CESLD Home Page

Our Mission Statement

The Episcopal Church of the United States

Episcopal News Service

Anglicans Online

Albany Via Media

Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh

Remain Episcopal - San Joaquin

Forth Worth Via Media

Via Media Rio Grande

Sign up for our email list server

Contact us

Read our AAC Fact Sheet

On the Subject of Redirected Offerings

Summary of the 11/24 AAC Meeting

(12/15/03) [+] One Mystical Body of Christ

An letter by Fr. John-Julian, OJN, with permission.

I am grateful to Father Bill for making a powerful and terribly important point in his somewhat bizarre and attention-getting posting about "I ate you this morning".

What he is re-introducing in that powerful way is the entire dynamic of the mystical aspects of Christianity. And it is the slow dying of this mystical tradition which has produced the literalists and the political and organizational dynamics of the threatened schisms today. If the Church IS, in fact, simply a bureaucratic organization, with constitution and by-laws and rule books and political shenanigans at center stage, then the schismatics have a fairly good case. If there are political problems in that kind of corporation, they should appropriately be dealt with politically. But the difficulty is that while, yes, the Church manifests itself on earth as a human organization; and, yes, there are political dimensions to any such organization, that by no means defines the central Realities of the Church - and we are all poorer when we blind ourselves to the deeper truths and concentrate our concerns and efforts only on the pragmatic and political.

Because the Church is PRIMARILY the mystical Body of Christ, as Saint Paul has reminded us. The Church is the extension of Jesus Christ into time and space far beyond and long after first-century Palestine. The Church is not merely a gathering of more-or-less like-minded people who try to follow the teachings of a Jewish rabbi who lived 2000 years ago. The Church is the embodiment of the resurrected Lord Himself. It is one, an identity, with that Lord who is one, an identity, with us. Indeed, on a mystical level, the Church IS Jesus Christ!

Few people today are inclined to grasp the implications of this theological and mystical reality. There is silly talk about Christianity versus "Churchianity" when such a dichotomy is impossible. To speak of Christianity as though it were a set of philosophical propositions to which one can give assent without taking the Church into consideration is simply an oxymoron. They only come as a package deal: they are not available separately.

And that is true because of the identity of Christ with the Church. As our Mother Dame Julian described one of God’s revelation to her:

"He IS Holy Church-
He is the foundation,
He is the essence,
He is the teaching,
He is the teacher,
He is the goal,
He is the reward for which every natural soul toils."

The implications of this are mind-blowing. Because if this is true than all the blather about apostasy and schism, about excommunication and "impaired communion", and about judgment and condemnation is useless and superficial, and is constructed on a view of the Church which the codifying Roman mind made up.

If the Church - that is, the full community of the baptized - is the mystical Body of Christ, then none of us has either the right or even the capability to "excommunicate" anyone else - for whatever reason. And none of us can separate ourselves from the others and think that we will be able to maintain some kind of private, exclusive, pure sub-club group within the Body. Who is "in" and who is "out" is a matter for Jesus Christ to determine, and none of us has either the authority or the competence to make those determinations.

So, you may have decided that because I am supportive of the consecration of Gene Robinson, I am a wretched apostate, and you will declare yourself separated from me and my Church. The thing is, you can declare that enmity and separation until you are blue in the face, but it has absolutely no cosmic effect on the Mystical Body. You may turn your back on my altar and deny me access to your altar, but that is all only empirical, desultory, and superficial, because, whether you like it or not, your altar and mine are exactly the same altar - they are one - and no matter what you do about it, they remain one! Although you may choose to celebrate the Eucharist on your altar and exclude me from that celebration, your excluding Eucharist and my including Eucharist are the identical Eucharist. There are not two Eucharists - one faithful to tradition and one open to transformation - there is only One. There is one Body and one Bread - and our temporal divisions and mundane separations are most probably irrelevant to God.

The rector who raised me (Fr. Edward C. Lewis) used to say that everything a Christian is and does is totally corporate, communal, and collective except for one thing: the only thing a Christian can ever do alone is to be damned! And that is a deep and important truth.

