Tuesday, April 27, 2010

Deception now business as usual for Episcopal Church?

When representatives of the Southern hemisphere's Anglican Provinces met last week in Singapore, their final statement expressed dismay that the Episcopal Church's

...refusal to honor the many requests made of them by the various meetings of the Primates throughout the Windsor Process have brought discredit to our witness...

After the Episcopal Church (TEC) ignored many of its own members, including a report from its own House of Bishops' Theology Committee, to affirm an actively homosexual Bishop in 2003, the wider Anglican Communion held global meetings in 2004, '05 and '07 calling on TEC to practice "gracious restraint" from more such elections because the Communion's stated teaching does not accept the practice.

The response of the Episcopal Church was to lie - to sign onto statements of restraint, give reassurances, and then proceed with "the agenda." Now, an active lesbian is to be made a Bishop in Los Angeles on May 15th.

The lying continues, even with the evidence in front of the world. A just disclosed communication from the Episcopal Bishop of Georgia justifies his affirmative vote for the lesbian Bishop this way (emphasis added):

I am aware of some concern about the so-called moratorium [on Bishops with sex lives inconsistent with Christian teaching]. The House of Bishops did agree to a moratorium a number of years ago. That moratorium, however, was not one-sided. It was accepted in the context that certain of our Anglican brothers would refrain from crossing diocesan boundaries. While the House of Bishops exercised the restraint of the moratorium for seven years, others did not practice such restraint even for a year. So, in my judgment, the moratorium was no longing a compelling consideration.

This paragraph is a complete distortion of the truth, as an alert commenter detailed:

...the Windsor Report recommended the moratoria in October 2004. In 2005 the Primates asked the Episcopal Church to consider the requests made in the Windsor Report. In 2006 General Convention passed B033 which responded to this invitation. In February 2007 the Primates requested clarification of the meaning of B033 and in September 2007 the HOB declared that it was correct to understand that B033 was intended to comply with the request.

Even under the most generous interpretation, the moratorium lasted only from 2006 - 2009.

Another observer teased out more details of distortion:

And as you put it, even 3 years is an EXCEEDINGLY generous interpretation. It helps to remember there was more than a single moratorium. It was not just about a moratorium on the consecration of further gay bishops, but also a moratorium on SSBs [same sex blessings].

And as we know, those considered full speed ahead in many dioceses, often with the bishop’s full knowledge and participation. Bishops like +Bruno, +Schori, +Chane, +Curry and former AK bishop +Maze and many others were all on the record as promoting, participating in, and in some cases performing SSBs. So all along the “moratoria” were a game for many TEC bishops. Say and pretend one thing, do another. [I remember vividly Susan Russell’s SSB and her trumpeting it on her blog in explicit defiance of the Primates and the moratoria. It wasn’t done in secret in a corner.]

And of course, at least 3 dioceses had partnered gays as candidates for bishop during the period… so, dioceses were actively trying to flaunt the moratorium on ordaining gay bishops. They just didn’t succeed until Glasspool was elected.

During this time, Global South and other Anglican Bishops did, in fact, end their intrusions into TEC congregations. Those who still come into the U.S. visit groups that TEC has rejected from its membership. TEC tried to sanction those who sought help from other provinces; TEC did not sanction its members who violated the other moratoria. So the Georgia Bishop's new claim that the moratorium was over because of foreign intrusions is yet another deception.

This sort of dissembling is now endemic to TEC leadership. Long, wordy answers to simple propositions and questions are a favorite form, and the Georgia letter embodies it. But it's not the standard of operations set forth by the one to whom the church will answer:

Let your word be “Yes, Yes” or “No, No”; anything more than this comes from the evil one. Jesus, Matthew 5:37

1 comment:

Undergroundpewster said...

Just what are the requirements to be a Bishop anyway? Doesn't the examination say,

"Your heritage is the faith of patriarchs, prophets, apostles, and martyrs, and those of every generation who have looked to God in hope."

I am afraid that the bishop and the rest of those who support the ordination of non-celibate homosexuals cannot say or hear these words without mentally erasing from their consciences all thoughts of those generations of the faithful that have gone before.