Below is a letter published by ENS. First, it is always sad, when an individual feels the need to leave the Church or a parish church. When we think about parishes and entire dioceses leaving, it is even sadder. I wish the present circumstances were different.
The circumstances are what they are. We didn't arrive at this place overnight. We could easily list the tensions, but let's not. The tensions cannot tear the fabric of the Church. It is how we respond to the tensions. Bishop Duncan and a group within the Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh have chosen a response. This did not happen overnight either. The decision to attempt an "official" exit requires time and planning. I think the Episcopal Church has been conversing with partners unwilling to deign to listen, because the die was already cast.
I am weary of the persecution complex of those exiting. There are voices within the Episcopal Church that I vehemently disagree with, from all over the spectrum. There are also many mission-minded clergy and lay people working with God that the Kingdom might come. The Church is not the problem. The problem is that the Church is made up of people. We become so locked into our thoughts and approaches, we damage one another and the Church. Yet, I am not foolish enough to believe that there is anywhere to go, to avoid our broken human nature, and still be the Church.
Some will condemn the Presiding Bishop's letter to Bishop Duncan. I am sure, it is not a letter the author enjoyed writing. It tells me that our Presiding Bishop is clear, in her own mind, about her responsibilities. Some will say she is being punitive and litigious. I say, she seems prepared to do the hard work of leading the Episcopal Church through very difficult times.
I pray for all of us.
Chris+
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
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Sorry, hard to feel anything good about a PB who, remember, signed the communique from the Primates and then came home and lobbied for, and enacted, the exact opposite response.
Nice woman she may be, but she has no credibility with me: if the quotes attributed to her in Time magazine are true they, along with the silly stuff she says about 'mother Jesus' and Jesus being a 'vehicle' to the divine and a 'godly' human being (never mind her misrepresentation of herself as a dean of a school of theology when she was campaigning for the post) make me as sad as i was for ECUSA under FTG's leadership. And that was very sad.
Duncan is a great man. While I don't share some of his Anglo-Catholic stuff, he has been humble, gracious, soft-spoken, and always, always clear that he does not want the buildings (as often alleged).
And, of course, the question hanging over all of this was 'Who really decided to walk apart?' and 'What really is or was the schismatic act?'
IMHO consecrating VGR was the bomb that tore the fabric.
Dear Anonymous,
I am not the Presiding Bishop's champion. I haven't always been thrilled with what I hear from the press either. But, I am committed to Christ and his Church.
Speaking only for myself, I see nothing that has happened in the life of the Episcopal Church that warrants schism. The issues we are fighting over have to do with the interpretation of the Bible. The Bible is open to interpretation. It has to be. I believe in the story of salvation articulated in the Bible.
As Anglicans, we are open to interpretation and that will mean differences of opinion. I don't see the PB as a Pope articulating the authoritative and undeniable doctrine of the Episcopal Church. This seems inherent in our structure.
Ultimately, my faith is secure enough to handle differences of opinion to tolerate being in a church with those I disagree. I have to believe that God is working out God's purpose through the Spirit dwelling within the Church. I can't help but remember that the disciples were not always of one mind. The Early Church was not always of one mind. I cling to much of the historic faith I have inherited. If creation is ongoing, and the world is being brought to perfection in Christ, it only stands to reason that our understanding will continue to develop as God's will is revealed.
There is certainly a core, but that would also mean there is a periphery. Again, speaking only for myself, much of what we fight about seems removed from the core.
I wish you well and God's peace.
Chris+
Post a Comment