Anglicans in Crisis
The United States: What will be the Fallout from the Episcopal Decisions and Who are the Players?This is the last in a series of articles on the looming crisis in the Anglican Church, brought on by attempts to promote homosexual clergy into the upper reaches of the Anglican hierarchy.
The first and second articles described the issues at the heart of the crisis and focused on the recent incident in England and the players involved. Articles three and four identified a different, yet equally divisive issue in Canada and examined the fallout and the players in that crisis.
The fifth article and the present one deal with the crisis in the Episcopal Church, the name given to the Anglican Church in the U.S. That crisis is likely the most egregious and divisive of all. The previous article detailed the issues and how things played out at the recently concluded General Convention of Episcopalians, during which most of the present series of articles were being written. This last article discusses the fallout from the U.S. decision to proceed with the confirmation of Canon Robinson, a practising homosexual, as Bishop of New Hampshire. That consecration is set for early November of this year. A second issue of developing rites for same-sex blessings did not receive official approval at the Convention, although an unofficial nod seemed to be the clear message.
Since this article is being written during the weekend following the end of the U.S. General Convention, much of the fallout from the decision to promote a practising homosexual to the position of Bishop has not yet happened. Still, it is clear where many people stand and more than a little reaction has emerged.
The Presiding Bishop as a Symbol
One of the characterisations used to describe the issues that have motivated the crisis in the U.S. Episcopal Church is that they represent �symbols of a desperately confused, errant and disintegrating Anglican province�.
Other symbols are the people themselves, and one such symbol, evident even before the vote was taken, came in the form of the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church himself.
At his press conference earlier in the week, Frank Griswold was asked by a reporter, if it is all right for a divorced male bishop to live with a man to whom he was not married, then would it be morally right for a divorced heterosexual man, living with a female lover, to serve with equal �distinction� as bishop? In other words, as the reporter put it, "Is being outside marriage only OK if you are gay?" Griswold responded by saying he thought the situation with the heterosexual man �would be a significant problem�.
The reporter�s next question ended the press conference: �So there's a double standard, then?� At that point, the Bishop�s media representative quickly intervened and whisked him away � to sounds of laughter wafting from the press.
Rev. Griswold has shown evidence of what appears to be contradictory and clouded thinking on other occasions. As early as 1997, he seemed to be setting the stage for what now has become the key justification for homosexual activists and abandonment of Scripture as the central guiding force in the life of the faithful:
Broadly speaking, the Episcopal Church is in conflict with scripture � (One) would have to say that the mind of Christ operative in the church over time ... has led the church to in effect contradict the words of the Gospel.
After the vote was taken, Rev. Griswold was optimistic and hopeful for the Church as a consequence of the approval of Canon Robinson�s election as Bishop. That optimism and hope, in addition to being shortsighted, also may be shortlived.
Two Days at Truro
Another event that preceded the General Convention in Minneapolis, Minnesota, and foreshadowed some of the fallout that has occurred, was a meeting held at the Truro Episcopal Church in Fairfax, Virginia. The meeting was held a week prior to the Convention and was attended by 60 conservative Anglican leaders from around the world.
Their purpose was to develop a strategy for how to approach the two contentious issues on homosexuality that would be addressed at the Convention. A second purpose was to issue a warning that either support for the confirmation of V. Gene Robinson as Bishop, or approval of rites for blessing homosexual partners would cause grave damage to the Anglican Communion and lead to a �realignment� within the Church.
Such a �realignment� might take the form of parishes breaking away from their dioceses, refusing to recognize the authority of their bishops or refusing to pay monies to the U.S. Church. The term �realignment� was chosen carefully since �schism� seemed to imply that they might be breaking away from the Church and that, in fact, was what they believed their opponents would be doing. Their view is that they, and the people they represent, are faithful to traditional interpretations of Scripture on the issue of homosexuality, and therefore solidly within the Communion.
After the Vote
Statements of both support and condemnation began almost before the final vote was taken. Comments by the Presiding Bishop and several pro-homosexual lobby groups, such as Integrity, were naturally supportive.
As far as predictions of a schism in the Church, Griswold and his supporters point to other controversies that have threatened the Communion, including the ordination of women in 1975, the dismissal of heresy charges against Bishop John Spong in 1987, the first female bishop in 1989, and another dismissal of heresy charges in 1996 against Bishop Righter for ordaining a homosexual priest. Although there were a few departures as a consequence of those events, no major schism occurred and that, they say, will be the case again.
Others do not see it that way. On the morning following the vote, more than two dozen deputies at the Convention expressed their dismay:
We believe that this is a profound error�. But understand this clearly: We are not leaving the church. It is rather this Church which has left the historic faith and has fractured the Anglican Communion...
