wfn.org | Delegation of bishops issues critical report

[ENS.parti@ecunet.org (ENS)]

For more information contact:
kmccormick@dfms.org

2000-002

Delegation of bishops issues critical report after visit to the 
Episcopal Church

by James Solheim

     (ENS) An international delegation of church leaders, who 
have expressed deep concerns about developments in the Episcopal 
Church and accepted an invitation from Presiding Bishop Frank T. 
Griswold to visit, has issued a report outlining the leaders' 
observations.

     The 10-day fall visit was the result of a public letter in 
February, 1999, by a group of primates and archbishops that 
expressed alarm at some developments in the Episcopal Church, 
including repudiation in some dioceses of resolutions at the 1998 
Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops that condemned homosexual 
activity as "sinful" and deplored attempts to mandate the 
acceptance of women in the priesthood.

     The report, issued by Archbishop Harry Goodhew of Sydney 
just before Christmas, began with a set of general impressions. 
It pointed to "the wide diversity that exists both between and 
within" the church's dioceses and to the "strong sense of 
loyalty" to the church. Despite some significant tensions, they 
observed "a strong desire on the part of many to hold ECUSA 
together."

     The report added that the team "carried away an impression 
of people committed to their church but deeply divided over 
issues of great significance," especially sexuality issues and 
women's ordination. Pointing to what it called contradictions and 
inconsistencies, the team members said that some were prepared to 
press for recognition of same-sex relationships while "mandating 
the acceptance of the ordination of women to the priesthood."

     Team members felt that they were being asked "to contemplate 
a paradox--those wishing to ignore the resolutions of Lambeth in 
respect of human sexuality were said to be strongest in wishing to 
enforce their interpretation of the Lambeth resolution on the 
crossing of diocesan boundaries" by bishops of another 
jurisdiction.

     "We also became aware of a widespread appreciation of the 
conciliatory role of the current presiding bishop," the report 
said. "Some believe that now, in a way that was not previously 
the case, conservatives are given an opportunity for their case 
to be presented and their voice heard." Others said that 
Griswold's signature on the Koinonia Statement, presented to the 
House of Bishops in 1994 by Bishop John Spong of Newark, 
caused a problem. The statement argued that sexuality was "morally 
neutral" and that it was possible for gays and lesbians to lead 
holy lives that could be blessed by the church.

     In a section offering advice to the presiding bishop, the 
team encouraged him "to consider some action that would re-
position himself with regard to the Koinonia Statement," 
suggesting that "his status as a mediator would be greatly 
enhanced, especially in the eyes of the more conservative 
elements of the church, if he were not seen as giving public 
support to one side of the issue."

Looking at the evidence

     The report wandered into the raging debate over the sources 
of homosexual orientation and the possibilities of leaving that 
lifestyle, outlining arguments based on Scripture and scientific 
evidence. "We are bound to comment that our appreciation of the 
situation leads us to believe that the case for justifying a 
homosexual lifestyle on the available evidence is grossly 
overstated."

     During its visit to different parts of the church, the team 
heard testimonies on both sides of the issue. From a non-Western 
perspective, the report said, the team saw "Western culture 
cutting itself adrift from its Judeo-Christian roots and 
suffering a consequent moral and intellectual confusion that 
makes space for values of a more pagan kind to take root and 
flourish." 

     The report also noted "a certain conflict fatigue," an 
eagerness by many to move on with the mission of the church. "We 
all had sympathy with that sentiment but recognized the truth 
that the point of conflict is the place where faithfulness is 
tested and loyalty demonstrated. While some said they found 
dialogue valuable, others told the team that it was also 
perceived as "a device to weaken conservative resolve while 
radicals continue to move ahead with unacceptable practices."

Identifying the issues

     In a section that identified issues, the report began with 
sources of authority, asking "what are the instruments that give 
us the ability to determine on matters relating to sexual 
morality?" Anglicans depend on Scripture, reason/experience and 
tradition but "we encountered a tendency to submit Scripture to 
experience rather than the other way around."

     The report also found reasons to believe that in parts of 
the church the "liberal agenda" supports homosexuality and 
"mandating the acceptance of the ordination of women is 
coercively applied." Because most in the Anglican Communion 
regard homosexuality as sinful, "we consider that universal 
responsibility must over-ride local preference. Anglicanism is 
indeed in favor of local contextualization but not in 
contradiction to universal norms," it concluded.

