Did I speak too soon?

[dsdrane]

There is more than a little disturbing news coming out of the now concluded meeting of Anglican Primates in Tanzania. Is Archbishop Jefferts Schori about to sell GLBT Episcopalians down river to appease American and World conservatives and avert a schism in the Anglican Communion?

[I've always wanted to use that.]

At the risk of jingoism: Don't Tread on Me!

What have y'all heard?

[keltic63]

I was reading about that in the NY Times this morning.

It doesn't sound good to me....

[u-dog]

can you provide a link Keltic?

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by u-dog

can you provide a link Keltic?

it's HERE but you have to be a member to view it (free, just register)

[dsdrane]

...can be found here:

http://episcopalchurch.typepad.com/episcope/

This blog has all the articles from the nation's leading papers, comments by Archbishop Jefferts Schori, the Communique, etc.

[andrewlittle]

Periodically, acting like "lesser" primates is not just the purvue of Anglican Primates. Unfortunately, this is one instance of just that - Primates pissing in each others' corners trying to expand their territories and become the alpha dogs.

[BruceChris]

She's one smart cookie.

A. If the Episcopal Church, USA goes it's own way, and splits from the Anglicans, I don't see much of a problem, other than one of image. Personally, I would prefer to see this, it's more honest, and they could hire or appoint more gays.

B. The Bishop will not sell us out.

What may happen, is that an extreemly vaguely worded statement will be issued, with a recommendation to refer it to a comittee, and discuss it at some future time. The US Episopalians will then try to keep a lower profile. Mini-bummer.

(And andrew, if I were a chimpanzee, or other "lesser" primate, I would definitely mark your territory!)

Peace and Love, Bruce Chris

[Daniel]

David- thanks for the link!

Have been reading about this in the NYTimes too. There was a good discussion about the matter on the Lehrer Hour last night (Tuesday). Personally, I don't think things are going to go well: the American church is being painted into a corner and asked to make choices it- historically- has never been made to make.

This is a church which has always been able to maintain paradoxes. As it was pointed out last night on the show, the church itself, when it was instituted by Henry VIII, had to decide if it was going to be Protestant or Catholic. In essence, it chose a middle path. That's the kind of approach that is being lost here. There is another matter too: the African church is organized differently. Their bishops makes decisions in a way that American ones do not- they are authoritarian- a top down approach. Decisions are made very differently in the American Church: bishops, laypersons, clergy and congregations, together chart the way forward. In sum: the African bishops are demanding that Americans bow to their Authority. That's not how we do business here.

Persoanally, I think this is a numbers game, with a doll house mentality.

[u-dog]

My guess is that the ECUSA hierarchy and much of its lay leadership will decline to be dictated to regardless of what they think about gay people and relationships. A small number of conservative congregations, priests, and members will split off into an alternative denomination which will be recognized by other Anglican national churches. What will be interesting to see is what Archbishop Williams will do when push finally comes to shove.

[dsdrane]

Interestingly, perhaps ironically?, earlier this week I attempted to contact Gene Robinson via the NH Diocese specifically to ask what, if anything, was being done to support and encourage ++KJS and other more liberal/mainstream Episcopal leaders to stand their ground. The terse response informed me that Bishop Gene was on vacation and that I should contact 815.

Now that we know what went down in Tanzania and that, under the best of circumstances, ++KJS is trying to buy time, what can we do in the meanwhile to stiffen the resolve of our leaders (especially those who are apt to go "all wobbly" on us).

My hope is that u-dog is right, that center-right, Straight Episcopalians will ultimately say: they might be queers, but by gum!, they're OUR queers, and we won't be told what to do with 'em by some foreign poohbah!

But, I don't think we should leave that up to chance.

Is this one of those full-page-ads-in-the-nation's-papers moments? Anyone know someone in the know at Integrity USA?

[Daniel]

News Analysis
Many Episcopalians Wary, Some Defiant After Ultimatum by Anglicans

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
Published: February 21, 2007
There was a time when the Episcopal Church in the United States was known as “the Republican Party at prayer,” but in the last 30 years it has evolved into the Rainbow Coalition of Christianity.

There are hip-hop Masses, American Indian rituals to install a new presiding bishop and legions of gay and straight priests who don the rainbow stoles of gay liberation. Its pews are full of Roman Catholics and Christians from other traditions attracted by its aura of radical acceptance.

The article has these nice words from the Bishop of NYC.

“Being part of the Anglican Communion is very important to me,” said Bishop Mark S. Sisk of New York. “But if the price of that is I have to turn my back on the gay and lesbian people who are part of this church and part of me, I won’t do that.”

But this part of his response seems overly legalistic:

Some liberals yesterday were latching on to what they saw as a loophole because the wording specified that the bishops would not “authorize” rites. There are many bishops who have not formally authorized ceremonial rites for gay unions, but who nevertheless allow priests to perform them. If this is all the communiqué is requiring, they suggested, the Episcopal Church can live with that.

“Blessings happen, sure,” said Bishop Sisk of New York. “But I didn’t authorize them.”

Bishop MacPherson, however, said that his understanding is that the communiqué asks the bishops to actually stop the performing of same-sex blessings in their dioceses.

The most despairing reactions came from gay men and lesbians in the church, who say this is not reconciliation, but capitulation.

“They’re trying to make people choose between the Communion and the church’s commitment to gay and lesbian people,” said the Rev. Michael Hopkins, a priest in Rochester and the former president of Integrity, a long-established organization of gay and lesbian Episcopalians.

