Thursday, April 23, 2009

Bishops' Statement On The Polity Of The Episcopal Church

The shorter version from a humble pew warmer of what I believe the Bishops' Statement says:
The Episcopal Church has governed itself all wrong since 1789.

The numerous lawsuits in the US which have been decided in favor of the Episcopal Church as a hierarchical church count for nothing. Only the outlier decision in California counts.

The comparisons to the Roman Catholic Church and the Serbian Orthodox Church show that the Episcopal Church is not like them.

The Bishops' Statement quotes the Archbishop of Canterbury:

The organ of union with the wider Church is the Bishop and the Diocese rather than the Provincial structure as such.... I should feel a great deal happier, I must say, if those who are most eloquent for a traditionalist view in the United States showed a fuller understanding of the need to regard the Bishop and the Diocese as the primary locus of ecclesial identity rather than the abstract reality of the "national church".

Are we to assume that the Archbishop of Canterbury regards the Church of England as an "abstract reality" and that the dioceses of the Church of England are free to go their own way and sign covenants and maintain constituent membership in the Anglican Communion separately from the Church of England? Or do the words apply only to the Episcopal Church?

The Bishops' Statement says further:

The traditional doctrine and worship and the historic polity of the church are in grave peril.

As I see it, the Bishops' Statement puts the "historic polity of the church" in great peril.

Two caveats:

I may have left out something important, as I tend to fall asleep when I read documents like the Bishops' Statement.

Of course, I could be wrong.

13 comments:

  1. Yeah -- and I guess they are perfectly happy with bishops authorize same sex blessings. Sure.

    ReplyDelete
  2. SusanKay, of course! Fair is fair.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Twaddle and codswallop.

    Thank you, Mimi, for wading through so we don't have to.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If a national church is an "abstract reality," then why do we need the approval of diocesan bishops and standing committees to ordain a bishop? And why do we need at least three bishops to lay on hands? Tom Ray can go ahead and ordain Kevin Thew Forrester all by himself whenever he feels like it.

    ReplyDelete
  5. It's nonsense. Just because the signatories want what they say to be so, doesn't make it so, even if they say it over and over.

    TheMe, I posted on the Church Times story. The headline pretty much says it all.

    ReplyDelete
  6. Mimi,
    My understanding is that Archbishop Rowan has regretted the statement about the diocese, rather than the national church being the reality. Marilyn

    ReplyDelete
  7. Marilyn, thanks. I'll check that out. If you have a link, I'd like to have it. I'll publish his statement of regret.

    ReplyDelete
  8. I for one will be very glad to find out if the church is acid or base. I'm inclined to think both, but I think that ends up as salt.

    Thanks, Mimi, you've got it in a nut shell.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Tobias, thank you. Call me Anglican salt. I hope that I don't lose my savor and get trampled on.

    Thus far, I have not found a statement of regret from the ABC. That's not to say that there's not one out there somewhere.

    ReplyDelete
  10. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  11. I, too, think I read that Rowan regretted his statement about dioceses, but, as far as I can tell, being an archbishop means never having to say you’re sorry. (Or, perhaps, given your exulted status—see statement from Communion Partner bishops—you cannot retract anything, lest you confuse the little people.)

    Anyway, I finished my own essay on the bishops’ statement for my blog yesterday, using about a zillion words. I’m impressed that you were able to say so much using so few.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Lionel, I read your thoughtful response, and I would not put mine in the same category. Before I can understand statements, I must simply them. My post was a tad, but just a tad, flippant. What I wrote was what I understood the BS to be saying in the parts of it that I commented on, which did not include all the subjects covered in the entire statement.

    If I can get a link to the ABC's statement of regret, I'll post it.

    My heart goes out to the members of your diocese for what you have endured over many years, and I pray for better times for you.

    I see that you are a native of New Orleans. "Do you know what it means....?"

    ReplyDelete

Anonymous commenters, please sign a name, any name, to distinguish one anonymous commenter from another. Thank you.