Sunday, May 18, 2008
Total visitors right now (TitusOneNine & Stand Firm): 218
Jackie Bruchi
Archbishop Mouneer Anis (Jerusalem/Middle East) On HoB Response
Wednesday, October 3, 2007 • 2:06 pm

Assessment Of The Response The HoB Of TEC To The Windsor Report And Dar Es Salam Recommendation
First, I would like to thank the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church in America (TEC) for her kind invitation and for the great hospitality we enjoyed while we were in New Orleans. I am also grateful for the opportunity I was given to address the House of Bishops (HOB).

It is very unfortunate that not all the members of the Joint Standing Committee (JSC) were present when a response to the HOB of TEC was drafted. The lack of discussion and interaction will not produce a report that expresses the view of the whole committee.

The response of the House of Bishops of TEC represents a superficial shift from their previous position; the fact remains that their position since 2003 has not changed. The House of Bishops has not responded positively to either the Windsor Report or the Dar El Salam Primates recommendation.

Therefore I strongly disagree with the report of the JSC which states that "We believe that the Episcopal Church has clarified all outstanding questions relating to their response to the questions directed explicitly to them, and on which clarifications were sought by the 30th of September, and given the necessary assurance sought of them." The reasons for my disagreement are as follows:

On Public Rites for Blessing of Same-sex Unions
The statement of the House of Bishops in New Orleans did not meet the request of Windsor Report that the "Bishops must declare a moratorium on all such public rites". It also failed to meet the request of the Primates at Dar El Salam that the Bishops should "make an unequivocal common covenant that the Bishops will not authorize any rites of blessing for same-sex unions in their Diocese."

They did not declare a moratorium on authorization public rites of the blessing of same-sex unions. Instead the House of Bishops pledged not to authorize any public rites of blessing of same-sex unions. I understand moratorium as "cessation of activity". In the explanatory discussion they mentioned that "the majority", not all, of Bishops do not make allowances for the blessings of same-sex unions. This means that a number of Bishops will continue to make allowances for the blessing of same-sex unions. I see this as an equivocal and unclear response.

While the House of Bishop's response means that 'authorization' of the rites will not take place, but it also stated that some will continue to ''explore and experience liturgies celebrating the blessing of same-sex unions''. The exploration of liturgies celebrating the blessing of same-sex unions, keeps a window to continue such blessings under another title!! This unashamedly disregards the standard teaching of the Anglican Communion which is still torn over this issue.

On the elections non-celibate gay and lesbian persons to the Episcopate
Those who read the whole response of the House of Bishops of TEC, not only parts of it, would find the following.
• The House of Bishops clarified Resolution B033 of the General Convention 2006 in such a way that "non-celibate gay and lesbian persons are included in the restraint". But in the same response we find them saying "We proclaim the Gospel that in Christ all God's children, including gay and lesbian persons, are full and equal participants in the life of Christ's Church." What does this mean? This statement contradicts their explanation of B033 which put a restraint on electing and consecrating non-celibate gay and lesbian persons to the Episcopate Order, as it restricts them from full participation in the church.

• The request of the House of Bishops to the Archbishop of Canterbury to explore ways for Gene Robinson to fully participate in Lambeth Conference demonstrates clearly that they see that the manner of life of Gene Robinson, as a non-celibate gay, does not present a challenge to the wider church and will not lead to further strains on the Communion. This again contradicts their clarification of General Convention Resolution B033 that it does indeed refer "to non-celibate gay and lesbian persons".

On the Pastoral Scheme
In regard to the recommendation of Dar El Salam Primates Meeting, for the establishment of a Pastoral Council "to act on behalf of the Primates in consultation with the Episcopal Church", the House of Bishops did not respond positively. Their excuse was that such a pastoral scheme would compromise the authority of the Presiding Bishop, and place the autonomy of the Episcopal Church at risk.

The House of Bishops came up with another internal plan that allows the Presiding Bishop to appoint Episcopal visitors for Dioceses that 'request' alternative oversight. This is completely different from the Pastoral scheme recommended by Dar El Salam. The composition of the recommended pastoral scheme has the ability to stop the interventions of outside Provinces because it represents TEC, the Primates, and the Archbishop of Canterbury.

Suspending all Legal Actions
The Primates in Dar El Salam urged the representatives of TEC and of those congregations in property disputes with TEC to suspend all legal actions against each other. The House of Bishops did not address this issue.

Conclusion
The House of Bishops did not respond meet the recommendation of Windsor Report and the Dar El Salam Primates Meeting Communiqué. Instead they used ambiguous language and contradicted themselves within their own response.

