Worldwide Anglican church facing split over gay bishop

[davidinalameda]

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,11069-2245849,00.html

The Archbishop of Canterbury has outlined proposals that are expected to lead to the exclusion of The Episcopal Church of the United States from the Anglican Church as a consequence of consecrating a gay bishop.

The US branch of Anglicanism faces losing its status of full membership of the Anglican Church in the wake of its consecration of the openly gay Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, an act which has propelled the worldwide church to the brink of schism.

The final straw came when The Episcopal Church failed to "repent" of its action at its General Convention in Columbus, Ohio earlier this month, and failed to vote through a moratorium on any more gay consecrations.

Dr Williams is proposing a two-track Anglican Communion, with orthodox churches being accorded full, "constituent" membership and the rebel, pro-gay liberals being consigned to "associate" membership


associate? why not relegate those groups that insist on discrminating to associate status

this will lead to the splitting of the ECUSA, and as an Episcopalian, I'm not going to lose any sleep with the conservatives leaving the ECUSA

[Totallybushed]

1. Not being Episcopalian, and

not being gay, I don't have a personal dog in this fight.

What would be wrong with letting each group go their own way? Let God sort 'em out. What business is it of anybody else's?

[Tesha]

2. My money's on the Rebel Alliance in the long run. (NT)

[dsc]

3. The American Anglicans should withdraw the compromise

resolution that they passed. I understand why they passed it but they should resind it and tell these people just what to do with themselves.

[BOHICA06]

15. They only meet every three years ...

... and they do nothing fast!!! Except with the Presiding Bishop and Presiding Bishop Elect think they aren't going to get their tea-party at Lambeth and get their collective jockeys and/or panties in a wad and then pushed through BO33 ...... as "the best we could do!"

We had clarity till they panicked about crumpets!

[dsc]

20. It is too bad it will take that long to undo it

but they always could just make sure all future bishop appointments are done by those who had already said they weren't going to listen to that anyhow. This is sadly what happens when you try to appease bigots, it only emboldens them.

[Tesha]

4. Where will they go? The RC church?

> ...I'm not going to lose any sleep with the conservatives
> leaving the ECUSA

Where will they go? The RC church? Where the priests
f**k little boys instead of consenting adult men?
As you say, let 'em go!

Tesha

[atreides1]

5. I'm also an Episcopalian

And I agree with you.

As an associate the "orthodox churches" can still accept money from us, especially for the very
orthodox members on the African continent, who seem to dislike us the most. Of course they don't
dislike the funding they receive, do they?

Historically the Anglican church only came into existence because the king of England wanted to sleep with a woman who wasn't his wife, and the Catholic church wouldn't grant him a divorce.

Nothing like changing the rules when you don't get your way

[AndyTiedye]

22. It's Good to be The King

[nerddem]

6. it'll be so much better when they leave

that way we can go ahead and fix the language in the wedding ceremony

[pelagius]

7. Interestingly enough...

...the Canadian Anglican province is about 1/2 step behind the Episcopalians on issues of human sexuality, and the good old Church of England another 1/2 a step behind them. If there is an "Anglican Covenant" that has as one of its key points "no fags" (they'll say it more politely, of course), it could be that North America, Europe, New Zealand, and maybe Australia (except for the Diocese of Sydney) may become "associate members" of the Anglican Covenant.

As an Episcopalian, I'm hopeful we can put this endless talk behind us and start getting focused on our primary task of uniting people to God and each other through Christ -- regardless of who and how one loves.

[TallahasseeGrannie]

8. This is rather sad

because the ECUSA has a long, proud history. While it is a temptation to say "we don't need them (the Anglicans), it does make the ECUSA a splinter organization and to those with concerns about things like apostolic succession, it is a big deal to be excluded from the Anglican Communion.

I also wonder what the legal ramifications will be regarding property if the ECUSA is tossed out of the Anglican Communion. Will breakaway groups then have more chance to reclaim their churches and budgets from the ECUSA, if the ECUSA is considered to have broken the communion?

[davidinalameda]

9. from my understanding

the church property belongs to the individual diocese

I don't see how the ECUSA leaving the Anglican Communion would impact on this

[TallahasseeGrannie]

10. Would a court be inclined to grant

a breakaway parish the right to the property if they can prove that the church is guilty of heresy? What a trial THAT would be!

[davidinalameda]

12. I can't imagine any civil court touching that one with a 20 foot pole

[DeepModem Mom]

11. I'm an Episcopalian.

We know very little about Jesus Christ, but if one thing is known about him it is that he abhored exclusion, that he welcomed all manner of saints, sinners, outcasts. He travelled with all, shared meals with all, ministered to all. If I am no longer an Anglican, so be it. If I am part of one part of an American church split by a civil war, so be it. I'll go with a heart at peace, with those whose practice is to include.

