A great comment over at T19 describing the various players in the COE and the situation confronting that church. I couldn't resist posting it over here. Note also that PM has placed transcripts of the various speeches by FIF in the comments -- if I had time I'd post them up over here.

Giles Fraser, former Vicar of Putney and advocate of all things ‘Inclusive’ has been richly rewarded for his chairmanship of Inclusive Church, for having Bishop Gene Robinson preach at his church contrary to the wishes of the ABC, and his readiness to write and talk to the media on all occasions which present themselves. He is now at St Paul’s Cathedral as Canon in charge of interesting evening talks.

However it is also true that he is not very inclusive of those he disagrees with. As he admits with honesty: “compromise has a limit - especially when the issue is regarded by many as a fundamental question of justice”. Justice, not faith, truth, Christian teaching, or theological integrity. No it is all trumped by a right-on secular agenda.

What is he talking about, why it is women bishops and how those awful neanderthal mysogenistic Anglo-Catholics cannot get their heads round ‘justice’ and get with the program. They keep bringing up theology and the teachings of Christ, and the understanding of the rest of the church over the world, and all through time.

Now I am not saying that we should necessarily not have women bishops, but I do say that we should make provision for those clergy and laity who have fundamental theological problems with it; a provision that actually deals with the issues.

Today may turn out to be rather an important day, as much as it is one of the important days we have regularly. An important day not just for the Church of England whose particular issue this is, but also for the Anglican Communion.

What is so important? Well today the Church of England Revision Committee meets. People are making submissions at the last minute, and my - are they Inclusive!

WATCH, Women and the Church, pushed in a supermarket trolley from Synod ‘08 by TEC-in-a-bag ladies, Christina Rees and Canon Marilyn McCord Adams has put in something which is quite hard to read or make sense of, so apoplectic is it at the temerity of the Revision Committee for making any provision whatever for the Anglo-Catholics. It is an A1 rant:
http://www.thinkinganglicans.org.uk/archives/004041.html
and yesterday in more measured tones, but equally hard-line, the Anglo-C’s brother Affirming Catholics put the jack boot in demanding the statutory concessions go and by implication the Anglo-Catholics too:
http://affirmingcatholicism.org.uk/pages/default.asp?sID=0&mode=news&article=45

You can just feel the love can’t you?

Interestingly even on Thinking Anglicans some of the commenters are having trouble stomaching the WATCH spiel. No repentance or mercy for the disgraceful treatment of the Anglo-C’s at Synod ‘08 by the chief mischief-makers of WATCH and Affirming Catholicism, notwithstanding the latter’s oh so calm and holy recent statements.

So why does it matter?
1. The Pope - now with his generous pastoral offer, the Anglo-C’s have another option, one they received with deep gratitude at their recent FiF Conference which was humble, gentle and extremely thoughtful and theologically argued in comparison to the theologically light offerings above.
2. GAFCON, or rather FCA - who have served notice on the CofE as well that if proper provision is not made for conservatives in the CofE, they are going to:
http://www.anglican-mainstream.net/?p=16521
3. Reform have also issued a statement making it clear that there is no need for those who do not wish to to go to Rome, because FCA is here now, if the Revision Committee do not pass muster:
http://www.reform.org.uk/pages/press/latestpress.php
4. And the Global South Council have stated:
“We urge the Archbishop of Canterbury to work in close collegial consultation with fellow Primates in the Communion, act decisively on already agreed measures in the Primates’ Meetings, and exercise effective leadership in nourishing the flock under our charge, so that none would be left wandering and bereft of spiritual oversight.”
http://www.globalsouthanglican.org/index.php/weblog/comments/pastoral_exhortation/

And what of the people all this is about, the Anglo-Catholics and others who have been made so unwelcome thanks to the efforts of the ever ‘inclusive’ WATCH and AffCaths? They have been deeply upset; are deeply grateful to the Pope and others, some following the reports of two of the flying bishops [Provincial Episcopal Visitors in the parlance] are taking great interest in the offer from Rome; are taking an interest in FCA; are still taking an interest in what the Revision Committee has and may yet come up with and have also expressed deep thanks for the support they have had personally from the Archbishop of Canterbury who has tried to ensure that they can be kept in.

