Category: Future of the Church


Getting on with business

Bishop Nichollsthe-rt-rev-d-ralph-spence.jpgdean-snyder-picture.jpgfaith-beyond-resentment-cover.jpg

Progressive Episcopalians in the United States now and again need to be reminded that there are others in the Anglican Communion who not only support our decisions about the full inclusion of women as well as gays and lesbians in the church, but who are getting on with the business of doing just that.

For example, the Diocese of Toronto has elected a woman as the new suffragan bishop in the Diocese of Toronto. Canon Linda Nichols will become the 4th female bishop in the Canadian church. And the southern Ontario Diocese of Niagara this past week approved blessings for gay couples; previously their bishop, The Rt. Rev. D. Ralph Spence had issued guidelines for the reception and blessing of civilly married gay and lesbian couples.

Closer to hand, there are efforts among some United Methodist clergy, such as Rev. Dean Snyder, Senior Minister of Foundry United Methodist Church, Washington, DC, who has just issued a pastoral Letter concerning the way in which he intends to provide liturgical services to recognize and honor lesbian and gay committed relationships, while at the same time trying to live “as a loyal United Methodist pastor … within the covenant of the United Methodist Church as set forth in our Church’s Constitution, General Rules, and Book of Discipline.” While the United Methodist Book of Discipline states that “Ceremonies that celebrate homosexual unions shall not be conducted by our ministers and shall not be conducted in our churches” (Para 341.6), Rev. Snyder says that in not responding to the reality of faithful lesbian and gay couples in his own congregation, “the failure of their Christian community and their pastor to properly recognize and honor their committed relationships formally denies them, at the very least, an encouragement and spiritual support the Church provides to other couples. At the worst, it undermines and dishonors their commitments by withholding recognition and prayerful support.” Significant in its own right, Rev. Snyder’s letter may gain additional attention if Foundry United Methodist Church remains the congregation in which the Clintons worship, if Hilary follows her husband Bill as the President of the United States.

Finally, I encourage you to look at the video presentation by The Rev. James Alison based on his book Faith Beyond Resentment (Video courtesy of Trinity Television and New Media.) that is posted on the Diocese of Washington blog. It is a striking example of the sort of deep theological contribution that is being made to the whole of the Christian community by theologians like Alison reflecting on the impact that his identity as a gay man has on the way he understands the theological tradition we all share.

I am tired of blogging about turmoil; it is so refreshing to be able to share news of those who are “getting on with business” as Christ’s Body on earth, which of course includes the business of living into our commitments to diversity and full inclusiveness of all of God’s people in the business of the Church.

‘Being the Church’ should take our breath away. The very images we use are graphic: we are ‘grafted on’ to the vine that is Jesus — we are the very Body of Christ.

Then, unfortunately, these days, come the asterisks. Yes, but ….

It is a good thing that the House of Bishops affirmed in their final statement from their just-concluded meeting in New Orleans their “commitment to establish and protect the civil rights of gay and lesbian persons, and to name and oppose at every turn any action or policy that does violence to them,encourages violence toward them, or violates their dignity as children of God.”

And who can argue with their strong affirmation, saying: “We proclaim the Gospel that in Christ all God’s children, including gay and lesbian persons, are full and equal participants in the life of Christ’s Church.”

But, then, the asterisks …

They continue to hold to the lamentable last-ditch language of Resolution B033, from the last General Convention, agreeing “to exercise restraint by not consenting to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on communion.” And then they now add: “The House acknowledges that non-celibate gay and lesbian persons are included among those to whom B 033 pertains.”

It appears as though the Bishops are ready not only to refuse to consent to the legitimate election of a non-celibate gay or lesbian Bishop – including, potentially, Tracey Lind, Dean of Trinity Episcopal Cathedral, Cleveland, OH, who has been nominated to be Bishop of Chicago — but to continue to blame it on her “manner of life” (wink, wink) because it “presents a challenge to the wider church”. People wept openly at General Convention when this language was pushed through at the last moment in the summer of 2006 – don’t the Bishops remember?!