There were immediate responses from some of the Primates, heads the 38 world-wide Provinces of the Anglican Communion. Here is a sample of their displeasure as well as their support for those opposing the decision:
Archbishop Peter Jasper Akinola, Archbishop of Nigeria:
We applaud the admirable integrity and loyalty of those gallant 45 Bishops of ECUSA who have refused to succumb to the pressure for compromise�. In the language of the Bible, they have refused to bow their knees to Baal.
Archbishop Drexel Gomez of the West Indies:
A majority of Anglicans across the Communion are convinced that the action of the General Convention of ECUSA in confirming the election of Canon Gene Robinson is incompatible with Scripture.
Bishop Gregorio Venables, Primate of the Southern Cone of South America:
The Convention's vote is contrary to the clear teaching of Holy Scripture and the Anglican formularies about marriage. If the consecration of Canon Robinson proceeds, the Convention will be taking ECUSA outside the boundaries of the Anglican Communion.
Archbishop Bernard Malango of Central Africa:
It is not we who are breaking away from the Anglican Communion. It is they who are breaking away from us. The consequences will be very bad.
Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was quick to respond to the affirming vote for Rev. Robinson. Known to be a liberal on such matters, he has shown great reluctance to condemn actions like those that precipitated the crises in England and in Canada. In fact, when he was the Bishop of Wales, he ordained a homosexual and, at the 1998 Lambeth Conference, he failed to support proscriptions against homosexuality, a position supported by 90% of the nearly 600 members who cast their votes.
It is not surprising that he shows similar restraint in response to the U.S. vote. His statements seem to be clear attempts to tread a fine line without openly revealing his biases in the matter; to buy time for decision; to encourage respectful dialogue that would provide him opportunities for persuasive argument; to imply support by reference to autonomy of Province and Diocese; and to mildly quell dissent.
It is my hope that the church in America and the rest of the Anglican Communion will have the opportunity to consider this development before significant and irrevocable decisions are made in response. I have said before that we need as a church to be very careful about making decisions for our part of the world which constrain the church elsewhere.
On Friday, Archbishop Williams said that he would call a meeting in mid-October this year, of the leaders of the world�s Anglican Churches to discuss the impact of the U.S. decision on the Communion. The date of the meeting precedes the consecration of Canon Robinson by about two weeks. Part of the official statement from Lambeth Palace quoted the Archbishop:
I am clear that the anxieties caused by recent developments have reached the point where we will need to sit down and discuss their consequences. I hope that in our deliberations we will find that there are ways forward in this situation which can preserve our respect for one another and for the bonds that unite us.
In spite of the fact that the head of the Church of England clearly is sympathetic to normalizing homosexuality in the Church, it is not clear what he can do against other Anglican world leaders who, for the most part, are opposed to the ordination of homosexual clergy and the blessings of homosexual cohabitants. The meeting promises to be a tumultuous one.
Numerous other individuals and groups have reacted and it is impossible to identify and quote them all. What follows are a few of those responses, some from prominent groups in and out of the Communion, others not. The intent is to give more of a flavour for the extent and content of the reactions from traditional and orthodox members of the Anglican faith.
Forward in Faith (FiF), is a group allied with the Continuing Anglicans, who broke from the Anglican Communion over the ordination of women over a decade ago. They agree in principle with the stand taken by the Continuing Anglicans but have remained in the Anglican Communion to exert their influence from within the Church. They commented as follows:
This schismatic act alienates us from the worldwide Anglican Communion and repudiates the clear teaching of Holy Scripture�. We believe this action has set in motion a process that will lead to a realignment of the Communion.
The Anglican Mission in America (AMIA) is a missionary outreach of the Anglican Province of Rwanda, established three years ago in response to the crisis of faith and leadership that exists within the Episcopal Church. The Chairman of AMIA, Rev. Chuck Murphy, referring to the comment cited earlier by the U.S. Presiding Bishop, noted: �it is this kind of confusion and presumption from the very highest levels of leadership in the U.S. Episcopal Church that has now produced both this latest vote to confirm the election of Gene Robinson, and the severe crisis of Faith and leadership that now exists within the worldwide Anglican Communion.
The leader of the Anglican Church of West Malaysia, Bishop Dr. Lim Cheng Ean, said that Southeast Asian Anglican Bishops might be in a position to discuss cutting ties with the U.S. church at a meeting next week.
The Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen, an outspoken opponent of integrating homosexuality into the Church hierarchy put it this way:
It is a historic moment in Anglican Communion affairs. This catastrophic decision cannot simply be allowed to pass away into history� It represents a time for decision by mainstream, biblical Anglicans around the world, and undoubtedly will result in a significant realignment of relationship within the Communion.