While you may find the Affirming Catholics esconced in the cathedrals and the evangelicals in the rich suburbs and cities, it is the Anglo-Catholics who you will find at work in they traditional calling, the poor and difficult areas, where following the call of their Master they minister to the least, and in their churches and their ceremonies try to show a glimpse of magic and deep reverence for our Lord [...and it has to be said our Lady]

I have tried to understand more about the Anglo-Catholics, it was alien to my churchmanship, but they are some of the most up to date and effective bloggers, and I have wandered onto their sites including Anglican Wanderings and our own Father Ed Tomlinson’s and his friends. To start with I think there was a degree of incomprehension on my part and maybe on theirs, but with a few jokes we got chatting. I think that as a church we will be enormously poorer without them. The theologically vapid and liberal AffCaths are no substitute.

And bringing all the above together, the Revision Committee are between a rock and a hard place. If they go with proper statutory provision for the Anglo-Catholics they might make a difference to so many and give a lead to the rest of the Communion in that the CofE can still deal with things in a Christian manner and keep the balanced mix that we have always had.

Then again if they do not go with the WATCH/AffCath bunch they will hack off the liberal end and no doubt Christina Rees and her friends will have a complete fit of the screaming hab-dabs - toys being thrown all over the back of the Merc.

If the Revision Committee do go with the WATCH bunch then we can expect the Pope’s offer to be increasingly attractive, and the FCA will move in

And for the rest of the Communion, they will see who we have decided to become, and whether we are either capable of giving a lead or for that matter worth following any longer; whether our future lies with the intolerance of TEC or with the Communion.

Prayers for us today would be good, and for the Revision Committee.

Do listen to the FiF conference speeches here, particularly those of Bishop Broadhurst of Fulham, Bishop Nazir-Ali and the PEV’s:
http://www.forwardinfaith.com/news/na09-10.html
and John Hind, Bishop of Chichester’s transcript here:
http://www.diochi.org.uk/downloads/Bishop of Chichester/Adresses/2009 1023 FiF.pdf

[Hmm…I wonder if this is my longest comment]

17 Comments • Print-friendly • Print-friendly w/comments

Comments:

If it is your longest, it is a good one showing the realities facing us all in the Anglican Wars.

[1] Posted by Creighton+ on 11-03-2009 at 08:31 AM • top

Pageantmaster, prayers rising for the Church of England and the Revision Committee - and thank you for helping us on the other side of the Pond understand more about what’s happening there. On behalf of orthodox Americans, I apologize for the TEC ranters you have received on your shore. Sadly, we have plenty more where those came from.

[2] Posted by oscewicee on 11-03-2009 at 08:46 AM • top

My heart sank as I came onto SF and saw my name at the top of the threads with a bit of a shock. Oh no! I thought: what have I done now!

But thank you Sarah for posting this link. I listened to and started transcribing some of the FiF speeches last week, on and off, really because of the window they shone into the UK Anglo-Catholics’ deliberations and their high quality. I was up early this morning wondering whether to post something or not. Then I got going, I am not sure why, because I am usually part of the chorus.

I am not sure why but I do have a sense that for us in the Church of England, we are at a point of decision, about who we are and where we are going and I think today and this month are going to be crunch time for us. It has been clear for me for a long time that the question the Church of England is being asked, as with others is “Who do you say I am”, and “Will you accept me as your Lord, will you place me back at the head of my church and lift up my banner”. I am not clear where it will lead, but I do think that prayer is important and I thank you for posting this and for all of your kind interest and prayers for my and our church.

[3] Posted by Pageantmaster on 11-03-2009 at 11:18 AM • top

I find this struggle emblematic - I suppose it is good that some in the CoE find the lack of protection tragic and wrong. I hope that they carry the day.

Apart from a disregard for catholicity and other theological arguments to the contrary, the proponents of women bishops who object to any protection are rejecting more:

1. Any relationship with the disenfranchised individuals themselves - given that these proponents are well aware that the disenfranchised are being forced out.
2. Any weight to Paul’s admonition for charity in Romans 14:21
3. The credibility of church teaching – their message is that the church was so very wrong yesterday, but today it is so very right. What an unreliable church!

Of course, I have not heard these proponents argue that women bishops are necessary for the salvation of those within the church. Nevertheless, they must enforce this non-essential on all, because it is ‘correct.’

IMHO, the clear rejection of the charity called for in Romans 14:21 is the dead canary. If Romans 14:21 carries no weight for the charitable treatment of brothers and sisters in Christ, then why should we expect any scripture to be authoritative for this crowd? So, if the rest of the CoE goes along…

Romans 14:21
It is good not to eat meat or drink wine or do anything that causes your brother to stumble.