And they “pledge not to authorize for use in our dioceses any public rites of blessing of same-sex unions until a broader consensus emerges in the Communion, or until General Convention takes further action.” Some may feel off the hook by pointing out that no public rites have been authorized for use in any dioceses, and so perhaps use of ‘unauthorized’ rites will pass muster (wink, wink).

As I see it, either all baptized Christians are a full part of the Body of Christ or we aren’t – ANY of us! And if we are, then we’re not just eligible to be called by God to serve the Church as the Church discerns is the most faithful use of our gifts. It’s incumbent up us all that when called we say yes, even if that works out as gay=Bishop.

We can’t be about the business of saying “Welcome to the Body of Christ! But just because you’re a lung, don’t expect to go about breathing around here!” Every part of the Body is essential. Essential, not just ‘eligible’ for participation.

In my parish, our gay asst. rector and straight rector — who happens to be my spouse — made the same promise to their Bishops when they were asked: “Will you do your best to pattern your life in accordance with the teachings of Christ so that you may be a wholesome example to your people?”

What matters most in “the teachings of Christ,” Jesus himself told us, is to love God and our neighbor as ourselves. To do our best to pattern our life on that teaching — not our sexual orientation, which Jesus never talked about at all – is what makes any one of us a wholesome example to anyone else — and fit for any role to which the church legitimately calls us.

It appears to have been Rowan Williams who planted the idea at the House of Bishops meetings that, in his words, “one can say you accept gay and lesbian persons as the Body of Christ and turn right around and raise questions about their eligibility for active roles in the Church.” And so they did. Turn right around.

But in my parish — which happens to be more than 60% gay and lesbian — we are way beyond ‘acceptance’ or ‘tolerance’ or even ‘inclusion’ of gays and lesbians. We actually believe that when God’s table — and as a result, Christ’s Church — is open to all, one can actually get a glimpse here of the Reign of God breaking in. And either we ALL are essential to the Body of Christ, OR NONE OF US ARE!

We really believe we all are called as a community to be Christ’s Body — fully, however God and the Church call us to make that manifest. So the most hopeful thing to say here, despite deep sadness at yet one more exhibition of a willingness to buy unity at the price of love and justice to gays and lesbians, is just this — and I say it to ALL of us Episcopalians, straight and gay. Our Bishops have spoken. Now so should we. “Go! Be the Church!” It’s who we are. All, or none.

Powered by ScribeFire.

By LAURIE GOODSTEIN
The New York Times

Published: March 21, 2007

Responding to an ultimatum from the leaders of the worldwide Anglican Communion, bishops of the Episcopal Church have rejected a key demand to create a parallel leadership structure to serve the conservative minority of Episcopalians who oppose their church’s liberal stand on homosexuality.

The bishops, meeting at a retreat center outside of Houston, said they were aware that their decision could lead to the exclusion of the Episcopal Church from the Anglican Communion, an international confederation of churches tied to the Church of England.

The bishops have a “deep longing” to remain part of the Communion, they said, but they are unwilling to compromise the Episcopal Church’s autonomy and its commitment to full equality for all people, including gay men and lesbians.

In a strongly worded statement issued Tuesday night, the bishops said the Communion’s attempt to impose a parallel authority structure “violates our founding principles as the Episcopal Church following our own liberation from colonialism.” The bishops inserted a gentle reminder that the Episcopal Church long ago declared itself independent from the Church of England.

“We cannot accept what would be injurious to this church and could well lead to its permanent division,” the bishops said in their statement, a set of three resolutions addressed to the church’s executive council.

They called for an urgent “face to face” meeting in the United States with the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, the leader of the Church of England, and a representative committee of the church’s primates, who head the international provinces. The primates, at their meeting last month in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania, are the ones who issued the formal set of demands to the Episcopal Church.

The demands also asked that the Episcopal Church refrain from ordaining openly gay bishops and stop allowing blessings of same-sex couples. The bishops, while not addressing those demands directly in their new statement, did reiterate their commitment to including “all God’s people” including gay men and lesbians in church life.

A spokesman for the Anglican Communion said the Archbishop of Canterbury was still digesting the statement from the American bishops and might issue a response later today.

The United States bishops plan to hold a news conference late this afternoon. Many liberal and moderate Episcopalians immediately applauded the bishops for standing by their principles. Response from conservative Episcopalians ran the gamut from confusion to angry resolve that this, surely, is the last straw.