So, as Fr. Bill put it so graphically, we eat each other at Eucharist every morning - we dine together on the Christ who we are. Mystically (and paradoxically), we ARE the Christ whom we receive at the altar. We ARE both the Receiver and the Received.

So if some of you want to go off by yourselves and pretend that you are separate from me and righteous in the face of what you see as my sin and my apostasy, please realize that that is ONLY a pretense on your part - that it simply cannot happen in the deeper mystical Reality - that there is actually nothing you can do to get rid of me! You and I are as surely one unity as the Holy Trinity is one Unity, and as long as we are one-ed to the same Lord within His Body, you and I will be one unity for all eternity. For good or ill, as long as we honor that same Lord and seek to recognize our union with Him, you and I are tied up and tangled up and amalgamated within the His Body, and there is nothing you or I can do about it, no matter who gets the property or the endowments.

Our Mother Julian prophesied: "...that God's servants, Holy Church, shall be shaken in sorrows and anguish and tribulation in this world as men shake a cloth in the wind." So the hardship, distress, and adversity we face need not be a surprise - but know that our weak struggles to put others "outside" the Lord are simply futile, and a desolate and pitiable waste of time and energy.

You are stuck with me - and I with you - and no one but Our Lord Himself has the ability to disjoin us one from the other - and He will not and may not do that (and still be God).

John-Julian, OJN

(12/5/03) [+] Historic Faith and Order - What is the Anglican Communion?

Adapted from a post by Thomas Bushnell, BSG to the House of Bishops/Deputies email List, with permission.

The Constitution of the Episcopal Church does not say (that ECUSA is an) "integral part" (of the Anglican Communion), but rather, (a) "constituent member". And it defines what the Anglican Communion is, something that (we should all) take note of:

"a Fellowship within the One, Holy, Catholic, and Apostolic Church, of those duly constituted Dioceses, Provinces, and regional Churches in communion with the See of Canterbury, upholding and propagating the historic Faith and Order as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer."

Let's take that apart piece by piece.

First, a Fellowship. Not a "church", and not a "federation", but a fellowship. The false dichotomy of (those who seek schism) is thus opposed, when they asked "is the communion a church or a federation?" The answer is: neither--it is a fellowship within the church.

This is important, because there is one church, not just one Anglicanism, but one church. We are a fellowship within that church--and the implication is that there may be other fellowships within the church which are not our fellowship; understand here other Christian bodies within the one Body of Christ.

Now, who makes up our Fellowship? It is Dioceses, Provinces, and regional Churches, all duly constituted. Not self-appointed, but duly constituted. The AMIA is not duly constituted. The members of the Fellowship are not, in fact, individuals. We are members of the body of Christ (a far higher calling than mere membership in the Anglican Communion); but the members of the Communion are here said to be dioceses, provinces, and regional churches. An individual can therefore not join the Communion simpliciter, but can join a diocese, province, or regional church, and ipso facto enjoy a relation to the Communion. It is also not for an individual (whether bishop or not) to declare what is or is not a matter of joining the communion. Only the constituent members--that is, the dioceses, provinces, and regional churches--can do this. Not even the Primates Meeting or Lambeth are members of the communion, still less given any official role within it.

Not just any dioceses and provinces and regional churches, however. Specifically those who are "in communion with the See of Canterbury." First, not "in communion with Rowan Williams", but rather, with a particular diocese--Canterbury. Not Nigeria, not the Primates meeting. "The majority of Anglicans" are simply not invoked here: what determines whether a diocese, province, or regional church is a member of our Fellowship is determined by whether they are "in communion with the See of Canterbury." Doctrinal agreement, however serious, is simply not made a requirement under this clause, except in so far as it might affects that communion with Canterbury.

But the next clause does imply some doctrinal--and practical--requirements: "upholding and propagating the historic Faith and Order as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer."