The Most Rev. Dr. Mouneer Hanna Anis
President Bishop of the Province of Jerusalem and the Middle East
Member of the Primates Standing Committee

Comments:

Note to God -

Thank you for such a brave, honest, and truthful man.  thank you for calling him to be a tower in yout Church.  Give him strength Lord for the journey.

In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Ghost,

Amen

RSB

[1] Posted by R S Bunker on 10-03-2007 at 02:34 PM

There is nothing more to be said. 

We are indeed blessed to have ++Anis come to our aid.

[2] Posted by young joe from old oc on 10-03-2007 at 03:11 PM

Gotta love a real honest man of integrity who tells the truth.

[3] Posted by dwstroudmd on 10-03-2007 at 03:21 PM

The truth needs no defense.
Thank you Most Rev. Dr. Mouneer Hanna Anis

Laytone

[4] Posted by Laytone on 10-03-2007 at 03:23 PM

grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin grin

[5] Posted by Hosea6:6 on 10-03-2007 at 03:25 PM

The Most Rev. Dr. Mouneer Hanna Anis hit the nail on the head!

[6] Posted by Piedmont on 10-03-2007 at 03:29 PM

It is very unfortunate that not all the members of the Joint Standing Committee (JSC) were present when a response to the HOB of TEC was drafted. The lack of discussion and interaction will not produce a report that expresses the view of the whole committee.

Regular Guy translation: KJS, et.al. threw me under the bus.  I won’t forget…

[7] Posted by bigjimintx on 10-03-2007 at 04:12 PM

Thank you Lord for this man who understands English better than our HoB

[8] Posted by Eren on 10-03-2007 at 04:14 PM

Truely a “Pillar of Iron” Jeremiah 1:17-19 (The Message)

17"But you—up on your feet and get dressed for work!
Stand up and say your piece. Say exactly what I tell you to say.
Don’t pull your punches
or I’ll pull you out of the lineup.

18-19"Stand at attention while I prepare you for your work.
I’m making you as impregnable as a castle,
Immovable as a steel post,
solid as a concrete block wall.
You’re a one-man defense system
against this culture,
Against Judah’s kings and princes,
against the priests and local leaders.
They’ll fight you, but they won’t
even scratch you.
I’ll back you up every inch of the way.”
God’s Decree.

Jeremiah 1:17-19 (KJV)

— Justin Martyr

[9] Posted by Justin Martyr on 10-03-2007 at 04:29 PM

Well, I can understand why the JSC wanted to get their “official” response out before Abp. Anis’ response arrived.  Certainly makes it difficult to claim “consensus,” doesn’t it?

I think it is about time to give the GS their appropriate representation on the ACC- given the increase in the number of Anglicans in those provinces.  Maybe then some of these commissions will begin to reflect what the Anglican Churches believe, rather than the opinion of a few rich white Euro-Americans.

May God bless the good Archbishop for standing up for the faith.
TJ

[10] Posted by tjmcmahon on 10-03-2007 at 04:42 PM

It’s time people realized that the good reasons for disassociating with TEC may also apply to England, Ireland and Scotland.  When there is no leadership in either numbers or in faithful witness, there’s not much left.  Thomas Merton was particularly damning in his suppositions:

“Prayer is attractive enough when it is considered in a context of good food, and sunny joyous country churches, and the green English countryside.  And, as a matter of fact, the Church of England means all this.  It is a class religion, th cult of a special society and group, not even of a whole nation, but of the ruling minority in a nation.  That is the principle basis for its rather strong coherence up to now.  There is certainly not much doctrinal unity, much less a mystical bond between people many of whom have even ceased to believe in grace or Sacraments.  The thing that holds them together is the powerful attraction of their own social tradition, and the stubborn tenacity with which they cling to certain social standards and customs, more or less for their own sake.  The Church of England depends for its existence, almost entirely on the solidarity and conservativism of the English ruling class.  Its strength is not in anything supernatural, but in the strong social and racial instincts which bind the members of this caste together; and the English cling to their Church the way they cling to their King and to their old schools: because of a big, vague, sweet complex of subjective dispositions regarding the English countryside, old castles and cottages, games of cricket in the long summer afternoons, tea-parties on the Thames, croquet, roast-beef, pipe-smoking, the Christmas panto, Punch and the London Times and all those other things the mere thought of which produces a warm and inexpressible ache in the English heart.”
...
“It is a terrible thing to think of the grace that is wasted in the world, and of the people that are lost.  Perhaps one explanation for the sterility and inefficacy of Anglicanism in the moral order is, besides its lack of vital contact with the Mystical Body of the True Church, the social injustice and the class oppression on which it is based: for, since it is mostly a class religion, it contracts the guilt of the class from which it is inseperable....” _The Seven Story Mountain_.