Reached by telephone as he was leaving the bishops meeting, Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, who leads a network of conservatives who have been asking for alternative oversight, would only say: “I’m really thinking through what all this means.”

powered by performancing firefox

Thank you, Bonnie!

Friday, February 23, 2007

[Episcopal News Service]

Bonnie Anderson, president of the House of Deputies, has issued a statement on
the recently concluded Primates’ Meeting and the resulting communiqué.

The full text of Anderson’s statement follows.

As I read the Communiqué from the Primates’ Meeting in Dar es
Salaam, Tanzania, I am deeply troubled by its implications for the
Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion.

I continue to offer the Primates my affection, prayer and
companionship along the way of the Cross and I respect their leadership
of our Communion. Their Communiqué, however, raises profound and
serious issues regarding their authority to require any member Church
to take the types of specific actions the Communiqué contemplates and
whether they have authority to enforce consequences or penalties
against any member Church that does not act in a way they desire. The
type of authority for the Primates implicit in the Communiqué would
change not only the Episcopal Church but the essence of the Anglican
Communion.

The polity of the Episcopal Church is one of shared decision making
among the laity, priests and deacons and bishops. The House of Bishops
does not make binding, final decisions about the governance of the
Church. Decisions like those requested by the Primates must be
carefully considered and ultimately decided by the whole Church, all
orders of ministry, together.

Some are asking whether the Primates can ask our House of Bishops to
take certain actions and put a deadline on their request. Yes, they can
ask. There are larger questions that need to be addressed, including:
Is it a good idea for our House of Bishops to do what they have asked?
Is the House of Bishops the right body within the Episcopal Church to
respond to the Primates’ requests?

Our baptismal promise to seek and serve Christ in all people must be
very carefully considered when we are being asked as Episcopalians to
exclude some of our members from answering the Holy Spirit’s call to
use their God-given gifts to lead faithful lives of ministry. Our
promise to strive for justice and peace and respect the dignity of all
people binds us together. The Episcopal Church has declared repeatedly
that our understanding of the Baptismal Covenant requires that we treat
all persons equally regardless of their race, marital status, sex,
sexual orientation, disabilities, age, color, ethnic origin, or
national origin.

To honor all of the Primates’ requests would change the way the
Episcopal Church understands its role in the Communion and the way
Episcopalians make decisions about our common life. Our church makes
policy and interprets its resolutions and Canons through the General
Convention and, to a lesser extent, the Executive Council.

As president of the 800-plus member House of Deputies, it is my duty
to ensure that the voice of the clergy and the laity of our Church will
be heard as the Church discusses and debates the Primates’ requests and
that that process will not be pre-empted by the House of Bishops or any
other group. I have already begun to work toward that end.

All Anglicans must remember that the second Lambeth Conference in
1878 recommended that “the duly certified action of every national or
particular Church, and of each ecclesiastical province (or diocese not
included in a province), in the exercise of its own discipline, should
be respected by all the other Churches, and by their individual
members.”

This has been the tradition of the Anglican Communion. To demand
strict uniformity of practice diminishes our Anglican traditions.

Our tradition of autonomous churches in the Anglican Communion, that
come together because of our love of Christ and our common heritage,
has allowed us to focus on mission and evangelism to our broken world
which is in desperate need of the Good News of God in Christ. In recent
times, however, we have spent too much of our time, talent and treasure
debating if we ought to deny some people a place at the table to which
Jesus calls us all. Instead, we must listen to each other – really
listen and not just read reports – so that we can hear the voice of the
Holy Spirit moving through all of us and calling us to be more faithful.

powered by performancing firefox

Ash Wednesday +1

I just couldn’t help being struck by the contradiction between what the Primates of the Anglican Communion seem to think about gay and lesbian Christians – especially those chosen by our church as Bishops … or those seeking the blessings of the church on their commitment to relationships of fidelity — and the 134 people kneeling in my parish, St. Thomas at Dupont Circle, on Ash Wednesday night.

