth happens as usual, everyone can claim that business as usual is progressing with no real problem.  Some symbols, even those which really don’t have any concrete content, are important enough to pay attention to.

Unity at the price of Truth seems to be the goal, even of those who otherwise care about the Gospel.

#2:  “Well…if you want to be a witness, show it with your actions, not words. Get out. Not upset anybody? Sounds like the wife who gets beat every night, and stays with the husband because she does not want to upset anybody.. ” 
In my opinion that crosses a line of decency and faith.  How each of us respond to what is going on in TEC is a matter of our own discernment and what we are hearing from our Lord.  How few were the disciples after the Resurrection, but they didn’t leave their band and go join another.  How few we reasserters may be in TEC, but if God calls us to stay and work in this mission field until our lives’ end, so be it.  It is not for you to say if any one of us should leave or stay.  It is for our Lord to lead and each of us to follow.  I shall follow Him for now in TEC and in my reappraising diocese I may be a voice in the wilderness.  But that voice will be there to call others to the Lord, in spite of the obstacles that may be put in my way by reappraisers.  Without my voice (and others like mine), who will be here to follow the Lord’s command?  How isolated and few were the prophets of the Old Testament.  How isolated and few were the apostles of the New Testament.  God has not left us, even in the midst of what we perceive to be the secularism and heresies of present-day TEC.  And He will not leave us.  We can try to leave Him (but He always follows, doesn’t He!).

The dilemma that I face as a rector is the welfare of my congregation; we have been living a sheltered life as a parish for decades.  Strong vestry and clergy commitment to orthodoxy has been the pattern of our parish throughout its fifty year history, and the published record of my parish since the events of 2003; we are network affiliated, commitment to the Creeds and the Scriptures is at the heart of our parish life; the Eucharist is daily as is the Divine Office.  We don’t have the direct evidence of SSB or immoral bishops in sight anywhere in this diocese, and in the end, the hearts of most Episcopalians aren’t with Lambeth or the Anglican Communion or even their local dioceses.  It congregational in almost every case.  Until pressed or persecuted by a bishop or diocese.  That is not happening here, and I can’t imagine it happening until after our next episcopal election (if then).  Up until a few weeks ago, and now definitively since this latest HOB meeting, I’ve been seeking to hold my place in the Anglican Communion, in Communion with Canterbury.  I no longer care about communion with Canterbury, and I am not certain that there is any “there” there in the Anglican Communion as we know it.

So, as the local shepherd, I (and my colleagues in dozens if not hundreds of other parishes) have the reality of laity who just don’t know what the fuss is about…“it isn’t here in my parish”.  I and my priest associates teach the faith without apology. It is not that our people don’t know what the problem is; it just doesn’t touch them as far as they are concerned. If it were not for my care for this congregation, and its need for continued awakening so that decisions can be made at the crisis that will inevitably come to us locally, I would be gone today.  My congregation is a long way from being ready to walk away from its property and other assets.  I have no heart for a protracted battle in court; it is a waste of energy and money about things that are passing away anyway.  They are comfortable at this point not because they prefer or ignore false religion; only because they don’t see the false religion as having anything to do with them!  I could walk away myself and see who follows, and I can imagine that the day may come when that is a likely scenario.  But, in the meantime, we’ve got sick people, baptisms, children to form in our school, foreign mission, and worship to keep us busy.  Perhaps I am short-sighted, maybe self-interested.  I’m not naive about what to expect from the Episcopal Church of the future, but I’m not ready to ask my people to follow me into something new either.  We will retreat further from the institution, and prepare for the worst.  For us, at least, it is not now.

While I respect Matt Kennedy’s thoughtful analysis, I am perplexed by his reference to “sexual sin”? Why are folks so hung up about sexual sin? Seems like there are a lot worse sins that harm a lot more people…..say genocide, for one? Why is that not the sin folks rally against? I have a hard time believing that God cares a flip about what people do when they are naked. Seriously, how do we minimize God like that? Surely there are greater concerns.

Brien, that was a good posting and can her your pastoral concerns. I wrote a piece here about the problem of letting the sleeping, muddled middle constinue snoozing in the pews:

It is time to call the ABC out. The despair and disappointment of the faithful to the HoB meeting are in part the responsibility orthodox leaders who persisted (and still persist) in stating the ABC must do, has to do, or will do the right thing. He simply will not. Be forthright to your congregations. The ABC and so-called Windsor bishops who stayed in New Orleans have betrayed the orthodox. Any other statement is pastoral malfeasance.

Brien, Let me ask you a question. If AMiA or CANA came to you today and said we will purchase your church building from TEC and pay you whatever pension and insurance benefits you’re entitled to from the Church Pension Fund and we’ll make up the difference of any salary losss you might incur, and we will post a bond to secure our promises, if you will become the rector of our new AMiA or CANA plant in your town, would you do it?

13-You are right about explaining the clear facts about the ABC; I’ve put too much confidence in princes.
14- I don’t have any pension worries; I’m eligible to retire today with a very good pension.  I’m trying to take good care of my people; I don’t care about the property, perhaps that wasn’t clear in my post above.  There are a variety of deeper relationships that I don’t want to post about—those complicate the issue in my particular case.  What I would do (I’ve got every option from the Global South to the Roman Catholic pastoral provision) isn’t the issue: it is whether the sheep would trust enough to follow anyone anywhere because they, at present, can’t see the wolf.

Brien wrote, “...can’t see the wolf.” Some of the best rectors have done such a good job protecting their flock, that I think they don’t see the wolf. It is true in my parish. I would not have seen the wolf if not for Kendall and stand firm.

Brien:

Your church sounds comfortable. And…“it” is not affecting you at this time, right? I beg to differ. Any church in TEC is in the heirarchal structure of The Episcopal Church. You know what this means. Your church is under the spiritual direction of your bishop, and the PB of TEC . So, it does affect you. Spiritually. Your congregation may not see the danger, but it is creeping in them as we type.

bl