Part of the statement from the Anglican Mainstream, which includes 8 of the 38 Primates, other Archbishops and numerous Bishops, Clergy and Laity, read:
Sadly this decision ignores the mind of the Anglican Communion as set out by the Lambeth Conference in 1998 in its Resolution 1.10 and the Primates' Meeting in Brazil in May 2003. The Convention's vote is contrary to the clear teaching of Holy Scripture and the Anglican formularies about marriage. If the consecration of Canon Robinson proceeds, the Convention will be taking ECUSA outside the scriptural and currently agreed boundaries of the Anglican Communion.
David Virtue, author of VIRTUOSITY, an online electronic digest with a large readership in 38 countries, called for protest on the Sunday following the vote:
Episcopalians can take action by BOYCOTTING the pews, this Sunday. A strong response, such as this, will give encouragement to others who may have the same views. The national news services should give this wide publicity.
Canon David Anderson, President of the American Anglican Council (AAC), �a network of individuals, parishes, specialized ministries and Episcopal bishops who affirm Biblical authority and Anglican orthodoxy within the Episcopal Church�, had this to say:
Today's vote is yet another painful illustration that the Episcopal Church has left the Anglican family and become an �anything goes� denomination� Dioceses and local faith communities now have a green light to �bless� relationships outside of marriage. This move is a tragic but logical next step for a Church that has already abandoned the historic Christian faith.
The AAC is quickly moving forward�Under the direction and guidance of worldwide Anglican Primates, we are taking the necessary next steps to help insure that mainstream Anglicans in the Episcopal Church will have a place to call home.
Rev. David Phillips, general secretary of the Church Society, an organization in the U.K. representing evangelical Anglicans, indicated he hoped� �there will now be a division in the worldwide church. That is the only way we can be clear that some of us do not accept this�The assumption seems to be we can somehow keep the communion together and preserve unity just by getting together in a meeting. It is just nonsense.
The common position articulated in the above statements is one of strong disapproval over the U.S. Episcopal decision, and a fear - and even hope - that the crisis will precipitate a major realignment in the Church and be the wake up call to all Anglicans as to just how far from Scripture many of their leaders have taken them.
A Different Kind of Fallout: The Muslim Islamist Factor in Africa
A potentially devastating consequence of the decisions made by the relatively small US Province (the Episcopal Church represents only about 4% of worldwide Anglicans) is the effect on Africa. Of particular concern is the relationship of Anglicans to Muslims in the countries of that continent. Uwe Siemon-Netto, the religion editor of United Press International framed the issue this way:
What makes this whole conflict so infuriating is that North American and European church leaders don't give a damn about what their spiritual bankruptcy does to Africa, where orthodox Christianity is thriving in an often perilously hostile Muslim environment.
As have others, Siemon-Netto makes the point that Africa indeed could �go Islam� if homosexuality becomes acceptable in the Western Anglican Church and that could have profound consequences for persecutions of Christians there.
Others who have raised this issue include Canon Harmon of the Diocese of South Carolina, who said that Muslims would use such decisions �as a tool against Christianity�.
Rev. Minns, the rector at Truro and one of the organizers of the meeting described at the beginning of this article, made it clear that Africans feel their lives are on the line. �[They] risk their lives for the faith all the time�They are serious. They cannot survive if they go along with this.� The Nigerian Bishop, Cyril Okoracha, referred to the �severe persecution we are going to receive now from our Muslim neighbours�accusing us of maintaining [a] relationship with those who deny the Scripture.�
If those predictions are correct, the U.S. Church and its liberal power structure will have created a situation that will bring considerable pain and suffering to their brothers and sisters in the Church.
Wrap Up: Three Incidents; One Conclusion; Some Speculations
The six articles in this series have dealt with three incidents: the appointment in England of a homosexual Canon to be the Bishop of Reading; the granting of rites of blessings for homosexual cohabitants to a handful of parishes in Canada and, the approval in the United States of a practising homosexual to be the Bishop of New Hampshire.
It is clear to anyone who has looked at the history of this debate over the last 25 years that all three of those acts have been taken in arrogant and desperate defiance of the will of the world-wide Anglican Communion.
Perhaps the people responsible believe they are crusaders for the faith and are bringing the Church into a new era. Perhaps they believe that the majority of Anglicans understand, or will come to understand, the wisdom of their actions. Perhaps they believe that the storm will be short-lived and that, when things settle down, they can continue as before. Perhaps they believe that changing the principles of their faith will not undermine it.
Whatever they believe, the larger Communion is about to act and soon all of us will begin to understand the consequences of what has been done. What happens in the next few months will decide the future of the Anglican Church; a short journey that will lead to the most important decision the Church has ever made. That journey has already begun. Dr. Jack L. Edwards, President
Canadian Communications Coalition, Inc.
Toronto, Ontario, Canada
August 5, 2003
Christian Coalition International Canada Inc.
P.O. Box 6013, Station A
Toronto, Ontario
M5W 1P4
Phone: 1-905 824-6526
Fax: 1-905 785-0091
Email: [email protected]