Seven Candidates for Presiding Bishop
There are seven candidates for Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, and you can see and hear interviews by them at Episcopal News Service. Predictably, four voted for Robinson and three seemingly reluctantly voted against. Bishop Francisco Duque-Gómez of Colombia voted against because homosexuality is a cultural issue in Colombia. The only female candidate, Katharine Jefferts Schori of Nevada voted for Robinson. The other two who voted against confirmation clearly said that they wished they didn't have to do it.
All of the bishops expressed the opinion that the Episcopal Church is destracted from its main mission by this issue. One hears this theme over and over again as Episcopalians bemoan the fact that those who oppose the ordination of homosexuals are not simply willing to carry on business as usual. I don't know if they realize how disingenuous this seems to those of us who were unchurched earlier by the ordination of women. We got the same pleas aimed at making us feel guilty for having broken the fellowship and communion of the Episcopal Church over a matter which, if we had only been up to date with the times, we should have at least treated only as a matter of discipline, not of doctrine. Well, it is doctrine, not just discipline, and those who try to brush this fact under the carpet are either ignorant of the Apostolic tradition of the church or they wickedly choose to disregard it. Those who favor putting buggery on the same level as matrimony are the villains, not those who find themselves forced out of the Episcopal Church because of this radical change in the rules.
The Diocese of San Francisco recently elected a bishop who is strait, but pro gay. I would ask the question now whether it would be possible for a bishop who is not pro gay to be elected in San Francisco or anywhere else in the Episcopal Church. Things have slipped very badly since I was ordained in 1968. Much is being made of the fact that the next bishop of San Francisco is not gay, and that this may save the Episcopal Church from the brink of schism, but I see it differently, having left the Episcopal Church with the St. Louis crowd in 1978. The Episcopal Church is nothing but one of many different Protestant denominations in this country, and they are condemned to continue to divide and sub-divide because that is the lot of all denominations that are a law unto themselves. The only way forward, as I see it, is catholic unity.
Anglo-Catholics are, or were, a rare breed of Episcopalians who viewed themselves as part of the Catholic Church even though they were not in communion with either Rome or Orthodoxy. As long as there was hope that some day Anglicanism might be recognized as a legitimate sister church in the catholic communion, Anglo-Catholics could build beautiful gothic churches and fill them with incense. They could kneel at prayer, cross themselves, and make auricular confession to a priest. They could light candles and keep novenas. They could go on pilgrimage to holy places. They could recite the Divine Office, and they could pray the rosary, all the while blissfully thinking that they belonged to the Catholic Church, apart from which there was no salvation. But now it takes too much in the way of mental gymnastics to be able to maintain that claim, and most Anglo-Catholics are now out of the Episcopal Church. I wonder if we are missed.
As in the aftermath of the ordination of women there is today much talk of reconciliation, but it is one sided. Those who have been "unchurched" are made to feel like they are the culprits. Here is an example: An English superior of a religious order askes how we can maintain our sense of integrity as Christians when people think we have lost our integrity. The message is that those who are critical of the revisionist agenda are unchristian. Another example: A Dean of an Episcopal seminary mounts a special program calling people to "witness" to their faith to show we have not lost our vision. The subtle message behind this is that those who are not willing to witness with us are unchristian. After the St. Louis schism, Bishop Coburn was appointed to head up a committee for reconciliation. He was charged with the task of reconciling clergy and people back to the Episcopal Church. At the time I was the only priest in Massachuseetts who had joined the Continuing Church movement, and I never heard from Bishop Coburn on the matter of reconciliation, not that it would have done any good, but perhaps he knew me well enough from seminary to know that I would not be easily reconciled back to a heretical form of Protestantism. Words like "reconciliation", "witness", and "integrety" are face saving words used by the revisionists who know that the fellowship we once held in the Episcopal Church is utterly broken. I suppose they can not bring themselves to the point of saying that they are glad we are no longer present as an irritant in their church.
It will be interesting to see how things play out in the General Convention and in the Anglican Communion. My guess is that ECUSA will escape being expelled from the Anglican Communion, but that the gay agenda will continue to steer the ship onto the reefs.