     Dialogue is important where there are differences but "on 
this issue of sexuality we hold that the dialogue has been abused 
by the unauthorized introduction of changes that presuppose a 
particular outcome to that dialogue. This impaired process has in 
fact jeopardized Anglican continuity." The report urged the 
presiding bishop to "find ways to strengthen the framework that 
will make possible both obedience and dialogue." 

     The report also argued for alternative oversight where 
parishes are in conflict with their bishops, "much to be 
preferred to congregations either leaving ECUSA or seeking 
episcopal oversight from elsewhere in the Communion. Such an 
arrangement may go some way to meet the needs of those who might 
otherwise seek for the creation of a second, recognized Anglican 
province in the USA," it concluded. 

     The report was signed by Archbishop Maurice Sinclair, 
primate of the Church in the Southern Cone of America; Bishop 
Simon Makundi, representing Tanzania; Bishop Peter Njenga 
Karioki, representing Kenya; Bishop John Rucyahana-Kabango, 
representing Rwanda, and Goodhew.

Another meeting, same issues

     Several members of the visitation team also participated in 
a mid-November meeting in Kampala, Uganda, discussing many of the 
same issues. At the end of the consultation, which included a 
number of conservative representatives from the Episcopal Church, 
an open letter signed by primates and archbishops from Africa, 
Southeast Asia and South America reassured them "We also hear and 
understand what you have told us about examples of abandonment of 
Anglican teaching, discipline and practices in the provinces from 
which you come. We share your distress on account of the damage 
and harmful results of these increasingly serious developments."

     The letter suggested that some of the church leaders would 
be "ready to respond to specific and urgent situations which may 
arise in the months before the Primates' Meeting in Portugal," 
scheduled for March 23-28. "Parishes and clergy under threat 
because of their loyalty to the Gospel and to Anglican standards 
must be supported and we will play our part in such support." The 
letter also said that it would tell the rest of the primates 
about the "intolerable situation" faced by some traditionalists, 
offering to "carefully document and commend a proposal to this 
meeting which, we believe, will address the problems in our 
Communion caused by misuse of provincial autonomy and innovations 
exceeding the limits of our Anglican diversity."

     The letter cited a resolution opening the possibility of 
"emergency" intervention in provinces of the Communion and one 
condemning homosexual activity and advising against blessing 
same-sex relationships.

     The letter was signed by the primates of Rwanda (E.M. 
Kolini), Uganda (Livingstone Mpalanyi-Nkoyoyo), Congo (Patrice 
Byanka Njojo), Burundi (Samuel Ndayisenga), Southeast Asia (Moses 
Tay), Tanzania (Donald Mtetemala), Southern Cone of America 
(Maurice Sinclair) and Bishop M.B. Dawidi representing the Sudan, 
and Bishop Peter Njenga representing the primate of Kenya.

Different interpretations

     Some attending the meeting hoped for immediate redress of 
their grievances, according to some news reports, maybe even an 
endorsement for another province in the United States to protect 
traditionalists. 

     Bishop James Stanton of Dallas told the Church of England 
Newspaper, "Our position has been that while we believe there are 
great difficulties in ECUSA, particularly with some liberal 
bishops running roughshod over their people, we felt that 
whatever actions taken had to be in unison. What Lambeth called 
for was action by the primates as a whole." He said that the 
American bishops were supporting Griswold's attempts to carve out 
a time of Jubilee for the church. "Whether the presiding bishop 
will pull it off is going to be a real test," he said in the 
interview with CEN. "He has problems to contend with. There are 
some very impatient people who don't much care for conversation. 
For them the issue is decided, they are going to move forward."

     The Rev. Bill Atwood of Ekklesia, an organization of 
conservatives in the Episcopal Church, told CEN, "It was not 
crazy hotheads throwing hand grenades but concerned people 
expressing responsible grief and trying to chart a course through 
to prevent explosions."

     The primates told some participants that they were making plans, 
holding out the possibility of acting before the March 
meeting in Portugal, but declined to discuss specifics. "We were 
asked simply to trust them, and we affirmed that we would," said 
the Rev. Richard Kim of Michigan.

     For a complete report on the delegation visit 
www.anglicanmediasydney.asn.au

-James Solheim is director of the Episcopal Church's Office of 
News and Information.