  • We prayed, we sang, we repented and put on ashes
  • The rector’s sermon admonished us during our Lenten journeys to “bear the burden of one another … drawing no distinctions” just as God did not choose sides or favorites in loving us.
  • We were black and white, young and old, well-placed and unemployed, suffering grief at the recent loss of loved ones and joys at the newborn children who had just joined our household of faith.
  • We were doctors and lawyers, mothers of newborns, and members of the diplomatic corps; we were graduate students, and aspiring actors, and homemakers, and teachers and church leaders.
  • There was even a group of high school students on their spiritual pilgrimage from Connecticut to see the parish they had chosen because it looked like the most interesting of all the ones they researched on the internet.

From our kneeling for prayer, to the antiphonal chanting of the Psalm during Holy Communion, to the imposition of ashes, to the instructions in the bulletin insert about the church’s expectation that we heed in our lives the call to a holy Lent, you never would have guessed that tens of millions of Anglicans seem to think we are all beyond the pale — that we are not recognizable enough as members of the Body of Christ that they would stay in the same room with someone like us, much less eat at the same table or drink from the same cup. That we are all on the verge, if not over the cliff freefalling into heresy.

  • All because a majority of those in church last night find their primary affections – emotional and physical – toward members of the same sex.
  • All because we believe God loves us all, gay or straight, just as God made us.
  • All because we recognize Bishop Gene Robinson as part of the succession of bishops and would never think of refusing to consider for Bishop another homosexual man or woman who has Bishop Robinson’s track record of service to the church and skill in ministry.
  • All because we will not turn away faithful Christian parishioners who come asking to be counseled and prepared for the blessing and sanctifying of their commitment to one another by their priest and in their church … simply because they are not heterosexual.

It is hard for many beyond our walls to imagine the sense of loss and grief — as deep as the feelings of betrayal and pain — that was worn throughout our gathering. Betrayal at the prospect that the GLBT community might again be offered up by the Episcopal Church as scapegoats and Lenten sacrifices for the illusion of the unity of the Anglican Communion. And grief that any Episcopalians might be denied the opportunity to continue as part of Christ’s ministry of reconciliation precisely as Anglicans solely because any of us choose to live fully as God created us?

  • Some were there bearing the scars of parents who turned their children out into the streets as teenagers, or took down all of a son’s or daughter’s pictures in the family home, or still do not speak to their children after decades — all because their child came out as a lesbian or gay human being.
  • Some were there bearing the fears of losing jobs in the military or government because one still can’t be openly homosexual in many spheres of our nation’s life without risking ridicule or rejection or worse.
  • Some were there with memories of having been turned away from hospital rooms where partners lay, all because they were neither blood relatives nor married to the one who lay ill or dying.

All of us had many reasons not to be there; and yet all of us were there precisely because St. Thomas’ is a place of radical hospitality and safety, as well as a place to be challenged and reminded of the responsibilities towards God and one another that come with our baptismal vows.

No one was there simply because of “a lifestyle choice to be homosexual,” but despite the humiliations heaped on gays and lesbians for being just what God desires. All of us were there because God has called us into community with one another to be part of the Body of Christ.

Last night, 134 of us were there. And today on Ash Wednesday +1, here we still are. We have not gone anywhere, “walking apart” from the rest of our church. And we will be here, even when the last Anglican walks away and chooses the unity of the Church rather than the wonder of the reconciling love of Christ for all persons, even a straight man like me.

powered by performancing firefox

When religion loses its credibility

By Oliver “Buzz” Thomas Mon Nov 20, 6:40 AM ET
What if Christian leaders are wrong about homosexuality? I suppose, much as a newspaper maintains its credibility by setting the record straight, church leaders would need to do the same:

Correction: Despite what you might have read, heard or been taught throughout your churchgoing life, homosexuality is, in fact, determined at birth and is not to be condemned by God’s followers.

Based on a few recent headlines, we won’t be seeing that admission anytime soon. Last week, U.S. Roman Catholic bishops took the position that homosexual attractions are “disordered” and that gays should live closeted lives of chastity. At the same time, North Carolina’s Baptist State Convention was preparing to investigate churches that are too gay-friendly. Even the more liberal Presbyterian Church (USA) had been planning to put a minister on trial for conducting a marriage ceremony for two women before the charges were dismissed on a technicality. All this brings me back to the question: What if we’re wrong?