C. David Burt
There are seven candidates for Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, and you can see and hear interviews by them at Episcopal News Service. Predictably, four voted for Robinson and three seemingly reluctantly voted against. Bishop Francisco Duque-Gómez of Colombia voted against because homosexuality is a cultural issue in Colombia. The only female candidate, Katharine Jefferts Schori of Nevada voted for Robinson. The other two who voted against confirmation clearly said that they wished they didn't have to do it.
All of the bishops expressed the opinion that the Episcopal Church is destracted from its main mission by this issue. One hears this theme over and over again as Episcopalians bemoan the fact that those who oppose the ordination of homosexuals are not simply willing to carry on business as usual. I don't know if they realize how disingenuous this seems to those of us who were unchurched earlier by the ordination of women. We got the same pleas aimed at making us feel guilty for having broken the fellowship and communion of the Episcopal Church over a matter which, if we had only been up to date with the times, we should have at least treated only as a matter of discipline, not of doctrine. Well, it is doctrine, not just discipline, and those who try to brush this fact under the carpet are either ignorant of the Apostolic tradition of the church or they wickedly choose to disregard it. Those who favor putting buggery on the same level as matrimony are the villains, not those who find themselves forced out of the Episcopal Church because of this radical change in the rules.
The Diocese of San Francisco recently elected a bishop who is strait, but pro gay. I would ask the question now whether it would be possible for a bishop who is not pro gay to be elected in San Francisco or anywhere else in the Episcopal Church. Things have slipped very badly since I was ordained in 1968. Much is being made of the fact that the next bishop of San Francisco is not gay, and that this may save the Episcopal Church from the brink of schism, but I see it differently, having left the Episcopal Church with the St. Louis crowd in 1978. The Episcopal Church is nothing but one of many different Protestant denominations in this country, and they are condemned to continue to divide and sub-divide because that is the lot of all denominations that are a law unto themselves. The only way forward, as I see it, is catholic unity.
Anglo-Catholics are, or were, a rare breed of Episcopalians who viewed themselves as part of the Catholic Church even though they were not in communion with either Rome or Orthodoxy. As long as there was hope that some day Anglicanism might be recognized as a legitimate sister church in the catholic communion, Anglo-Catholics could build beautiful gothic churches and fill them with incense. They could kneel at prayer, cross themselves, and make auricular confession to a priest. They could light candles and keep novenas. They could go on pilgrimage to holy places. They could recite the Divine Office, and they could pray the rosary, all the while blissfully thinking that they belonged to the Catholic Church, apart from which there was no salvation. But now it takes too much in the way of mental gymnastics to be able to maintain that claim, and most Anglo-Catholics are now out of the Episcopal Church. I wonder if we are missed.
As in the aftermath of the ordination of women there is today much talk of reconciliation, but it is one sided. Those who have been "unchurched" are made to feel like they are the culprits. Here is an example: An English superior of a religious order askes how we can maintain our sense of integrity as Christians when people think we have lost our integrity. The message is that those who are critical of the revisionist agenda are unchristian. Another example: A Dean of an Episcopal seminary mounts a special program calling people to "witness" to their faith to show we have not lost our vision. The subtle message behind this is that those who are not willing to witness with us are unchristian. After the St. Louis schism, Bishop Coburn was appointed to head up a committee for reconciliation. He was charged with the task of reconciling clergy and people back to the Episcopal Church. At the time I was the only priest in Massachuseetts who had joined the Continuing Church movement, and I never heard from Bishop Coburn on the matter of reconciliation, not that it would have done any good, but perhaps he knew me well enough from seminary to know that I would not be easily reconciled back to a heretical form of Protestantism. Words like "reconciliation", "witness", and "integrety" are face saving words used by the revisionists who know that the fellowship we once held in the Episcopal Church is utterly broken. I suppose they can not bring themselves to the point of saying that they are glad we are no longer present as an irritant in their church.
It will be interesting to see how things play out in the General Convention and in the Anglican Communion. My guess is that ECUSA will escape being expelled from the Anglican Communion, but that the gay agenda will continue to steer the ship onto the reefs.
C. David Burt
posted by C. David Burt | 12:16 PM
|
2 comments