The historic faith and order. Not just faith, but order, which includes, most importantly for the maintenance of our Fellowship, adherence to the legal forms that we have chosen for our life together. This historic order includes obedience to one's bishop; it includes respect for diocesan boundaries; it includes the principal of subsidiarity.

More, it is the historic faith and order "as set forth in the Book of Common Prayer". Which book, I hasten to add, does not mention homosexuality. And, the Episcopal Church has already had a clear statement of what this clause requires: it's the core doctrines of the church, as expressed by the trial court in Stanton v. Righter.

Now, where in this did the General Convention violate the Preamble to the Constitution? Akinola, the bishops in Rwanda, Duncan and (others) in the US: they have violated the definitions there spelled out. But the General Convention? Where?

Thomas Bushnell, BSG

Los Angeles

(12/5/03) [+] Book Review - To Mend the Net

If you haven't read Fr. John Sorensen's excellent look at the 2001 treatise To Mend the Net by the Ekklesia Society, we strongly recommend it. You can find it here.

(12/3/03) [+] A New Label by Andrew Grimmke

It seems that within the past few years a meme has been born among the AAC leadership and their loyal following. They have slipped this new word into their vocabulary to describe those with whom they disagree and have no doubt, given the way this characterization is in regular use among the superiors within their movement, that there was real, strategic thinking given to branding opponents with this term.

Clearly, they wanted a word with the subtle inference of pathological wrongness. They were looking for a label they could tar their opponents with which is politically charged and insinuates a misguided desire to change history. What better label to suit their purpose than "revisionist"?

We at CESLD have gone out of our way not to use the word "Fundamentalist" on our website out of deference to those who consider themselves "Orthodox Anglicans" because we understand that they disapprove of this term for themselves. We are trying earnestly to have a sincere, open dialogue about the future of our diocese, our deanery, and our denomination, unhindered by personal attacks. For this reason, we were saddened to learn that a member of the clergy in the St. Lawrence Deanery chose to distribute an angry essay which perpetuates the "revisionist" slur.

The essay’s author, David Virtue, is among the most strident voices in the "Orthodox Anglican" movement. His bias is wholly transparent and his distain for those he disagrees with is vitriolic. In a recent edition of his newsletter, Mr. Virtue refers to his enemies as "forces of evil" while he throws around terms like "sodomite", "femi-nazi", and "lesbian storm-trooper". Sadly, Mr. Virtue also treats attempts at dialogue and reconciliation with utter contempt, responding to a call for discourse at Cambridge Divinity School with the scornful commentary, "Oh God please, no more punishment."

Mr. Virtue makes much of slights and unfairness he sees, or believes he sees, being perpetrated against those with whom he is aligned. Indeed, the recent firing of a deacon in Oklahoma is just one example of an incomplete news item he has presented, with obvious bias, to make a case for discrimination. The extravagant outrage with which Mr. Virtue reports such events might lead one in the direction of his viewpoint, if not for the fact that his information is often unreliable. The list of corrections from his own newsletter reveal that Mr. Virtue has had difficulty avoiding overstatement when it comes to perceived unfairness against his Orthodox brethren:

CORRECTIONS: In my story ‘CONFIDENTIAL LETTER REVEALS GRISWOLD'S PASTORAL CARE PLAN’ I made the observation that the makeup of the bishops who worked on this draft were all liberal/revisionists. That is not the case. Three bishops: The Rt. Rev'd Lloyd Allan, Diocese of Honduras; The Rt. Rev'd Charles Jenkins, Diocese of Louisiana; and The Rt. Rev'd Bruce MacPherson, Western Louisiana cannot be labeled as such. They are orthodox. In my story on the seminarians that attended the clergy conference in the Diocese of Los Angeles, I may have given the impression that the occasion was confrontational. It was not. ‘From the beginning we were made to feel extremely welcome and valued, and treated with genuine and deep hospitality. More and more this is the tenor of the Diocese of Los Angeles which, in my opinion, could serve as a model in many ways of how people of divergent and even severely conflicted convictions can nonetheless continue to live together in Christ with mutual respect and without compromise,’ writes the Rev. David M. Baumann. Virtuosity regrets any overtones in the story that may have suggested otherwise.