[megatherium]

13. As a gay Episcopalian, I am tired of the ECUSA trying to accomodate

the conservatives. I believe the ECUSA should say directly and forcefully that the conservatives are WRONG on this and other issues. Jesus never said anything about homosexuality, but he did say something about divorce -- he said divorce is always wrong (except in cases of infidelity) -- and the conservatives seem to have no trouble with divorce. Why the hypocrisy?

It is reported that the conservative effort to split apart the ECUSA is being funded by Richard Mellon Scaife and other hard-right groups. They want to weaken the ECUSA, which is a strong progressive voice in this country. I'm sure that their efforts to damage the ECUSA will continue, now that they've elected as Presiding Bishop a PhD oceanographer -- I suspect Bishop Schori will speak with moral and scientific authority on environmental issues, especially global warming, and this will be threatening to the energy industry.

[davidinalameda]

14. why the hypocrisy?

because they're Pharisees

[BOHICA06]

16. How are gay Episcopalians going to get the knife

out of their backs that +Schori planted so swiftly?

[pelagius]

17. The "knife" was more of a toothpick (not that that wouldn't hurt)...

...since Resolution B033 urging "caution" in ordaining "persons whose manner of living might present a challenge to the greater Church" was non-binding and at least 30 bishops stood up and said they wouldn't follow it. It was a feeble attempt to appease the reactionaries enough to get the Episcopal Church bishops invited to the next big global Anglican confab in Lambeth. (Definitely lame, I know.) Now that the ++ABC has issued a statement saying the Episcopal Church didn't go far enough in "repenting" and that the Anglican Communion is going to split into two tracks -- "full" and "associate" membership -- based on conformance to some yet-to-be-constructed "Anglican Covenant", B033 is effectively DOA. Expect same-sex blessings and ordinations of gay clergy to move forward, since we've been declared apostates now, anyway.

The reactionaries think that they're going to be the one, true Anglican province in the USA and the moderates/liberals say "don't let the chapel door hit you where the good Lord split you". Both groups can relax -- the reactionaries are going to get their "fag-free" church and the mainstream can continue to include all God's children.

[megatherium]

21. Why do you say it was +Schori that planted the dagger?

I thought it was the current Presiding Bishop (Griswold) who did that. He was said to have violated Robert's Rules of Order to get the offending resolution B033 passed, at the last minute and with only 30 minutes of debate. It is surmised that he didn't want to preside over the ECUSA when it got thrown out of the Anglican Communion; his failure to prevent that means progressives as well as conservatives will regret his presidency.

For her part, +Schori said directly at the Convention that she does not believe that homosexuality is a sin.

[BOHICA06]

24. Without her direct appeal to the House of Delegates

...while not out of order was highly ilregular....B033 would have died. Same result as now, but without the hurt and with greater clarity.

[JerseygirlCT]

18. This is infuriating

and had the ABC been the tiniest bit courageous years ago and told the loud-mouthed bigots where they could stuff it, there would be no problem. They'd take it, and the money they need to survive, and they'd learn to deal with it.

Instead, he wimped out, calling it "compromise" and now the only way he sees fit to keep the communion together is to split it up. Those bigots wouldn't want to be sullied with the rest of us...

It's really disappointing. And cowardly, and wrong.

And I truly believe that the North American churches will be the leaders now -- it's time for another reformation of sorts, and our church will be the one to do it, while they lag behind. Sad.

[GoddessOfGuinness]

19. People were split over slavery at one point, too...

And there was plenty of griping over sharing the same beaches, water fountains, and areas of churches with black people. It's time for them to realize that prejudice is NOT a Christian value.

[Lydia Leftcoast]

23. A bunch of parishes left over the ordination of women

They were and still are a splinter group, scattered here and there, and hung up on their own "orthodoxy" to the exclusion of everything else.

After Gene Robinson was approved in 2003, my parish, one of the sites where General Convention was held, received eighty inquiries about membership. We're fully inclusive, and we take in about 30 new members three or four times a year.

One of the people who attended General Convention told me that the strongest objections to equality for GLBT people came from retired bishops (who can still vote, but will be around only for limited amounts of time due to their ages) and from a few reliably conservative dioceses.

I think our more inclusive policy is going to attract not only GLBT people, but friends and family of GLBT people, and other people who don't fit into the mom-and-dad-and Johnny-and-Suzy picture of family life.