Leave the Keys on the Altar on Your Way Out

[furrbear]

From last Friday's L.A. Times:
Episcopal Church leader says those who defected 'are no longer Episcopalians'

by Duke Helfand
December 5, 2008

The presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church declared Thursday that church members who joined a newly formed conservative denomination "are no longer Episcopalians," even as she predicted that the exodus had largely run its course and would not trigger further large-scale defections.

In her first public comments since a coalition of 700 parishes announced the formation of a new North American church Wednesday, the Most. Rev. Katharine Jefferts Schori also reiterated that church property must remain in Episcopal hands, a position disputed by breakaway leaders.

"They are no longer Episcopalians," Jefferts Schori said of those who left. "They have made that very clear in their departures.

She emphasized that all Episcopalians were welcome "if they want to be part of a diverse church. . . . But the expectation has to be that we are not a single-issue church. We're not a church that says you have to believe this one thing in this one way and there is no room for difference of opinion."

====

Read the rest here ... and let's give thanks that what our Presiding Bishop makes clear is that after a decade of being blackmailed by the vocal minority who have insisted that they would leave if the LGBT baptized were fully included in the work and witness of the Episcopal Church, we are now free to get on with the work of incarnating God's justice and living God's love.

We will be looking for more and more diocesan conventions to pass resolutions affirming the full inclusion of all the baptized in all the sacraments of the church as we move toward our General Convention next summer in Anaheim. And once in Anaheim we will be looking for the Nat'l Episcopal Church to take some further steps forward on LGBT inclusion.

Comments

[timcub.livejournal.com]

If you know of anything, I'd love to hear what's happenning around you locally.

[furrbear.livejournal.com]

I can fwd the emails from the Steering Committee North Texas Episcopalians. Check out their web site for some stories.

Also check Katie Sherrod's blog, Desert's Child. Katie has lots of updates.

[bigfundrew.livejournal.com]

this is very interesting

[timcub.livejournal.com]

The Steering Committee web site is pretty interesting... have you thought about getting involved in any of the continuing congregation, or are you already?

[glowroper.livejournal.com]

Iker insists (via reposted notes to the House of Bishops & Deputies list) that he has not renounced his vows. That is the subject of much back-&-forthage, as you may imagine.

[furrbear.livejournal.com]

It takes a good deal of semantic wiggling to not conclude as +Katharine did when reading this:

Katharine Jefferts Schori has no authority over me or my ministry as a Bishop in the Church of
God. She never has, and she never will.

Since November 15, 2008, both the Episcopal Diocese of Fort Worth and I as the Diocesan
Bishop have been members of the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone. As a result, canonical
declarations of the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church pertaining to us are irrelevant
and of no consequence.

The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth

There's a bunch more a the Episcopal News Service story.

[voxbaryton.livejournal.com]

Well gee. I wonder how she'd feel if the Archbishop were to declare Episcopalians as "No longer Anglican."

[furrbear.livejournal.com]

Of course they are no longer Episcopalians. They have voted to leave and have left the Episcopal Church. It a matter of polity, not a theological issue. They are still members of The Church, just not this church. By the same token, the priests and bishops who have left are still priests and bishops, ordination is a rite and cannot be 'undone' - they just are no longer (until they decide to publicly recant their decision to leave) priests in the Episcopal Church.

Your comment about the ++ABC made me laugh. At it's core the Anglican Communion was formed by the three churches with traceable apostolic succession back to Rome: the Church of England, the Church of Canada, and the Episcopal Church (USA). What you propose Rowan do is exactly what the Primates of the churches in the Southern hemisphere are seeking to do, redefine Anglicanism in their image to the (initial) exclusion of the Church of Canada and the ECUSA.

[bookish-cub.livejournal.com]

It's about time that somebody started standing up to these bullies. I'm glad that she called them on it and I hope that she's able to retain all of the church property. If they want to create a new church, then they can meet in a strip mall somewhere.

[furrbear.livejournal.com]

Well... I know in the Diocese of Fort Worth, there's LOTS of potential "church space" after both Food Lion and Winn-Dixie pulled out of the area. Might even be an old VoldeMart or K-Mart they could rent.

[voxbaryton.livejournal.com]

When you figure out that there is no "other church" perhaps you and your fellow Episcopalians can learn a little humility.

I am the true vine, my Father is the vinedresser. Every branch of mine that bears no fruit, he takes away, and every branch that does bear fruit he prunes, that it may bear fruit. ... I am the vine, you are the branches. He who abides in me, and I in him, he it is that bears much fruit, for apart from him you can do nothing. If a man does not abide in me, he is cast forth as a branch and withers; and the blades are gathered, thrown into the fire and burned.

The appropriate response is to pray for the healing of your schisms, not to fan the flames.

[cipherpunk.livejournal.com]

Maybe I'm dense here, but I don't see how John's original remarks were "fanning the flames." Truth simply exists, and it is no crime to speak it.

There has been a great deal of prayer on both sides, and a lot of effort at reconciliation on both sides. It has not panned out.