How often are such distortions in Mr. Virtue’s newsletter uncorrected? It seems pretty clear that Mr. Virtue would prefer to dwell on negativity and exaggeration concerning the "other side" when it suits his purpose.

The charge of "revisionist" carries with it negative connotations, yet in the broadest sense of the word, we, as Episcopalians, are all revisionists. Theologies and traditions evolve based on knowledge and reason; to deny this is to deny history. One example might be the long-held tradition which precluded young children from taking communion. This tradition was rethought, not simply on a whim, but because we learned more about how the early church celebrated the Lord’s Supper.

Within the context of the present controversy, however, we must submit that revisionism is most commonly found in the proposals and theologies of those who call themselves "orthodox". The bid to abandon a geographical diocesan model, the call for dramatic increase in primatial authority, the theology which invalidates a sacrament based on the virtue of the celebrant, and the abandonment of the "three legged-stool" of Anglican theology are but a few attempted revisions of our faith that have come from the AAC.

It is with optimism that we pray for voices to resonate within the north country which are not angry and one-sided or seek to brand others with carefully crafted labels and rhetoric, We pray for voices that aren’t an ugly mixture of cunning vitriol and contrived victimhood, but instead are hopeful, thankful and joyful for our churches and communities.

(12/1/03) [+] The Rt. Rev. William D. Persell, Bishop of Chicago, grew up and graduated from high school in Massena, where his father was Rector before becoming Suffragan Bishop of Albany. In a recent pastoral statement, Bishop Persell addressed issues of the General Convention and alternate pastoral care and oversight.

...I believe it is most important to inform you how I will respond should congregations desire pastoral care from a bishop other than Bishop Scantlebury or me. I welcome any of our congregations to invite bishops from other dioceses to come into their congregations for a visit. When congregations desire pastoral and liturgical visitation from a bishop from another jurisdiction, I expect that they will follow the appropriate canonical procedures and request permission from me for such a visit. Those bishops would be extended my hospitality and courtesy, and I would anticipate receiving the same in return. However, visiting bishops would come as guests, not as overseers. While respecting the opinions of the Primates, and for that matter, members of the American Anglican Council, I will continue the pastoral direction and oversight of all our congregations. It is to that task that you called me four and one half years ago. I have worked hard to be bishop to all the people. I am committed to our diocese being a diverse community, including a diversity of opinion on human sexuality. My opinions on sexuality are not a central burning issue in the proclamation of the gospel and our servant ministry. Maintaining our unity and witness in the Body of Christ and bringing Jesus to those who are hurting and lonely are at the heart of our mission.

These are challenging times for our Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion. Differences will continue. Some new members will join our Episcopal Churches; some people may leave. I will grieve the loss of those who do. The answer is not "alternate Episcopal oversight", which is schism and separation under a different name. To break apart in this way is contrary to the best of our tradition and would be a tragic response to a particular issue.

Regardless of what happens in the Anglican Communion or in other dioceses, I know that all of our congregations will continue to be places of Good News and hope. I pray that our diocese will be an example to the larger Church and world of a community that loves one another in spite of our differences - where seemingly divergent ideas are held in tension as we advance the ministry of Jesus Christ. To assist in this work, I enclose information on Episcopal oversight. My office is assembling a more comprehensive resource packet to help us to continue the conversation on sexuality, the authority of Scripture, and ways to move towards reconciliation. We are organizing opportunities for continuing conversations throughout our diocese. I believe that by doing this we will be stronger for these challenging times. If we can stay focused on our mission, which is God's mission of reconciliation, our best years are ahead of us.

Read the full statement.

(11/30/03) [+] The Heresy of Donatism

Fr. John-Julian, founder of the order of Julian of Norwich, has written an excellent essay, posted I believe, to the House of Bishops/Deputies email list regarding the Heresy of Donatism. Enjoy.

