Episcopal PUP-like panel calls for 'amicable divorce' if necessary By John H. Adams The Layman Online Friday, January 20, 2006 The roots of the family tree of Episcopalians go deep in Virginia, but the limbs are falling off and the source of nourishment – giving – is drying up. The 87,000-member Diocese of Virginia, the largest diocese in the Episcopal Church (USA), is particularly vulnerable. Its bishop, James Peter Lee, has been under fire by traditional evangelicals because of his support of the election of a homosexual bishop and his vote to allow Episcopal rectors to conduct "union" services for same-gender couples. Many Virginia Episcopalians regard Lee, who once co-chaired a Billy Graham crusade in Chapel Hill, N.C., when he was the minister of that city's Chapel of the Cross, as a turncoat from traditionalism. Lee has repeatedly tried to diffuse the backlash, but with little success. Finally, he named a Diocese Commission on Reconciliation, which issued a report on Jan. 14. The 13-member commission undertook a task similar to that of the Theological Task Force on Peace, Unity and Purity in the Presbyterian Church (USA). But the commission's report is quite different from PUP's final report. The diocesan panel does not hold up unity as the critical issue, despite Lee's assertion that schism is worse than heresy. For one, the commission's report is only 12 pages. PUP produced 56 pages. The commission hones in on the divisions in the ECUSA. PUP focuses on unity. The Episcopal report does not try to resolve the issues. PUP would resolve them by both 1) affirming the denomination's standards against ordaining practicing homosexuals and 2) giving leeway to ordaining bodies to regard the constitutional standards as nonessential. The Episcopal commission calls for – if necessary – an "amicable divorce." PUP doesn't speculate on that possibility. Noting that its members held diverse but deeply entrenched beliefs about ordaining practicing homosexuals and conducting services for union couples, and that those beliefs were unlikely to change, the Episcopal commission said it "could not avoid the difficult question: 'Can we continue to live together?'" "We understand from some of those among us that the answer may ultimately be 'No,' and that in this case there must be provision for an amicable divorce," the commission said. "We do not see it as our charter to delve into this possibility, other than to acknowledge that at some point our church and our diocese may need to explore this eventuality." The commission members did cite several common bonds: Christ as Savior and Lord; "the basic principles of Anglicanism, as articulated in the Book of Common Prayer;" "the centrality and authority of Scripture in our common life;" and "the value, worth, and dignity of each individual human being, who is created in the image and likeness of God." But the Episcopal group also declared that the ECUSA is in a "Level 5 conflict" in which the "outcome can only be defined in terms of win, lose, or compromise." Homosexuality is not the chief issue, the report said. "Although the election and consecration of a person in a same-sex relationship to be the Bishop of New Hampshire [in 2004] has become the flash point of difference, we believe that the issues of difference between us transcend conversation regarding human sexuality." The deeper differences, the group said, are the interpretation of Scripture, views about the apostolic tradition and the relationship of the Episcopal Church (USA) with the Anglican Communion. "We lament the perilous position in which the Episcopal Church finds itself in relation to the rest of the Anglican Communion as a result of General Convention 2003, as well as the actions taken in response to that General Convention," the report says. While the report produces no easy answers or attempts to compromise, it does brace the diocese's leadership for reality. "The situation may be getting worse as positions harden," the report says. "The only hope we have – as a commission, as a diocese, as a national church – is to recognize, as our Communion has already done, the depth of the impasse." The report refers to the Windsor Report that was issued after the 2003 General Convention of the ECUSA. The Windsor Report says, "The overwhelming response from other Christians both inside and outside the Anglican family has been to regard these developments as departures from genuine, apostolic Christian faith." The commission report added, "To some of us this statement represents an accurate identification of the key issue that drives our difficulties." The report includes a section titled "Matters of Grave Concern in Some Parishes." They include: Same-Sex Blessings. There are several churches in our diocese that, after years of prayer, study, dialogue, and theological reflection are ready to perform same-sex unions for their homosexual members. However, our diocese has never allowed them, despite its votes on related matters at the 2003 General Convention. Some of us believe that this presents a grave pastoral issue for those parishes and their members. At the same time we recognize that many congregations view same-sex blessings as a fundamental break with their understanding of Christian teachings. Given that these diametrically opposed beliefs are deeply held, it doesn't seem possible that we, as a diocese and acting in communion, can reach unanimity at this time on this issue. Diocesan Contributions. While many churches feel estranged, they nevertheless are proud of their Episcopal heritage and seek healing in the church. We think it would be a mistake to further isolate them by attempting to enforce an arbitrary conformity at this time. Therefore we unanimously recommend that parishes that contribute financially to an approved diocesan enterprise of their choice should still be considered in good standing in Virginia. Episcopal Oversight. Some members of our Commission have proposed that parishes electing to do so may receive Episcopal oversight from retired bishops or other bishops of their choice, in consultation with the ecclesiastical authority of the Diocese of Virginia, and that they should retain their representation in the Council of the Diocese. Since this is the de facto policy of the Diocese, most members of the commission have no objection to this in the context of the Episcopal oversight plan devised by the House of Bishops. The Calling of Clergy. While there is universal praise among commission members for Bishop Lee's treatment of dissenting parishes, there are nevertheless fears expressed about the future. Several members of the commission propose that the right of succession of rectors and the call of assistant clergy should be protected and reserved to parishes, subject only to the canonical requirement of being free of impediment that would subject the selected new rector or assistant to discipline. Other members of the Commission believe that the current procedure is adequate and does not need to be changed. Candidates for Holy Orders. Some members of the commission have noted that some Virginia parishes feel aggrieved by some procedures in the selection and education of future deacons and priests. They propose that the Commission on Ministry would treat candidates for holy orders raised up in a parish in a nondiscriminatory way, including the choice of seminary. Other members of the commission see this as entirely under the Bishop's purview. Parish Building Programs. Several churches have purchased land on which they hope to build, yet have put their building programs on hold because of the hesitancy of parishioners to invest in something that might be taken away, as well as the hesitancy of some banks to lend money under current circumstances. The Diocese should consider allowing the churches to place their property in separate 501(c)(3) status, free of any possible claim under the so-called Denis Canon. Several members of the commission report that "this would be a large step in restoring the degree of trust needed if reconciliation is to have any real possibility of success." Others see this as another kind of trust issue. While everyone in the diocese should be concerned when the expansion of Christ's mission is jeopardized, this request seemed to indicate to these members of the commission that such parishes might also be setting the stage for eventual withdrawal, and as such could be viewed as provocative. Once again, we take our cue from Windsor which observed: "It is because we have not always fully articulated how authority works within Anglicanism … that we have reached the point where urgent fresh thought and action have become necessary." The report also notes that, "the church must give its primary energy to God's mission to the world, not to reordering its internal life." The Episcopal commission concluded, "We are humbled by our inability to 'solve' the problems we face. Yet the good news of the Gospel is that God is merciful and with God all things are possible." That claim also contrasted with the PUP report. The Presbyterian task force emphasized that it had developed a model for discernment and consensus-building that united even people who disagree.

Respond to this article

Home · Archives · The Layman · Subscribe to The Layman · PLC Publications Presbyterian Lay Committee · Online book reviews · Feedback · Links