We have a deep and divisive theological issue between us -- and it's not the Church's treatment of gays, either; that's a symptom, not the disease. The real issue is modernity. Is the Church going to remake itself for the 21st century, even if that means revising old canons? Or are we going to push for a "return to our roots," and avoid engaging the changed modern world?

People of good will can and will disagree on this. The ECUSA has tried to accommodate both camps, and is feeling the fractures that have resulted. A house divided against itself cannot stand; and thus, some people are embarking off on their own path that is still within the Anglican community, but not within the ECUSA.

[furrbear.livejournal.com]

Thank you, Rob. I'm going to respond here rather than fork this particular aspect of the thread.

To quote from the Nicene Creed, which is part of every Holy Eucharist in the Episcopal Church, "We believe in one holy catholic and apostolic Church." Note, that's little 'c' catholic and big 'C' Church.

Most any Episcopalian will agree with you that there is no other Church. They will also acknowledge that there are other churches: Roman Catholicism, Anglicanism, Eastern Orthodox. All expressions of that one Holy catholic and apostolic Church. Or are you trying to claim that only one church's expression of The Church is valid? That, in my opinion, would call for a heftier dose of humility than that you wish to prescribe to those who are only saying to a few leaving to form their own church (little c), "Go with God, just don't call yourselves by our name, OK?" If a bishop and some clergy left to associate with the Roman Catholic church, would it make sense for them to still refer to themselves as Episcopalians?

Episcopalians have been praying to heal this divide. For much longer than non-Anglicans would seem to show knowledge. The root of this rift dates back to 1979. In my own diocese (the one discussed here, Fort Worth), the seeds of this schism can be traced all the way back to the diocese's creation when it was split from the Diocese of Dallas. Further, in the late 1980s when those now calling themselves the Anglican Church of North America started planning this break in the formation of the Episcopal Synod of America. Since then, they've changed names about every 3-5 years. We've witnessed the machinations of the schismatics. We've prayed. We've pleaded with them. They were Hell bent of leaving and now they've left.

There are no flames to fan. They've left. Those of us remaining have the shell of a diocese and parishes to rebuild.

[furrbear.livejournal.com]

Gospel of John 15:1-8. Easter 5, Cycle B. It's up again this year along with Acts of the Apostles 9: 26-31 and 1 John 3:18-24.

I prefer this interpretation. You may not. I offer it anyway. (Full text)

...Let’s look at a powerful image in the gospel. Jesus says to his disciples, “I am the true vine. My father is the vine grower, but I am the vine and you are the branches. What I want you to do is realize that if you stay connected to me, if you allow me to be a life source in you, then you are going to be very fruitful. The process of being fruitful also includes the process of being pruned.”

Being pruned is an image of being changed. It’s an image of transformation. It’s conversion, the pain of “cutting back” the images we have of what we thought was supposed to be and allowing new growth to happen. There is something so interesting about the dying to self that we are engaged in. The promise is that everything happens on the other side of death. I am not talking about physical death here, but death to all of our illusions. We have to let go of the way in which we presume God is working and open ourselves to the way he truly works. That needs constant tweaking. It needs constant work, because we are so much a part of our culture. We are so much a part of human experience that we know what it’s like to be loved by other human beings. One of the things that is very common in human love is that love is conditional, love is intermittent (sometimes there and sometimes not) and it is very possessive. If we have an image of God’s love being possessive, intermittent and conditional, then all it does is allow us to act the same way toward the people around us. We will sometimes love people and sometimes hate them, depending on their performance. We will want to possess people, meaning we will want them to be “there” for us. That is a very common way for humans to love. And then, we will not really honor the person. We will not recognize the beauty of the person.

When Jesus loves, he has a way of recognizing our value. He recognizes how important we are and the gifts we possess. His love is a kind of super-powerful acceptance of everything we are. And he doesn’t love us in this way so that we will then turn around and love him back uniquely. By “uniquely,” I mean that we focus all of our life on him. Jesus doesn’t love us sometimes. His love for us has nothing to do with our performance. It has nothing to do with any kind of conditional love or any love that turns on and turns off. I love the image that Jesus recognizes us as valuable. There is something extraordinary about being loved this way. Once we understand this is the way God loves, an enormous power comes into us and enables us to be able to love in the same way. In my experience of human love, I think I am probably like you. Growing up in a family I think it is very common to experience love that doesn’t really recognize us for who we are or honor the unique, precious thing that each person is. I remember once talking to a therapist who spoke about a child who grew up in a family, perhaps we could say a typical one, but one of experiences this person had that was intense was that his parents weren’t very closely connected to the value and the presence of their children. This child used to announce his actions every time he got up to do something. Perhaps if all of those members of the family were watching television he would say, “I am going to the bathroom now.” And when he came back, he would say, “I’m back now.” Or: “I’m going to bed now.” In therapy, the child, now an adult male, was saying, “I used to do all this, and I don’t know why.” The therapist just smiled and said, “It’s because you had some deep sense and deep intuition that these people really weren’t paying attention to you. They were feeding you and taking care of you. They were getting you to school and making sure you cleaned up your room.” But they didn’t have the unique, wonderful gift that God longs for us to have in our love for each other, that he and only he can empower us to do: the love that is deeply connected to an awareness and a recognition of the value and dignity of the person we are.