As promised in the previous post, my first one, I present my draft resolution asking that The Episcopal Church make a voluntary withdrawal from the Anglican Communion. I envision presenting this at the diocesan convention of North Carolina in January of 2011. If it passes, it would then go on to the General Convention in 2012. Do I think it will pass? Probably only if things heat up more and get even uglier. Time will tell.
Whereas in response to disagreements and controversies in the worldwide Anglican Communion an Anglican Covenant has been drawn up and is being presented to the various provinces of the Anglican Communion for adoption as a basis for unity and intercommunion;
And Whereas the covenant proposes a more centralized structure for the unity of the Anglican Communion which gives the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates power to interfere in the internal affairs of the autonomous provinces of the communion, including punitive sanctions in section 4;
And whereas this violates the autonomy by which the provinces of the communion have historically governed themselves in the light of the needs and mission imperatives of their own region and culture;
And Whereas the Archbishop of Canterbury, in advance of the adoption of the Anglican Covenant, has begun to exercise punitive sanctions against the Episcopal Church for decisions made in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of said church,
Be it resolved that the Diocese of North Carolina gathered in convention asks the Seventy-Sixth General Convention of the Episcopal Church, meeting in 2012, to reject the Anglican Covenant in its current draft;
Be it further resolved that the Diocese of North Carolina respectfully requests that the General Convention of the Episcopal Church voluntarily withdraw The Episcopal Church from the Anglican Communion should the Anglican Covenant be adopted by a majority of the provinces of the Anglican Communion or should the Archbishop of Canterbury continue to impose sanctions against the Episcopal Church;
And finally be it resolved that this Episcopal Church, valuing its historic relationships with the various provinces of the Anglican Communion, negotiate individual intercommunion agreements with those provinces of the said communion which are willing to do so based up a common commitment to Jesus Christ as Lord of the Church and the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral as the only necessary and sufficient basis for intercommunion.
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Let's consider leaving the Anglican Communion
I never thought I would write something like this, but I think it is time for the Episcopal Church to consider making a voluntary withdrawal from the Anglican Communion. What on earth would inspire such a radical suggestion?
I have long considered myself both a loyal Anglican and a loyal Episcopalian. As a convert to the Episcopal Church, I sought it out as my spiritual home for three reasons: I love the liturgy fo the Book of Common Prayer; it was church whose breadth of inclusion meant I could express my faith in Jesus Christ with integrity and be in communion with folks with whom I might not agree, but whose differing insights into the faith could enrich my own; it was the American Branch of the Church of England. During my theological training, I was able to do my parish internship in a parish in the Diocese of Southwark. It was one of the most valuable experiences in my life to date. I so gloried in the connection between the Episcopal Church and the Church of England and the wider Anglican Communion that I even said that if ever the Episcopal Church and the Church of England and Anglican Communion parted ways, I would give my allegiance to whatever expression of Anglicanism Canterbury recognized as valid for North America. I find myself in a very different place now.
How has this change occured? As one might guess, my change of heart grows in part from the deep controversies swirling with the Anglican Communion. I do not think the Episcopal Church in the United States is being treated in a manner that is fair and even handed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. In saying this, I recognize that the Episcopal Church is largely responsible for initiating the current state of affairs. The General Convention in 2003 ratified the election of V. Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire. A majority of the bishops and standing committees of the Episcopal Church ratified the election of Mary Glasspool to be suffragan Bishop of Los Angeles. Given the anxiety over the elevation of gays and lesbians to the episcopate within the wider communion, one can imagine ++Rowan Williams' frustration with any and everything connected to the American Church. I do not intend this as a value judgement on +Gene Robinson or +Mary Glasspool as bishops, only an observation of the current state of affairs and their place in the controversies. In the face of these "facts on the ground" the Archbishop of Canterbury has not been even handed in dealing with the problems of the Communion in light of the proposed Anglican Covenant.
If the American Church is to be sanctioned, and the Canadian Church threatened with sanctions (over the blessing of gay unions) then those provinces of the Anglican Communion which continue to set up alternative jurisdictions over against the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada ought to be sanctioned as well. ++Rowan Williams has said he will. To date he has not, and one of his spokespersons has indicated they at Lambeth Palace are not even sure what constitutes an intervention into another province. Excuse me? Let me help clarify. If Anglicans in Nigeria or Uganda were to open a parish in the Diocese of Southwark (a very liberal place in the Church of England) which announced that it was not under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Southwark but rather under the care of a bishop from one of those two countries, I suspect that Lambeth Palace (which actually sits on land in the Diocese of Southwark) would think it had been invaded ecclesiastically speaking. Yet, when the same thing happens in the USA or Canada, Rowan Williams is not entirely sure provincial boundaries have been invaded. Forgive me for being a bit snarky, but I can't figure out which is denser, the fog on a damp day in London or the fog swirling in the collective minds of the Archbishop and his staff. But enough unkindness.