THE REAL PROBLEM

I have spent long hours reading the postings on this list serve, and trying to ask myself, "What can be done to prevent this mess?" and "What is the real cause of the problems we are having?" and it came clear to me today.

The cause of the problem is NOT conflict over the full acceptance of gays and their relationships, or the ordination of women, or the interpretation of Scripture, or the source of authority in the Church. These are truly not that much unlike literally hundreds of such conflicts in the history of the Church - indeed from its very inception at Pentecost.

What is different in this circumstance is the contemporary resuscitation of a very ancient and venerable heresy: the schismatic heresy of Donatism - a heresy which, curiously enough, arose and thrived (for a time) in the Church in Africa!

As most of you know, this heresy arose in AD 303 when the Emperor Diocletian forbid Christians under pain of death to possess books of the Holy Scriptures. Bishop Felix of Aptunga gave in to the threats of the magistrates and turned over the sacred books of the Church to the Roman authorities. In the eyes of Christians, this made him a traditor, a traitor, an unholy person, a sinner, and in the eyes of the Donatists, it also made his ministrations as a bishop invalid! The issue broke wide open when Caecilian was consecrated Bishop of Carthage by the same Bishop Felix. The Donatists refused to accept Bishop Caecilian because they would not accept the validity of his consecra-tion at the "sinful" Felix's hands.

The Donatists were rigorists. They believed that moral sanctity was necessary to Christians, and that any sacramental ministrations of sinful bishops were invalid. They believed that even those who communicated with those sinful bishops were con-taminated, and so they came to the conclusion that they, the Donatists alone, were the only true and holy Church. Their beliefs went to such an extent that they re-baptized their converts, believing their original Catholic baptism to be invalid.

Read More.

(11/26/03) [+] The Georgia AAC Meeting

Bishop Robert Duncan and Canon David Anderson were in Atlanta, Georgia on Monday, November 24 from 5:00 to 7:30. They were here to Give the American Anglican Council's (AAC) version of the future of the Episcopal Church. During the meeting, a number of interesting opinions and strategies were presented:

• Bishop Duncan wanted ECUSA "To be cast into utter darkness" and "fall apart like the Soviet Union"
• The AAC hopes to have a "Network of Confessing Diocese and Parishes" neatly organized to recieve a Primatial Endorsement
• The AAC will transfer papers dimmisory overseas whenever they have to, to protect their loyal clergy
• Canon David Anderson thinks that the United Religions Initiative is akin to polytheism
• Bishop Duncan twice compared ECUSA to Nazi Germany
• The AAC wants to transfer confirmands' church memberships to Canada to exploit a hole in the Canons

Read More.

(11/21/03) [+] We Add Some New Links

Notice that we have put up a few new links on the Sidebar. Most significantly, our friends at Albany Via Media now have there own web page. Give them a visit, their introductory statement "A Place to Kneel" is quite eloquent. Also, we have linked to other groups of concerned Episcopalians in Pittsburgh, and San Joaquin. Although we may not agree with every position by these groups, it is nice to see a multitude of voices making themselves heard in the Diocese pushing for realignment across the country. We expect to see more groups like these as time goes on.

On a different note, we added Anglicans Online which provides good general information about Anglicanism, what the church believes, church history, organization, etc. There is some excellent reading in all these new links. Enjoy. - ajg

(11/19/03) [+] A Numbers Game? - By Betsy Adams

We hear over and over again about the "numbers" of Anglicans in the global south. It is as though numbers of communicants is the qualifier for the the volume of voice a province should have. The number of communicants is a measure of Christian success. Since when did we become a "numbers" church?

When I was a child, I would occasionally attend a Wesleyan Methodist church with my paternal grandparents. I remember being somewhat appalled when I realized that during the service members of the congregation were in the back room counting the offering so that they could post the attendance and dollar amount of the offering on a board up front for all the congregation to see. That was certainly beyond my experience as an Episcopalian.