Religion’s only real commodity, after all, is its moral authority. Lose that, and we lose our credibility. Lose credibility, and we might as well close up shop.

It’s happened to Christianity before, most famously when we dug in our heels over Galileo’s challenge to the biblical view that the Earth, rather than the sun, was at the center of our solar system. You know the story. Galileo was persecuted for what turned out to be incontrovertibly true. For many, especially in the scientific community, Christianity never recovered.

This time, Christianity is in danger of squandering its moral authority by continuing its pattern of discrimination against gays and lesbians in the face of mounting scientific evidence that sexual orientation has little or nothing to do with choice. To the contrary, whether sexual orientation arises as a result of the mother’s hormones or the child’s brain structure or DNA, it is almost certainly an accident of birth. The point is this: Without choice, there can be no moral culpability.

Answer in Scriptures

So, why are so many church leaders (not to mention Orthodox Jewish and Muslim leaders) persisting in their view that homosexuality is wrong despite a growing stream of scientific evidence that is likely to become a torrent in the coming years? The answer is found in Leviticus 18. “You shall not lie with a man as with a woman; it is an abomination.”

As a former “the Bible says it, I believe it, that settles it” kind of guy, I am sympathetic with any Christian who accepts the Bible at face value. But here’s the catch. Leviticus is filled with laws imposing the death penalty for everything from eating catfish to sassing your parents. If you accept one as the absolute, unequivocal word of God, you must accept them all.

For many of gay America’s loudest critics, the results are unthinkable. First, no more football. At least not without gloves. Handling a pig skin is an abomination. Second, no more Saturday games even if you can get a new ball. Violating the Sabbath is a capital offense according to Leviticus. For the over-40 crowd, approaching the altar of God with a defect in your sight is taboo, but you’ll have plenty of company because those menstruating or with disabilities are also barred.

The truth is that mainstream religion has moved beyond animal sacrifice, slavery and the host of primitive rituals described in Leviticus centuries ago. Selectively hanging onto these ancient proscriptions for gays and lesbians exclusively is unfair according to anybody’s standard of ethics. We lawyers call it “selective enforcement,” and in civil affairs it’s illegal.

A better reading of Scripture starts with the book of Genesis and the grand pronouncement about the world God created and all those who dwelled in it. “And, the Lord saw that it was good.” If God created us and if everything he created is good, how can a gay person be guilty of being anything more than what God created him or her to be?

Turning to the New Testament, the writings of the Apostle Paul at first lend credence to the notion that homosexuality is a sin, until you consider that Paul most likely is referring to the Roman practice of pederasty, a form of pedophilia common in the ancient world. Successful older men often took boys into their homes as concubines, lovers or sexual slaves. Today, such sexual exploitation of minors is no longer tolerated. The point is that the sort of long-term, committed, same-sex relationships that are being debated today are not addressed in the New Testament. It distorts the biblical witness to apply verses written in one historical context (i.e. sexual exploitation of children) to contemporary situations between two monogamous partners of the same sex. Sexual promiscuity is condemned by the Bible whether it’s between gays or straights. Sexual fidelity is not.

What would Jesus do?

For those who have lingering doubts, dust off your Bibles and take a few hours to reacquaint yourself with the teachings of Jesus. You won’t find a single reference to homosexuality. There are teachings on money, lust, revenge, divorce, fasting and a thousand other subjects, but there is nothing on homosexuality. Strange, don’t you think, if being gay were such a moral threat?

On the other hand, Jesus spent a lot of time talking about how we should treat others. First, he made clear it is not our role to judge. It is God’s. (“Judge not lest you be judged.” Matthew 7:1) And, second, he commanded us to love other people as we love ourselves.

So, I ask you. Would you want to be discriminated against? Would you want to lose your job, housing or benefits because of something over which you had no control? Better yet, would you like it if society told you that you couldn’t visit your lifelong partner in the hospital or file a claim on his behalf if he were murdered?

