At the conclusion
of an all-day special meeting of the House of Bishops of the
Episcopal Church to respond to
the Windsor Report, it was decided that little would be said,
and even less would be done, to try to resolve the crisis that
divides us. In a nutshell, the Bishops expressed their desire
to remain full members of the Anglican Communion, while continuing
to reject the clear teaching of the Communion on matters of sexual
morality.
Two controversial
decisions of the 2003 General Convention have fractured the
unity of
the Anglican Communion
and placed our
future in peril. At issue are the approval given by the Episcopal
Church to consecrate a practicing homosexual, who lives with
another man, to serve as the Bishop of New Hampshire and the
okay that was given for the blessing of same sex unions. Both
actions are clear violations of the position taken by the world-wide
Anglican Communion that rejects “homosexual
practice as incompatible with Scripture” and thus advises against
the
blessing of same-sex unions and the ordination of those involved
in same-gender unions. (Lambeth Conference 1998, Resolution 1.10)
As a result, 22 of the 38 Provinces of the Anglican Communion
have declared that they are in impaired or broken communion with
the Episcopal Church, and last fall the Archbishop of Canterbury
convened a special meeting of the Primates to address the crisis.
They appointed a special commission to look at the controversy
and to recommend ways to maintain "the highest level of
communion possible" in the midst of these critical differences.
Those recommendations are contained in the Windsor Report 2004.
The
Bishops of this Church met last week in the Salt Lake City
where most
of our
time was spent in small groups and then "expanded
groups," discussing what we liked and didn’t like
in the Report, what we agreed with and disagreed with, what needed "more
conversation," and so on. Then we met in plenary sessions
to hear reports on what the other groups thought. At times the
conversation was tense and emotional, as deep differences were
expressed. We attempted to be honest and to respect those who
disagreed with us.
At
the conclusion of the meeting, the Bishops issued a statement
called “A
Word to the Church.“ The most positive
aspect of this carefully worded
document is an “expression of regret,” which is one
of the first actions called for by the Windsor Report. But don’t
be misled by what the statement says the Bishops regret and what
they do not regret. They regret “the pain, the hurt, and
the damage caused” to others in the Anglican Communion by
what we have done. However, they do not regret the actions taken
that caused the alienation and division in the first place. ‘We
want to remain a part of the Communion, but we intend to keep
on doing what we have been doing.’ It is sort of like a man apologizing
to his wife for having had an adulterous affair, and asking her
forgiveness, but then continuing on with the illicit affair anyway.
In addition to an expression of regret, the other two major
recommendations for the Episcopal Church as called for by the
Windsor Report
were:
These
two proposals were discussed by the Bishops at some length,
but no decision
was made on the requested moratoria. Don’t
hold your breath. It isn’t going to happen. Oh yes, the
House will “continue conversation” about this at our
next meeting in March, having given the rather lame excuse
that “we
have not had sufficient time” to decide on moratoria at
this time and that “we do not wish to act in haste.” From
my perspective, this simply is a delay tactic meant to
stall and put off any final decision until after the Primates’
Meeting
at the end of February, where the response of the Episcopal
Church will be under review.
Some
urged a moratorium on the ordination of practicing homosexuals
as
bishops until
2006, when the next General Convention meets.
Others said we should have a moratorium until the General
Convention of 2009, which follows the next Lambeth Conference
of all Anglican
Bishops in 2008. Other bishops felt that if we were going
to have any moratorium at all then it should be on all consecrations,
not just for newly-elected bishops who were living in same-sex
partnerships. It was pointed out that the Presiding Bishop
has already appointed a committee to make our case to the rest
of
the Communion on the theological rationale for how “a
person living in a same gender union may be eligible to
lead the flock
of Christ.” (paragraph 135) But what the Windsor Report
calls for is a moratorium on such consecrations “until
some new consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges.”
Many indignant voices demanded an immediate moratorium on bishops
crossing diocesan boundaries to perform confirmations without
the invitation of the bishop of that diocese, pointing this out
as one of the recommendations of the Windsor Report. What they
failed to acknowledge is that such boundary crossings have taken
place as emergency pastoral measures, as a result of certain
bishops having violated the teaching of the Scriptures about
standards of sexual morality and the blessing of same sex unions.
That is what led to the interventions in the first place, not
a total disregard for ecclesiastical protocol.
Near
the end of the discussion, one person questioned how
we could make
any decisions
at all in response to the Windsor Report
since the recommendations must first go to the Primates
themselves at their meeting next month, where they could be
changed. The
Presiding Bishop agreed and said he hoped we would not
reach conclusions at this time. Sure enough, that’s what
the Bishops decided, and they issued “A Word to the Church”
the next morning. It is a carefully-worded document designed
to say the right things while continuing to do what we have
done. Meanwhile,
‘Keep them talking. Remain in conversation. We are still
considering these matters. We need more time,’ and so on and
so on.
It
is interesting to note that the Bishops of the Church of England
were meeting to consider the Windsor Report at the same
time
as our meeting was taking place, but they did not have
the same difficulty in making decisions about it. They endorsed
the recommendations
of the Report and encouraged the Primates’ Meeting to implement
them.
I
agree with my English brethren. I do not believe that
more time is needed
to discuss
the recommendations of the Windsor
Report. We are either going to implement them and abide
by them or we are not. The Report is an invitation to seek
ways of reconciliation,
to heal our divisions, in the hope of preserving the unity
of the Anglican Communion. To refuse to implement these recommendations
is to choose to walk apart from the Communion. It is for
this
reason that at the end of last week’s meeting, I
joined several other Bishops in signing a document entitled
“A
Statement of Acceptance of and Submission to the Windsor
Report 2004.” It has been
sent to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the other Primates
of the
Communion for consideration at their meeting in Ireland
on Feb. 20 - 26, 2005. Please pray for them, that they
may be given wisdom
and courage as they seek to preserve our unity in faith
and in mission. We intend to stand with them and to follow
their Godly
counsel.
The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth
January 17. 2005