Looking at numbers as a definition success is a shaky theology. If we view Christian success as a matter of "numbers" then Jesus, by the time of His death, was a failure. Gone were the crowds of four and five thousand. Gone was the throng that shouted "Hosanna, Hosanna to the Son of David" Most of His disciples had fled. At the foot of the cross, the only witnesses we find are a handful of women.

Jesus' message lived on through a handful of witnesses. We must not let those who use numbers as a measure of success hijack the gospel of love and turn it into a gospel of accusation, exclusion, and self righteousness. Let our small voice be heard. Let us be His witnesses in the St. Lawrence deanery, the diocese of Albany, and indeed, to the ends of the earth.

(webmaster note)I would add that one cannot separate the "numbers game" from the culture in which the counting takes place. One region of Africa with which I am familiar is the area around Lumukanda, Kenya, where a friend and co-parishioner has done missionary work and where Tonya and I are sponsoring the education of a local young person.

The churches in this part of Kenya are not unlike those in much of Equatorial Africa, in that they not only provide worship but are the primary resource for some of the most important basic services for the community. Many African parishes include not only church, but school and clinic. Villages grow up around the church due to the value of these services for an almost exclusively pedestrian population. Compare this to our situation in the United States where a multitude of denominations compete for parishioners and education and medical services are provided by the government and private entities. These cultural differences should never be used to justify and ethnocentric view. Yet the underlying cultural issues need to be considered when the numbers in a particular Anglican jurisdiction are compared or discussed. - ajg

(11/14/03) [+] Betsy sent this essay from the Lent 1991 issue of Anglican Digest which is making the rounds these days. Enjoy.

Conservatives? Liberals?

I have heard rumors that conflicts between conservatives and liberals are tearing the Church apart. Don't believe it.

Few of these people exist. I have had letters and phone calls from some who claim to be one or the other. As far as I can tell, they are imposters. Of course, I can only judge from their behavior.

If the Church had many conservatives, the buildings would be packed on Sundays as they keep the Sabbath holy. Our Church would have money since they would tithe 10% of their income. Our Church life would be glorious as they would undertake all the traditional Sunday School, retreat, and holy day obligations. An authentic personal morality would be exemplified in their holy lifestyles.

If the Church had many liberals, they would be enthusiastically including people all the time. The Church would grow as they reached out to the poor and isolated in various ministries. Our service ministries would be overwhelmed with volunteers and resources. An authentic social conscience would be exemplified in the compassionate lifestyles.

Judging only by behavior, the Church has too few religious conservatives and religious liberals. God bless the ones we have, they are doing wonderful work.

Then where is the problem? There are numerous anti-conservatives and anti-liberals. These are people who compare their particular ideology with other's actual behavior. Their convenient posture enables them to be both righteous and removed at the same time.

Both know that others need to change their bad habits. The sins, failures, hypocrisy, and mediocrity of these others provide a good reason not to attend worship and not to give money and not to serve energetically and not to love affectionately in the Lord's name.

Religion is behavior, not theory. To worship God with all one's heart, mind, soul, and strength is not an idea, it is a practice. To love one's neighbor as an "idea" is an illusion. Love must take up space and time; it costs lots of money and much energy.

Church is a place for religious behavior, where one worships God and serves God's children. It is large enough to include true religious conservatives and true religious liberals, since they only emphasize one or the other aspect of true religion.

The Church will never be at peace until the commitment to God and the Gospel of our Lord take priority over any personal warp to some left or right ideas. People who have a primary commitment to their own opinions and a secondary interest in religion always threaten to destroy the Church.

What good reason and right opinion do you have to excuse yourself from the costly practice of true religion?