The suffering that gay and lesbian people have endured at the hands of religion is incalculable, but they can look expectantly to the future for vindication. Scientific facts, after all, are a stubborn thing. Even our religious beliefs must finally yield to them as the church in its battle with Galileo ultimately realized. But for religion, the future might be ominous. Watching the growing conflict between medical science and religion over homosexuality is like watching a train wreck from a distance. You can see it coming for miles and sense the inevitable conclusion, but you’re powerless to stop it. The more church leaders dig in their heels, the worse it’s likely to be.

Oliver “Buzz” Thomas is a Baptist minister and author of an upcoming book, 10 Things Your Minister Wants to Tell You (But Can’t Because He Needs the Job).

PASS. This week almost anyone who’s been a part of the leadership of the Episcopal Church in recent years – plus some latecomers like me – seemed to pass through Chicago. Every flight this direction from Washington, DC, on Wednesday had at least one Anglican collar leaning midwestward, earnestly.

Weather Map.jpg
U.S.A. floating in space

The Executive Council met early in the week, and among other things proposed an “Anglican regional convocation of the Americas” that would gather together the Episcopal Church, the Anglican Church of Canada, the Anglican Council of Latin America (Concilio Anglicano Latino Americano or CALA), and the Province of the West Indies.  It strikes me as a very responsive way to explore what all of us have in common, rather than letting the Episcopal Church in the Americas get defined by others.

The next thing you know General Convention will have to pass a resolution demanding that weather maps on U.S. TV fill in the blanks above and below the U.S. — “up north” in that unmarked region where all the cold weather comes from, and “down south” past where the Bush administration wants to put up all the walls and fences.

Also this week the Diocese of Chicago (actually meeting in Wheeling, IL) had its annual convention and honored the 25th Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, Frank Griswold, and his wife Phoebe.  I spent four days with Bishop Griswold a year ago at a retreat at Cathedral College, and I know I will miss his incisive intelligence and deep classical spirituality.
I’m here as one of the members of all the national church’s Committees, Commissions, Agencies and Boards (CCABs) who are meeting in the O’Hare Marriott.   In her welcoming remarks Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori reminded us to “be sure to treat each other with kindness and honesty; those aren’t mutually exclusive.” A nice laugh line. But, in all seriousness, it meant quite a lot to have her sit through a day with us and then to receive communion from Bishop Katharine later in the morning at the service installing all of us to our new appointments. Make no mistake. I’m a fan.

PUNT. Meanwhile the ABC put out a press release that said “The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams has dismissed as ‘wilfully misleading’ newspaper reports that he is doubtful over the ordination of women to the priesthood, has ever felt that the ordination of women priests had been ‘wrong’ …” I can’t imagine how anyone could have imagined he’d obfuscate, much less punt, on something this significant. Well, yes, there was that little recent episode of disavowing all his previous writings supporting same-sex unions and suggesting that gays and lesbians in the future should be ‘welcome’ but not ‘included’ in Anglican circles. I know he’s in a difficult place with the Anglican Right these days; but it all just sounded like an extended version of B033 from last summer’s General Convention.  Make no mistake. This is coming from someone who used to be such a fan. Now I’m mostly sad, and deeply disappointed.
KICK. That leaves the news that the vestries of Truro Episcopal Church and Falls Church, according to the Washington Times, have decided to give the Episcopal Church the boot and join instead the Anglican District of Virginia, led by the Rt. Rev. Martyn Minns, the rector of Truro who was consecrated Aug. 20 in Abuja, Nigeria, as a bishop with the Anglican Province of Nigeria. Bishop Lee reportedly voiced the deep sadness of the diocese over this decision, while the Times said the members of Truro had to be asked not to applaud when the decision was announced.

A week in the life of the Body of Christ. As good as it’s been to see friends like Bud Holland, and John Chane, and Linda Anderson, and Porter Taylor, and Chip Stokes, and Pam Ramsden, I’m looking forward to getting back to St. Thomas, Dupont Circle, on Sunday. My oblation team is on the schedule for the 11 a.m. service; and before that Randall Balmer is joining our Adult Forum on “Discipleship for People with Bodies.” We’re working hard, in C.S. Lewis’s terms, at merely being Christian.

