wfn.org | Episcopalians: Bishops explore theme of 'inhabiting reconciliation' at Cleveland

[dmack@episcopalchurch.org]

October 7, 2002

2002-228

Episcopalians: Bishops explore theme of 'inhabiting 
reconciliation' at Cleveland 

by James Solheim and Jan Nunley

(ENS) Continuing a process that began when they met in Vermont 
just days after the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the 
House of Bishops, at its interim meeting in Cleveland September 
26-October 1, explored a model for reconciliation even as 
tensions over collegiality and canonical authority bubbled under 
the surface.

Using the small group model that has, over the years, 
strengthened the collegiality of the house, the bishops also 
drew on their chaplains to "inhabit reconciliation." Introducing 
the model for theological reflection was the Rev. Mark McIntosh 
from the Diocese of Chicago. "What does reconciliation look like 
when I see it in terms of God's love?" he asked the bishops, 
walking them through the steps of the process that began with 
identifying a subject for reflection, moving to engaging "the 
light of Scripture...and the Tradition" as a group. He then 
invited each bishop to engage "the light of prayer for 
discernment" as an individual before returning to the group to 
discuss living out theology in public life. 

In the afternoon session, the Rev. Michael Battle of Duke 
University in North Carolina modeled the theological reflection 
process on the theme of "reconciliation and repentance," 
wondering how a theological reflection on those themes might 
"offer a meaningful approach, not just for current contentious 
issues such as the war on terrorism, sexuality, racism, and 
church authority, but for the constant and ongoing crises for 
the church and the world." He asked, "How might we practice 
reconciliation and repentance in a way that anticipates the 
conflict of the future and learns from the mistakes of the 
past?"

Respecting one another's urgencies

The bishops were soon to get the chance in a very concrete 
way. "One person's elephant can very easily be someone else's 
mouse," said Presiding Bishop Frank T. Griswold, opening the 
second day's session. With a reminder to the bishops to "respect 
one another's urgencies" but to retain a sense of proportion 
with regard to them, he called Pennsylvania bishop Charles 
Bennison and Pittsburgh bishop Robert Duncan to the podium to 
speak to "the facts" regarding Bennison's 
deposition of a traditionalist priest, the Rev. David Moyer, 
whom Duncan then invited to take up canonical residence in his 
diocese.

Bennison expressed gratitude to Griswold for his efforts at 
reconciliation, but said he "had no choice but to depose [Moyer] 
according to the canons." He apologized for "any way in which 
this has undermined" the ministries of other bishops, the 
church, or the Anglican Communion, but refuted a statement by 
Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey that he was "unwilling to 
consult" with Carey or other bishops on the situation. After 
repeated attempts to contact Carey at his Lambeth Palace 
offices, he said that he felt "undercut" by comments have been 
"contrary to the effort I undertook."

Duncan began by admitting that he had "purposely occasioned a 
constitutional crisis among us" to open a discussion about 
"limiting episcopal power" and make known his objection to 
Moyer's deposition under Canon 10, which does not require a 
trial. "I regret the chaos" this has caused and am "willing to 
accept the discipline of this house," Duncan added, but "my 
abiding goal is our common good." The action put Moyer in an 
"anomalous situation" of being recognized as a priest in many 
dioceses of the Episcopal Church, but not in Pennsylvania, 
Duncan said, and made Bennison an offer of his own. "Name me 
assisting bishop of Pennsylvania, I'll name you assisting bishop 
of Pittsburgh. You can deal with my difficult congregations and 
I'll deal with yours," he declared.

Of one heart?

"They may not have been of one mind but they were of one 
heart," commented Bishop Clifton Daniel III of East Carolina on 
the presentations by Bennison and Duncan.

After a brief period of questions and answers, Griswold turned 
to the theme of the session--appropriately enough titled "Power, 
Influence and Authority." He reminded the bishops that "our 
authority is that of Christ's work in us," to "make incarnate 
the life-givingness of God." But in Jesus' case, that process 
often ran counter to the needs of a religious establishment 
which is grounded in power and what he called the "dynamic of 
law and domination."

Such tensions exist within the community of the modern 
Episcopal Church as well, Griswold said, a "dynamic of law and 
domination in which the canons overwhelm compassion...At its 
best, canon law affirms what is already reality. But law does 
not create the church and I think some of us need to be reminded 
of that. We have the freedom to choose the way of 
life-givingness and no canon can do it for us."

Being a community of reconciliation is a lifelong process 
because of sin, Griswold went on, and the closer a community 
gets to the goal the more "the Evil One lurks close by to 
disturb our reconciliation." "We must engage in dying to 
singularities and the need to win," he told the bishops 
pointedly. "What makes division painful is that we have begun to 
live into the community of reconciliation" and have "increased 
expectations of mutuality, which makes conflict that much harder 
to bear." Before the bishops moved back into their groups, he 
also warned of the sometimes unconscious pressures of "bearing 
concerns that are not our own." 