The next area of offense was the treatment accorded the Primate of the Episcopal Church, ++Katherine Jefferts Schori on her recent visit to Southwark. She was there at the invitation of the Dean of the Cathedral. Yet, Lambeth Palace forbad her to wear her mitre, the symbol of her office as bishop. Other overseas female bishops, including Americans and Canadians have been invited to preach and celebrate in locations in the Church of England and were allowed to preach and celebrate wearing their mitres. It is difficult not to see this as a deliberate slight and insult to our Primate. She was not denied the right to her proper insignia because she was a woman, but because she was the Primate of the Episcopal Church. That is rude, plain and simple.
On my next post, I will present a draft of a resolution I intend to introduce at the Convention of the Diocese of North Carolina to be sent on to General Convention. It proposes our voluntary withdrawal from the Anglican Communion while making provision for negotiating individual communion agreements with those provinces of Anglicanism who are willing to work with us.
I am an Episcopalian
Donald A Lowery
I have long considered myself both a loyal Anglican and a loyal Episcopalian. As a convert to the Episcopal Church, I sought it out as my spiritual home for three reasons: I love the liturgy fo the Book of Common Prayer; it was church whose breadth of inclusion meant I could express my faith in Jesus Christ with integrity and be in communion with folks with whom I might not agree, but whose differing insights into the faith could enrich my own; it was the American Branch of the Church of England. During my theological training, I was able to do my parish internship in a parish in the Diocese of Southwark. It was one of the most valuable experiences in my life to date. I so gloried in the connection between the Episcopal Church and the Church of England and the wider Anglican Communion that I even said that if ever the Episcopal Church and the Church of England and Anglican Communion parted ways, I would give my allegiance to whatever expression of Anglicanism Canterbury recognized as valid for North America. I find myself in a very different place now.
How has this change occured? As one might guess, my change of heart grows in part from the deep controversies swirling with the Anglican Communion. I do not think the Episcopal Church in the United States is being treated in a manner that is fair and even handed by the Archbishop of Canterbury. In saying this, I recognize that the Episcopal Church is largely responsible for initiating the current state of affairs. The General Convention in 2003 ratified the election of V. Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire. A majority of the bishops and standing committees of the Episcopal Church ratified the election of Mary Glasspool to be suffragan Bishop of Los Angeles. Given the anxiety over the elevation of gays and lesbians to the episcopate within the wider communion, one can imagine ++Rowan Williams' frustration with any and everything connected to the American Church. I do not intend this as a value judgement on +Gene Robinson or +Mary Glasspool as bishops, only an observation of the current state of affairs and their place in the controversies. In the face of these "facts on the ground" the Archbishop of Canterbury has not been even handed in dealing with the problems of the Communion in light of the proposed Anglican Covenant.
If the American Church is to be sanctioned, and the Canadian Church threatened with sanctions (over the blessing of gay unions) then those provinces of the Anglican Communion which continue to set up alternative jurisdictions over against the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada ought to be sanctioned as well. ++Rowan Williams has said he will. To date he has not, and one of his spokespersons has indicated they at Lambeth Palace are not even sure what constitutes an intervention into another province. Excuse me? Let me help clarify. If Anglicans in Nigeria or Uganda were to open a parish in the Diocese of Southwark (a very liberal place in the Church of England) which announced that it was not under the jurisdiction of the Bishop of Southwark but rather under the care of a bishop from one of those two countries, I suspect that Lambeth Palace (which actually sits on land in the Diocese of Southwark) would think it had been invaded ecclesiastically speaking. Yet, when the same thing happens in the USA or Canada, Rowan Williams is not entirely sure provincial boundaries have been invaded. Forgive me for being a bit snarky, but I can't figure out which is denser, the fog on a damp day in London or the fog swirling in the collective minds of the Archbishop and his staff. But enough unkindness.
The next area of offense was the treatment accorded the Primate of the Episcopal Church, ++Katherine Jefferts Schori on her recent visit to Southwark. She was there at the invitation of the Dean of the Cathedral. Yet, Lambeth Palace forbad her to wear her mitre, the symbol of her office as bishop. Other overseas female bishops, including Americans and Canadians have been invited to preach and celebrate in locations in the Church of England and were allowed to preach and celebrate wearing their mitres. It is difficult not to see this as a deliberate slight and insult to our Primate. She was not denied the right to her proper insignia because she was a woman, but because she was the Primate of the Episcopal Church. That is rude, plain and simple.
On my next post, I will present a draft of a resolution I intend to introduce at the Convention of the Diocese of North Carolina to be sent on to General Convention. It proposes our voluntary withdrawal from the Anglican Communion while making provision for negotiating individual communion agreements with those provinces of Anglicanism who are willing to work with us.
I am an Episcopalian
Donald A Lowery
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)