There are other tales to recount from the first meeting of the new Standing Commission on Lifelong Education and Formation that I was asked to join — like our picking three members for our leadership team who are all under forty two (two under thirty). Or the lunch conversation with three generations of women leaders, of three ethnicities, from three areas of the country — they left me feeling so reassured about the future of the church. And so profoundly aware of the sea-change that’s happening whether anyone thinks they can “choose” it or not. But that’s for another day. Actually its already here today. I’m just too tired to tell it until tomorrow.

,
Nathan D. Baxter


[Episcopal News Service]

The Rev. Dr. Nathan D. Baxter, 57, rector, St. James’ Church, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and former dean of Washington National Cathedral, was elected July 22 bishop of the Diocese of Central Pennsylvania.The election, on the fifth ballot, came during the diocese’s 136th annual diocesan convention, which began July 21 at Bucknell University, Lewisburg.

An election required a simple majority in both the clergy and lay order. Thus, of the 96 votes cast in the clergy order on the fifth ballot, 49 were needed for election and 84 of the 166 votes in the lay order. Baxter had 49 clergy votes and 88 in the lay order.

Under the canons the Episcopal Church (III.16.4(a)), a majority of the bishops exercising jurisdiction and diocesan Standing Committees must consent to Baxter’s ordination as bishop within 120 days of receiving notice of the election.

After this process is complete, the consecration of the new bishop will take place at Trinity Lutheran Church in Camp Hill, Pennsylvania, on October 21. Baxter will succeed Bishop Michael Creighton, 65, who has been bishop since January 1996 and will retire later this year. [full story on ENS site]


Welcomes International Perspectives

By Matthew Davies
Wednesday, July 12, 2006 [ENS, Manchester, England]


The history of women’s ordination in the global church is being addressed at a three-day conference held at the University of Manchester in England July 12-14 under the theme” Women and Ordination in the Christian Churches: International Perspectives.”

Setting the scene for the conference, Dr. Ian Jones, research associate at the University’s Lincoln Theological Institute, explained that the conference is intended to explore the wider story of the participation of women in the church.

“The last 150 years has seen the remarkable growth of women’s place in ordained ministries in the global church, but it has progressed at a different rate depending on which church,” he said. “The European reformations saw radical protestant groups calling for the ministry of women … The Anglican Communion has taken seriously in the second half of the twentieth century the calling of women’s ministry.”

The conference is particularly timely in light of the July 8 decision by the Church of England’s General Synod to affirm the principle of women bishops and a motion passed July 10 that begins the process toward ordaining women to the episcopate.

< Read Entire Article>

THE BROAD RICH HEARTLANDS OF OUR ANGLICAN HERITAGE

NdunganeGlobalForum.jpg
Archbishop Ndungane

The Archbishop of Cape Town has written to the Primates of the Anglican Communion issuing a strong call to uphold the ‘ broad rich heartlands of our Anglican heritage.’

He argues that this must be ‘the territory on which we debate our future.’ He adds ‘it is not something to be fought out at the limits of conservatism or liberalism, as if they were the only possibilities before us.’

In a lengthy reflection on what it is to be Anglican, Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane declares, ‘we cannot lose this middle ground.’ He argues that the central core of Anglican tradition is not bland or shallow, but offers ‘productive spiritual soil.’ He refutes any suggestion that embracing the middle ground means ‘anything goes.’ Rather, he affirms uncompromising dedication and obedience to the heart of faith, as it is lived under the authority of Scripture, of Church order and structures, and of Christian tradition.

—–

Read the full news story at Anglican Communion News Service.

—–

For full text of Archbishop Ndungane’s press release,

click “Current News” tab at top of the SoulJournal opening page.

—–

The Church of the Province of Southern Africa is the oldest Province in Africa. The 24 dioceses of the Province extend beyond the Republic of South Africa and include the islands of St. Helena and Tristan da Cunha, Mozambique (Lebombo and Niassa) the Republic of Namibia, the Kingdom of Lesotho, the Kingdom of Swaziland and Angola.

There are 902 parishes and 874 clergy in this Province.

In July 2005 the Province started the process to change its name to “The Anglican Church in Southern Africa.” This Province is in an official partnership with the Epicopal Church’s Diocese of Washington.

Powered by WordPress | Theme: Motion by 85ideas.