I should apologize in advance to readers and to Dr. Radner for the brevity of my following comments given the serious matters at issue here. I hope to have time to elaborate on them later.
Dr. Radner has without a doubt taken stands for orthodox Anglicanism that can be described as nothing if not courageous and visionary. No matter what the outcome of this larger crisis in Anglicanism, and no matter what becomes of your diocese or your parish, we all owe Dr. Radner our gratitude.
But it’s also true - in my opinion, at least - that his resignation from the ACN was done clumsily, perhaps as a result of haste combined with indignation and more than a little frustration. I also believe that Dr. Radner has overlooked more than one critical sub-plot, and about one of them, CJ has a point - quite a good one, if you ask me:
When Dr. Radner states that, “To say that this is all ‘over’ and ‘lost’ and that it is time to invent some new and better means to pursue this…is…not only a mark of uncalled-for desperation, but an arrow into the heart of the calling God has in fact given us,” he completely misreads the situation. Gene Robinson is only a symptom; he is not the disease. Does Dr. Radner not recall James Pike? John Spong? Walter Righter? Does he not recall that none of these men paid any sort of penalty for their heresies and apostasies?
To suggest, as Dr. Radner does here, that Bishop Duncan’s recent statements imperil Anglican unity is a bizarre statement to make. Not to put too fine a point on it but Anglican unity went on life support in 1998 and was killed off in 2003. Neither Bob Duncan nor anybody else can possibly say anything that can cause any more harm to the Communion’s unity than ECUSA’s actions have caused it over the last thirty to forty years.
9 Comments •
Christopher Johnson scores more touchdowns with these gems:
o Things are desperate, Doctor, the one thing conservative Anglicans no longer have the luxury of is time and to suggest that people should hang in there while something, no one is sure quite what, gets done behind the scenes is wildly unrealistic.
o If Dr. Radner means that we should avoid rhetoric that our opponents might consider mean-spirited, he is suggesting that we on the Right shouldn’t say or write anything at all.
o Because honesty sometimes tends to anger people. Which is why when some of us declare our view that homosexual activity is a sin, we get called bigots and Nazis. As for “offering a true alternative in spirit and in Christ,” I know of no instance in the Scriptures where Our Lord withheld a hard truth because it might have angered a Pharisee, say, but perhaps Dr. Radner can enlighten me.
o Come September, if ECUSA officially reacts the way everyone expects it to, the Windsor bishops may have to do something they don’t much like. Stick their necks out. Take a risk. Fortunately, there is a group of Episcopalians in place ready to help them do just that.
It’s called the Anglican Communion Network.