The Very Rev. George Back, Dean, St. Paul's Cathedral, Oklahoma City, OK
Lent 1991 Anglican Digest

(11/12/03) [+] The Diocese of Pittsburgh Conducted their Diocesan Convention on November 7-8. Bishop Duncan, an active member of AAC, proposed two ammendments to the Diocesan Constitution, which must be approved by the delegates two years in row to take effect. The group Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh responded with a press release which describes the issues well:

Today the Diocese of Pittsburgh concluded its 138th annual convention. With bishop Robert W. Duncan presiding, the convention passed two amendments to its constitution that advance the creation of an autonomous diocese without geographic boundaries no longer answerable to the Episcopal Church, USA (ECUSA). According to the diocesan constitution, these amendments will become effective if also passed at the 139th convention of 2004.

The first amendment provides that the diocese will not be bound by the constitution, canons, or actions of the national church in cases where the diocese determines them to be "contrary to the historic Faith and Order of the one holy catholic and apostolic church." The second amendment seeks to remove the residency requirement on canonically resident clergy.

The convention did not heed the warnings of those present who argued that the first change was illegal and negated a precondition for being a diocese of the Episcopal Church, namely, "unqualified accession" to rules and decisions of the national church. Proponents were also heedless of admonitions that voting for the amendment would be contrary to the vows taken by every ordained person, though they did succeed in assuring that votes of individual members of the clergy would not be recorded.

Support by Bishop Duncan belied his promise, repeated the day before, that he would not leave the Episcopal Church. Diocesan Vice Chancellor Robert Devlin advanced the novel theory that the Episcopal Church is a confederacy of dioceses. According to him, the Pittsburgh diocese never acceded to the authority of the national church. Dr. Joan Gundersen, a historian of the church, however, raising a point of order, exhibited the 1865 minutes of the House of Bishops in which such accession was certified. Nonetheless, the schismatic amendment was passed by a vote by orders (clergy and laity voting separately) after approximately 20 minutes of discussion.

In fact, the diocese had effectively renounced, in resolutions passed in a special convention on September 27, its allegiance to the national church. In that convention, the diocese disavowed the confirmation of the election of Gene Robinson as Bishop Co-adjutor of New Hampshire and the limited acceptance of the blessing of same-sex unions. That convention also voted to withdraw financial support from the ECUSA, a move implemented in the budget presented and approved without discussion on November 7.

Removing the residency requirement did not raise the same constitutional issues, but those speaking in favor made clear that they expect the change to be used to invite clergy and parishes from other dioceses to join the Pittsburgh diocese, a move that itself would be contrary to national church canons that establish dioceses as geographic units, require that bishops may not act within another bishop’s jurisdiction without permission, and that territory cannot be moved from one diocese to another without concurrence by both dioceses and by the church’s General Convention...more

(11/6/03) [+] Just saw this ENS News Release. It's very nice to hear that Albany Via Media got some credit for going to New Hampshire to voice their disapproval of Suffragan Bishop Bena's Statement.

Epicopal News Service - US reactions to Robinson consecration still coming in

...A group of clergy and laypeople called Albany Via Media declared that they do not endorse our Suffragan Bishop’s [David Bena] formal objection, read during the consecration liturgy. The Albany group asked those who object to Robinson’s consecration to be open to the possibility of God’s blessing the ministry of Bishop Gene Robinson in the spirit of the advice given by the rabbi Gamaliel during the debate over whether to punish the apostles Peter and John for preaching Christ: So in the present case, I tell you, keep away from these men and let them alone; because if this plan or this undertaking is of human origin, it will fail; but if it is of God, you will not be able to overthrow them in that case you may even be found fighting against God! (Acts 5:38-39).

Progressive Episcopalians of Pittsburgh, which describes itself as an organization of concerned laity and clergy in the Diocese of Pittsburgh, asked Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh to disassociate himself from the statement of the Rev. Earle Fox at the consecration. Fox, who lives in Virginia but is canonically resident in Pittsburgh, was interrupted by Griswold in the midst of a clinical description of homoerotic sex acts.