[4] Posted by tired on 11-03-2009 at 11:23 AM • top

Thank you, Pageantmaster, for your thoughtful appraisal and you, Sarah, for posting it here. It is rather striking the difference between those who have their own agenda for the church and those who try to follow the church’s agenda. Despite a typically American disdain for old British monarchs, I find myself wondering what Henry VIII would say about all this.

I also can’t help but wonder what the majority of Anglicans (most of them south of the equator) think. Surely most can see that the disruptive force from TEC is unabating and ever-darkening. If most of the Anglo-catholics leave CofE, because they are treated so shoddily, that will complete its change into a duplicate of TEC, with which many of the Southern Anglicans are already out of communion. How long can it be before someone there attempts to consecrate a practicing homosexual bishop to complete the makeover? +Gene Robinson is routinely well received, contrary to the wishes of the ABC. It would seem, in fact, that the ABC has about as much influence over the CofE as he does the rest of the AC; and I do not say that gladly.

How much more can the majority of Anglicans take before they declare themselves out of communion with the CofE? Can one do that and still be in communion with the ABC? Surely, satan is cackling with glee at this state of affairs. It was a truly beautiful church once.

[5] Posted by RicardoCR on 11-03-2009 at 12:04 PM • top

COE is not the only entity that is squeezing out Anglo-Catholics. ACNA has by it’s own lack of standing on the matter of ?/? (banned topic on SF) has set the stage for more and more Protestant thinking and applications in the reality of day to day church life. It is happening in the so-called Anglo-Catholic diocese of San Joaquin in which the ACNA infection has already taken hold. It would not surprise me if Bp +Iker is quietly struggling with the same issues.
The big tent is not as big as advertised.
Intercessor

[6] Posted by Intercessor on 11-03-2009 at 12:45 PM • top

“exercise effective leadership “
The ABC would do, if he had any idea what that phrase meant.

[7] Posted by Marie Blocher on 11-03-2009 at 12:46 PM • top

Thank you, PM, enormous amount of work you have done in the last 24 hours. If you are reading this thread, please follow the link over to T19- after Pageantmaster’s comment, he has posted transcripts of several speakers from the recent FiF meeting, including +Nazir-Ali and +Iker along with several of the English FiF bishops.

[8] Posted by tjmcmahon on 11-03-2009 at 01:14 PM • top

Thanks to Pageanmaster for his incisive and poignant analysis. I agree that the CoE appears to be at a major and perhaps decisive crossroads. Whatever road is chosen will have fateful, momentous consequences.

I must admit that I’m not optimistic. But “nothing is impossible with God,” and I’ve been surprised before.

I don’t know how many hours it took Pageanmaster to transcribe all those FiF talks he posted at T19, but I’m sure glad he did.

BTW, one thing I learned from them was that Bill Ilgenfritz was consecrated a bishop in late August for the FiF folks in ACNA. Somehow I’d missed that important developemnt. I don’t remember SF devoting a thread to it. I guess I overlooked it.

If anyone else did too, here some a few of the basic facts. Ifgenfritz was consecrated by ++Duncan, +Iker, +Ackerman, +MacBurney, and +Wantland on August 22nd. The FiF diocese is known as the “Missionary Diocese of All Saints,” and is expected to have 12 or 13 congregations by the end of the year. +Ilgdnfritz will continue as rector of St. Mary’s, Chaleroi, PA.

I’m sorry if that seems like a digression off-topic, but I think it may illustrate the unfortunate reality that the FiF folks tend to be all too easily overlooked by other orthodox Anglicans, whether in the US or the OK, and whether we’re in the ACNA or TEC.

David Handy+

[9] Posted by New Reformation Advocate on 11-03-2009 at 01:15 PM • top

You want to see the end result of this process to squeeze dissent when liberals get power, look no further than ECUSA/TEC. Hit squads under the President of the Douse Deputies going in to dioceses to “assure compliance with WO” and the PB from gehenna with no regard to canons or constitution in the treatment of “dissidents” and willing to inflict atheologia on the entire communion to get it s way. Oh, yes, the CoE has much to observe and think about and decide.