The older and deeper tradition that evangelized the British Isles was and remains, IMHO, the real spiritual strength of Christianity in those parts.  It is that Holy Tradition that +++Williams once cited when he spoke of what moves him most deeply.  It is from that fount that Evelyn Underhill drew her fire.  The churches of Jerusalem, Antioch, Alexandria, and Constantinople have remained in communion and hold up to us 2000 years of apostolic and eucharistic fellowship...not to mention the seven Ecumenical Councils.  When the Church of Rome’s emissaries came to the British Isles, they met peoples grounded in five centuries of Christian worship.

[11] Posted by Pernoctate on 10-03-2007 at 06:19 PM

If you have friends who don’t normally check in with Stand Firm or Titus One Nine, etc—send them a link to this statement of the facts by Archbishop Anis.  This is as good as it gets—a man sent from God to speak the truth about TEC.  Let’s get the word out.

Thanks for posting this, Jackie.

[12] Posted by hanks on 10-03-2007 at 08:22 PM

Someone said during the HOB meeting after +Anis spoke that what he said was only with the ABC’s prior knowledge. Here he was silenced presumably without his prior knowledge.  The ABC’s reponse should tell us wiether these assumptions/conclusions were well founded

[13] Posted by Paul PA on 10-03-2007 at 08:59 PM

Bishop Mouneer needs our prayers - praise to God for a holy man who’s willing to point out the glaring inconsistencies betw what was requested and what was delivered; and for protection from attacks by the Enemy, spiritual or temporal.

[14] Posted by maineiac on 10-03-2007 at 09:22 PM

WOW!!!!!!! What a scathing indictment of the Church of England by a former Episcopalian--Trappist monk, Thomas Merton. Someone should send a copy to the HOB, Great Britain’s bishops, +Katherine, and to ++ Rowan and ask them to respond to it. Maybe this document could be used to the advantage of the orthodox in the Anglican Communion.

It sure is something I hope to refute by my own faith stance. But then, I would be labeled extreme. Well, that is why I am an Anglo-Catholic. And many in the GS are, or are devout Evangelicals/Charismatics. It seems the liberal/broad church have a soul-problem--either hot or cold, but lukewarm ,and I will spew you out of my mouth--Revelation. PITY!!!

[15] Posted by Forever Anglican on 10-03-2007 at 10:00 PM

Clear and precise! Concensus or no....JSC getting a jump or no....all we need are more Bishops/Primates to stand up and tell it like it really is and be clear and precise just like +++Anis! Great- Great response. Praise be to God Almighty.
Thank you Jesus.

[16] Posted by One Day Closer on 10-03-2007 at 10:32 PM

Amen!  I am so thankful to hear a courageous voice speak the truth so boldly.  Bless you!

[17] Posted by Spencer on 10-04-2007 at 06:10 AM

Looks like someone is trying to put ++Anis in an “awfully small box” and throw away the key.

the snarkster

[18] Posted by the snarkster on 10-04-2007 at 08:45 AM

How many Primates does it take to start a new Anglican Communion, which eventually would reach around the world.  ONE - and I’ll bet we will have more.......it is happening.....right before our eyes.....thank you Lord....

[19] Posted by Dee in Iowa on 10-04-2007 at 11:03 AM

Jackie, this is a terrific item—I’m a great fan of ++Mouneer—but it might help those who scan over the headlines to indicate in the header that this article is ++Mouneer‘s assessment and comment on the JSC report, rather than the JSC commentary itself.

Pray for the Primates.

[20] Posted by Craig Goodrich on 10-04-2007 at 12:03 PM

Craig,
The headline was used as that is how Archbishop Anis titled it in his email.  For clarity, I moved his title to the body of the document and added your suggestion.  Hope this helps.

[21] Posted by Jackie on 10-04-2007 at 12:22 PM

Alas! Clarity! No double-mindedness!

[22] Posted by bygrace on 10-04-2007 at 12:53 PM

I still think that the ABofC hasn’t realised that he will definitely split the communion, including the Church of England, if he continues to hang on the TEC

Whereas, if he tells TEC that they have to go, then he will preserve the rest of the communion and I guess that TEC will decide to conform… After all they have nowhere else to go!

[23] Posted by Zwingli on 10-04-2007 at 04:15 PM

TEC will never decide to conform. They are in the control and the thrall of the revisionists. ABC must make a choice, an AC without TEC or an AC without the Global South.

[24] Posted by BillS on 10-04-2007 at 04:22 PM

Now THAT’s a minority report.  That’s what I’m talkin’ about.

[25] Posted by Cindy T. in TX on 10-04-2007 at 05:26 PM

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.