We ask you to do all in your power to see that the Rev. Fox receives appropriate pastoral, episcopal, and psychological care to help him understand that his actions in New Hampshire were an embarrassment to himself, his diocese, his superiors, his Church, his vows, and his Lord, the Pittsburgh group requested. Your silence sends a message of agreement with his position. If you are truly sincere in your message of love and welcome, you must demonstrate that embracing welcome now by clearly stating that Earle Fox did not speak for you or the diocese...

(11/5/03) [+] Betsy sent the following statment from the Rt. Rev. Carolyn Tanner Irish, Bishop of Utah. Some good stuff excerpted below, but read the whole thing.

"Our church is, and has always been, the most comprehensive of Christian families, because we have sought to embrace theological and cultural diversity of the kind that has sometimes fractured other Protestant churches. Presently the issue of homosexuality has put us on a global and very public stage, but that appears to be the really new element in our situation, not the challenge of abiding in our differences. Indeed, more than abiding.

"Reconciliation is the mission of God in this world, through his son, Jesus Christ. It is for that reconciliation which we must now pray. Opinions, after all, are not ultimate. Love is ultimate.

"As God loves Bishop Gene Robinson, God also loves the majority and the minority who voted last summer. And it is God's love, after all, that creates and sustains our communion with him and with one another."

(11/5/03) [+] This news item contains some interesting bits: Two Episcopal Congregations Seek Affiliation With Another Diocese - Albany Could Oversee Conservative Parishes.

Key graphs:

Members of at least two Episcopal congregations in the state say they've asked leaders from another diocese to supervise their parishes because they don't agree with having an openly gay bishop.

Robert Newton, a lay leader at St. Mark's Church in Ashland said the conservative bishop at the Diocese of Albany, N.Y., has agreed to allow his parish to affiliate with the diocese.

Kathy Lewis, treasurer of the Church of the Redeemer in Rochester, N.H., said she also wrote to the Diocese of Albany. She said she was advised to sit tight while plans are developed, but that the New Hampshire church would likely fall within Albany's geographical area if a new system of oversight is created for conservative parishes.

(11/1/03) [+] We put Betsy Adams' excellent essay on the subject of redirected offerings on it's own page. If you haven't read it yet, please do. This is a moving essay which we highly recommend.

(11/1/03) [+]Some Important Facts to Consider Regarding the Diocese of Albany and Schism:

On July 15, Before the General Convention, twenty-four bishops (thirteen of whom are Diocesan Bishops), including bishop Herzog, met at Truro church, in Fairfax, Virginia and wrote a an "open letter" to the "primates of the Anglican Communtion" asking for intervention in our church, marginalizing Presiding Bishop Griswold by affirming "the moral and spiritual authority of the 'concerned primates' of the Anglican Communion" and promising to "act in concert", "take counsel from" and "pledg(ing) solidarity with" these foreign bishops. This act is very telling of the intentions of these bishops because it contrasts with their vows to "conform to the doctrine, discipline and worship of the Episcopal Church", not to whatever Anglican jurisdiction is most theologically convenient.
Bishop Herzog is an active member of the American Anglican Council (AAC). Their website gave clear instructions to it's members prior to the October 7, Plano, TX meeting and Meeting of the primates:

Do's and Don'ts Do NOT say you are leaving the Episcopal Church. Do NOT say you are breaking Communion with your bishop. DO say you are NOT leaving the Anglican Communion. Do NOT sue for your property or take unilateral action. DO hold on until Plano. DO give the orthodox bishops and archbishops six months to achieve a framework for dramatic realignment.

The AAC also advises Episcopalians to "REDIRECT...money from structures which support these [General Convention] actions (parish, diocese, national church), and give to parishes, diocese, organizations and mission agencies which are upholding mainstream Anglicanism, such as the AAC, FiFNA, and Ekklesia."

In response to the Actions of the AAC the Episcopal Women's Caucus (EWC) delivered a statement which makes some important points:

We at CESLD urge Bishop Herzog and the clergy and parishoners of the Albany Diocese to have a complete and open dialogue about whether schism, realignment or impaired communion with other Dioceses of the Episcopal Church is in the best interest of our North Country parishes.