Although the Episcopal Church is known as an inclusive haven, Mr. Hopkins said, he already knows gay men and lesbians who are leaving. He said, “People like me can only convince other people to hang in there for so long.”

My sense is that those looking for a loophole are only fooling themselves- and playing chess with the lives of gay and lesbian Anglicans. The African bishops are as anti-gay as they seem to be- there no loopholing that.

[suzer1013]

Hi David. There are some good blogs out there with discussions and information about what to do next. I would recommend Susan Russell's blog (she is the President of Integrity). The link is:

http://inchatatime.blogspot.com/

You can also find some good discussions in the comment sections at Father Jake's: http://frjakestopstheworld.blogspot.com/

It can get a bit heated at Father Jake's, but I've learned alot from his posts and the discussions there.

I'm a cradle Piskie, and don't know where the church is headed. Not even sure I can speculate at this point. But, already, bishops are letting their voices be heard that they and the church are committed to the full inclusion of GLBT people. Whether we remain in the Anglican communion doesn't seem so important to me really. I think if TEC is kicked out, or if it leaves on its own (which I doubt will happen), it will do just fine and, in fact, thrive.

Susan

[Gregory_de_Bois]

Originally Posted by dsdrane

My hope is that u-dog is right, that center-right, Straight Episcopalians will ultimately say: they might be queers, but by gum!, they're OUR queers, and we won't be told what to do with 'em by some foreign poohbah!

Ha, that is funny. I can't wait for that day. But I hope it will be with all Christian churches. That would be better.

[andrewlittle]

I can't wait for that day. But I hope it will be with all Christian churches. That would be better.

Amen, amen, amen.

[BenL]

Originally Posted by dsdrane

But, I don't think we should leave that up to chance.

Is this one of those full-page-ads-in-the-nation's-papers moments? Anyone know someone in the know at Integrity USA?

The House of Bishops meets next month. It is bound to take up the covenant signed by the Presiding Bishop. If you are an Episcopalian, write or call your bishop. He or she is, after all, your chief pastor. Make your case as clearly and succinctly as you can. By all means, let them know that there are consequences to putting people's spiritual lives at risk by using them as pawns in an international game of chicken. What irritates me so much is that no one at the highest levels on either side seems to understand that we are REAL people, beloved by God. I know, I know, so are the conservatives here and in Africa. But right now it's our inclusion in the church that's at stake.

BenL

[dsdrane]

Check!

(Thanks, BenL.)

[keltic63]

this http://www.365gay.com/Newscon07/02/022807episc.htm makes it sound like KJSchori is selling us out. I know she's in a tough position. I understand that she is pastoring "all" the flock, but it still feels like we're being asked to sit in the back of the bus for a few more years.

[Daniel]

Well....things seem to be getting more and more interesting. These words from the 365gay.com article strike me as disturbing.

"We are being pushed toward a decision by impatient forces within and outside this church who hunger for clarity. That hunger for clarity at all costs is an anxious response to discomfort in the face of change which characterizes all of life," she said. "The impatience we're now experiencing is an idol - a false hope that is unwilling to wait on God for clarity."

Who are these 'impatient forces within and outside this church who hunger for clarity'?

One might say that the impatient forces inside the church are those on bother sides- those who are pro gay- and those who are not. But what of the 'forces' outside the church? Who might that be? Without further clarification, one is left wondering. However, if she means gay people- the unchurched- who are seeking civil liberties, she is barking up the wrong tree. In effect, she is telling those people to sit down and shut up.

I see her statement as telegraphing, or indicating, that she has lost her grasp on the whole issue. It will go forward with or without her, having a force all it's own at this point. Trying to blunt the force of change will only result in her being reviled by both sides.

[u-dog]

Give the woman some slack guys. She is in the hardest job and in the hardest spot of her life. One that most of us will NEVER be in. She has been given stewardship of an institution that is about more than just this issue and she needs to be mindful of an impossible number of perspectives and agendas.

Here are some thoughts:

The fact that she says "THIS church" suggests that she is talking about the ECUSA. So the "outside" forces are the conservative primates of the developing world and perhaps secular media and opinion outlets. The "inside" forces are the conservative bishops, priests, and congregations who want to clarify he issue by putting the brakes on gay inclusion. "Inside" may also refer to the reaction she is feeling from progressive forces wanting her to tell the Primates to "go to hell"

She believes that the way forward on gay inclusion is a slow one... the church feeling its way along making one change or decision at a time, letting the Spirit unfold the future at its own speed. She sees the forces who want to make "once and for all" decisions as interfering with that spirit led process.

All of this, of course, is just my interpretation. But I bet I'm right

[keltic63]

Originally Posted by u-dog

Give the woman some slack guys. She is in the hardest job and in the hardest spot of her life. One that most of us will NEVER be in. She has been given stewardship of an institution that is about more than just this issue and she needs to be mindful of an impossible number of perspectives and agendas.

Here are some thoughts:

The fact that she says "THIS church" suggests that she is talking about the ECUSA. So the "outside" forces are the conservative primates of the developing world and perhaps secular media and opinion outlets. The "inside" forces are the conservative bishops, priests, and congregations who want to clarify he issue by putting the brakes on gay inclusion. "Inside" may also refer to the reaction she is feeling from progressive forces wanting her to tell the Primates to "go to hell"

She believes that the way forward on gay inclusion is a slow one... the church feeling its way along making one change or decision at a time, letting the Spirit unfold the future at its own speed. She sees the forces who want to make "once and for all" decisions as interfering with that spirit led process.

All of this, of course, is just my interpretation. But I bet I'm right

perhaps this isn't quite as important to you as it is to the rest of us.