Frustrations surface in resolution

Frustrations about recent actions by Bennison and Duncan, as 
well as the bishops of Kansas and Delaware, surfaced in the form 
of a strong "mind of the house" resolution that would have 
chastised those colleagues for "inappropriate behavior" that 
threatens the unity of the church

The original resolution asked the House of Bishops to express 
its "disappointment" with the bishop and leadership of the 
Diocese of Pennsylvania in its failure to resolve issues 
surrounding the deposition--and it also pointed to what it 
called "extra-canonical action" taken by the bishop of 
Pittsburgh in offering the deposed rector a position. 

The proposed resolution also lamented the decisions in the 
Dioceses of Kansas and Delaware that "went beyond the consensus 
achieved by the General Convention Resolution D039 when they 
formally authorized the blessing of same-sex unions."

After a long, lively and occasionally confusing debate, the 
bishops unanimously adopted an amended resolution that removed 
the specific references to colleagues and asked the house's 
committee on pastoral development to prepare for the spring 
meeting a suggestion on how to deal with "breaches of 
collegiality" among the bishops. The bishops are looking for a 
way to "support one another in waging reconciliation within the 
Body of Christ and to enhance wider consultation and our role as 
guardians of the faith, unity and discipline of the church."

During the debate bishops objected to the tone and use of 
language in the proposed resolution. Bishop Paul Marshall of 
Bethlehem said the resolution did not reflect the spirit of 
reconciliation that members of the house were seeking because it 
created a situation of "winners and losers." Ohers were clear 
that legislation would not solve the underlying issues. "Votes 
close off conversation," argued Bishop Catherine Waynick of 
Indianapolis, "creating victors and victims." In the end, Bishop 
Robert Ihloff  of Maryland, who introduced the resolution shaped 
by facilitators of the small groups, said that he was 
"comfortable" with the amended resolution because it "captures 
the essence of what most groups wanted to say." 

The final resolution retained a sentence that said, "We 
believe that the canons, used properly, can be an instrument of 
grace and a unifying factor in the life of the church. We expect 
that depositions and other disciplinary actions be recognized by 
all bishops of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion."

The bishops also endorsed a call from the presiding bishop to 
consider preparation of a pastoral teaching on reconciliation as 
a contribution to the General Convention next summer in 
Minneapolis. Professor Ian Douglas of Episcopal Divinity School 
in Massachusetts, who helped shape the reconciliation theme at 
the Vermont and Ohio meetings, will alter his teaching schedule 
to assist in preparation of a draft in time for consideration at 
the spring retreat of bishops.

Questions about war with Iraq

The possibility of war with Iraq was very much on the minds 
of bishops and they unanimously endorsed a strong statement that 
was sent to all members of Congress as they began debate on a 
resolution. President George W. Bush is seeking authorization to 
use military force if Iraq doesn't submit to inspections.

"We deeply respect the seriousness of your responsibility to 
protect the lives of our citizens and, with you, we condemn the 
brutality of Saddam Hussein and his regime," the letter said. It 
quickly added, "Our faith requires us to strive always for 
justice and peace. We believe that restraint and the on-going 
commitment to international cooperation are the means toward 
peace that we all desire."

In arguing that "we do not believe that war with Iraq can be 
justified at this time," the letter pointed out that Iraq has 
not attacked the United States, "our nation has not exhausted 
all possibilities for a peaceful solution," nor has it 
"sufficiently garnered world support." The statement also 
stressed the "unintended consequences" of war, including 
"unacceptable civilian casualties."

The letter concluded that the bishops "do not support a 
decision to go to war without clear and convincing evidence of 
the need for us to defend ourselves against an imminent attack."

In their own meeting, 74 spouses of the bishops signed a 
letter questioning the use of force against Iraq.

Living in reconciled community

In his sermon at Trinity Cathedral on Sunday, Griswold said 
that the possibility of war raises deep questions of "what it 
means to be peacemakers, living as a reconciled community. How 
does shalom become the truth of what we are--and shall be?"

He said that "as a nation we are accustomed to waging war," 
and facing that possibility with Iraq it is important to ask, 
"How are we as a nation called to be an agent of reconciliation? 
As persons of faith we are called to wage reconciliation...to 
bring people to the deep place of shalom, that true peace that 
flows like a river from the heart of God."

Noting that how people speak to one another also shapes the 
response, Griswold decried the "harsh language" being used by 
the US government over the Iraq issue. "We must embody 
reconciliation, becoming the thing we preach...because we are 
called to the costly and on-going work of reconciliation," he 
said.

While that doesn't mean "being passive in the face of evil, 
it does recognize that even the enemies of truth have a place in 
the heart of God." He also said that Americans "must ask what it 
is in us, as a nation, that provokes such strong reaction."

------

--James Solheim is director and Jan Nunley is deputy director of 
Episcopal News Service. The Rev. Jan Nunley is deputy director 
of Episcopal News Service.