[10] Posted by dwstroudmd on 11-03-2009 at 03:42 PM • top

Hi Sarah,In your paragraph commencing “I have tried to understand Anglo=Catholics>...” Well I am one of those, BUT quite extended in 1974 when I was Baptised in the Spirit. I had been a priest for 14 years, and then I came to know JESUS.
I still wear Chasuble, swing a Thurible. etc. etc.I don’t HAVE to BUT Oh the Word of God is alive and very active. I celebrate Golden Jubilee next year.
I have many clergy friends in Sydney and we are close buddies, But there are many in Sydney so called Evangelicals who need a good dose of Jesus so that they might proclaim the Good News, not those things that are forbidden( (by Calvin? )like vestments etc, but the Good news that Jesus is here.) I fear that Evangelicism speaks too much negative theology, rules and the like.. They become like the liberalists .eg WATCH or AFF/CATH..
Scripture says “The Spirit will set you free, and you will be free indeed” I found this to be true.
Brian Hatherly+

[11] Posted by Brian on 11-03-2009 at 06:30 PM • top

RE: “Hi Sarah,In your paragraph commencing “I have tried to understand Anglo=Catholics>...” . . . “

Hi Brian—thanks for your comment.

Keep in mind though that those words are not my own—I am quoting the commenter over at T19 . . .

[12] Posted by Sarah on 11-03-2009 at 09:21 PM • top

My Word!
I have scanned much of this post… my word!
Pardon me for being a bit stunned, but this is actually a <u>theological discussion!</u>

In Canada, where I come from, there are no theological discussions. Our theologians whine and cry and stomp and talk about their feelings an aweful lot (well, most of the libs, actually).

I am, in fact, quite fond of the Rev. Peter Ould (from a distance), who posted a youtube video of the Muppets (“Beaker”, I think) performing “Feelings” after the last General Synod in Canada. (Thanks, Peter, you led the way to some formative laughter, there.)

Perhaps in June 2010, Canada will do a bit better arguing from a theological standpoint - before we get truly swept away by the revisionist US tide… time will tell.

In the meantime, I will relish this post and spread it around to my lay and clerical contemporaries in my own little corner of the world.

Thanks, PM !

[13] Posted by ZachD on 11-04-2009 at 12:17 AM • top

Well, humbly, there is some theological discussion going on in Canada, on second thought…

I must state that, beyond the vacuuous nature of revisionist fluff about feelings and human rights, and Biblical reinterpretation, ARE a growing body of thoughtful lay and Ordered speakers who have a strong hold of a true and living relationship with the true and living Lord, who are making wizened theological debate in our day. I am truly thankful for them all.

Prayerfully, June won’t be the wash-out that many thing that it might be…

...here’s hoping.

[14] Posted by ZachD on 11-04-2009 at 12:26 AM • top

A prayer for the Church of England can be found here.

[15] Posted by Jill Woodliff on 11-04-2009 at 06:39 AM • top

#15 Thank you for posting that prayer for the Church of England Jill, and I thank you and others for praying for us and our leaders.

[16] Posted by Pageantmaster on 11-04-2009 at 07:28 AM • top

“Then again if they do not go with the WATCH/AffCath bunch they will hack off the liberal end and no doubt Christina Rees and her friends will have a complete fit of the screaming hab-dabs - toys being thrown all over the back of the Merc”.

So?

“Screaming hab-dabs”, yet Pageantmaster(thank you, sir, for this incredible work) also said this:

“...it is the Anglo-Catholics who you will find at work in they traditional calling, the poor and difficult areas, where following the call of their Master they minister to the least, and in their churches and their ceremonies try to show a glimpse of magic and deep reverence for our Lord [...and it has to be said our Lady]

I have tried to understand more about the Anglo-Catholics, it was alien to my churchmanship, but they are some of the most up to date and effective bloggers, and I have wandered onto their sites including Anglican Wanderings and our own Father Ed Tomlinson’s and his friends. To start with I think there was a degree of incomprehension on my part and maybe on theirs, but with a few jokes we got chatting. I think that as a church we will be enormously poorer without them. The theologically vapid and liberal AffCaths are no substitute”.

Um, what are the screaming hab-dabs offering other than theological vapidity and the usual rant re: “justice”?

Maybe some just need to stay screaming hab-dabs while the correct provisions are made for the A-C’s, who seem to be doing the actual work of the Church.

[17] Posted by Passing By on 11-04-2009 at 10:13 AM • top

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere about the crisis in our church. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments that you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm, its board of directors, or its site administrators.