Tuesday, February 14, 2012

Welcome to Stand Firm!

Want to advertise on Stand Firm? Click here for rates and info

Live Blog: Bishop Michael Ingham’s Address to the Plenary Session of the Executive Council

Saturday, March 3, 2007 • 7:41 pm

The following is Bishop Michael Ingham’s address to the plenary session of the Executive Council of the Episcopal Church. I just live blogged it about half an hour ago so please bear in mind…it’s live not memorex.

+Ingham: You are the light to the Gentiles…


Bishop Michael Ingham reporting on our relationship with Canada

MI: Thank you your grace. Grace is a name applied usually to females but in our Anglican churches it has only been applied to men until you came along. And that is wonderful.

Applause

I will tell my own synod what a joy it is to be in a church led largely by women.

In our country, as in yours, we are also struggling with sexuality issues. And like you we have had to develop alternative schemes of care for those who disagree with the positions we have taken on sexuality, although we have not yet made all the decisions we need to make. I believe we will do this at our Synod this year.

We developed a document called: Shared Episcopal Ministry. In this document, we call for the care of all those who feel themselves to be minorities in the national church. The wording speaks of “all” minorities. The wording is important. The Canadian position therefore differs from the primates who have envisioned the care of only “certain” minorities. It seems to us that many will feel disadvantaged and we must care for “all” minorities.

So there are some who are in the minority because of traditional convictions and they must be cared for.

But it is also clear that there are other people, namely sexual minorities, who also need the care and pastoral concern of the church.

As we formulate our response to the Primates, it is important for both of our churches to say to the rest of the Communion that we must be even handed and not selective.

I think you know that our two churches, while we are very different, are being drawn close together by current events. 

There is a wonderful photo on the front of the Anglican Journal of ++Andrew and ++KJS standing together in Cuba. It is a great photo. It says many things.  But what it seems to portray is our two churches in friendly relationship doing something good in communion, advancing the cause of equality and the fullness of the gospel. We need not forget in the current climate that there are millions of Anglicans around the world who look to us, to our churches, for hope in dark times.

Part of the post Tanzania difficulty is that it feels like our two churches are being forced toward a divisive question: whether we will choose to belong to the Anglican Communion or to choose our gay and lesbian members. That is the wrong question.

One of the things I hope Executive Council can do and your HOB will do is to refocus and reframe the question. I do not see that we need to choose between belonging to the church and protecting and caring for church members. That is not a gospel choice nor is that orthodoxy. Orthodoxy is a wide river not a narrow stream. The genius of orthodoxy is that it has provided space and boundaries for many in different positions to come together and that is not just the genius of Anglican orthodoxy, but it is the genius of the entire Christian tradition.

We are also being forced to choose between conformity and autonomy. This is also a false choice. The Anglican Communion is interdependent. Interdependence is a different matter altogether and it does not force these choices

The draft covenant seeks to move the Anglican Communion from a confederal system where authority is dispersed to a more centralized federalism. This sort of federalism makes the interdependence that characterizes confederation impossible. If this choice is accepted and made, then we will no longer have interdependence in the Anglican Communion.

It seems to me that tradition is very much on the side of those who wish to maintain con-federalism. The orthodoxy here is to preserve the status quo.

Your response to these developments at this meeting and in the HOB and in your meeting in June, all of which take place before the Canadian Synod, will have a huge impact on Canada.

Your response will have not just an impact in Africa but in Canada and England and other provinces that do not wish to be forced into these false dichotomies that are being pushed by political agendas that have nothing to do with the gospel.

I am impressed with your advocacy for the MGDs and your consistent advocacy for mission and your advocacy of Jesus Christ in your tireless efforts for the unfortunate.

You may not know this about yourself but you are a light to the gentiles.
(Standing Ovation)


22 Comments • Print-friendlyPrint-friendly w/commentsShare on Facebook
Comments:

Enter by the narrow gate?

[1] Posted by Harry Edmon on 03-03-2007 at 07:18 PM • top

The good bishop may think his church is being asked the wrong question but he, too, will find out that matters nxt to nothing with the Primates.  They want answers to the questions they are asking, not those possibly asked by the North Americans.  And they have time limits on receiving the answers.
As far as Orthodoxy goes, yes it does provide some space, but it has never provided enough space to repudiate the clear meaning of Holy Scripture.  To think otherwise is to fall under the sway of the the Adversary.

[2] Posted by David+ on 03-03-2007 at 07:20 PM • top

“One of the things I hope Executive Council can do and your HOB will do is to refocus and reframe the question. “

Attention K-Mart Shoppers: Blue Light Special now going on in Aisle D (or is that Aisle B, I’m sorry, is that Aisle E, wait, no wait, it could be Aisle C - sorry folks, we heard there was a Blue Light Special going on but we have no idea what Aisle it’s in because it would mean you’d have to choose to leave the Aisle you’re in and go to another Aisle, leaving behind the Aisle you are in right now, which is not fair to you or the Aisle your in, or were in until you went off to find the Blue Light Special which is, of course, now cancelled).

bb

[3] Posted by BabyBlue on 03-03-2007 at 07:23 PM • top

I can’t wait to see Bishop Ingham explain this to the primates come Canada’s turn to address it.

[4] Posted by paddy on 03-03-2007 at 07:26 PM • top

What is wrong with these people?

[5] Posted by DietofWorms on 03-03-2007 at 08:10 PM • top

Exactly, Harry!
“Orthodoxy is a wide river not a narrow stream. ” +Ingham

“Broad is the path that leads to destruction, and many are they who travel on it.  Narrow indeed is the gate that leads to life, and few are they who find it.”  Jesus

[6] Posted by Milton on 03-03-2007 at 08:41 PM • top

<blockquote>The orthodoxy here is to preserve the status quo.
<\blockquote>

I think he has something there.  So, 2000 years of tradition do m,ean something - or NOT!

[7] Posted by Wilkie on 03-03-2007 at 08:45 PM • top

Oops - bad blocquote, sorry.

[8] Posted by Wilkie on 03-03-2007 at 08:47 PM • top

Heaven help us! Now they’re reinventing the meaning of orthodoxy, blurring any distinction between the issues! So now the innovators are orthodox? And the orthodox are orthodox? We’re all orthodox?

Yeah, that’s it!

Problems? We don’t have no problems. We don’t need no stinkin’ problems!

[9] Posted by Antique on 03-03-2007 at 08:55 PM • top

I will tell my own synod what a joy it is to be in a church led largely by women.

When is the movie going to be broadcast on Lifetimewink

[10] Posted by Piedmont on 03-03-2007 at 08:58 PM • top

Und ve will taken caren ob minorities….Ja! ve vill!!!!!  Ourselves! und da glorious future ve hab vaiting for du all!!

[11] Posted by dwstroudmd+ on 03-03-2007 at 09:13 PM • top

He’s right…orthodoxy is a wide stream.

Heterodoxy is the narrow stream…

it’s called micturation…

unfortunately we’ve been on the receiving end for some time now.

I am impressed with your advocacy for the MGDs…

Oh please tell me that’s what he said and it’s not a liveblog typo, it would help make so much more sense of the rest of his address and really help the job market in the Dio of Milwaukee.

Sorry…it’s been a long week.

[12] Posted by Rom 1:16 on 03-03-2007 at 09:34 PM • top

advocacy of MGD? Now they’ve really gone over the edge!

[13] Posted by justin on 03-03-2007 at 10:00 PM • top

A relief pitcher, Mel Famey, had a serious drinking problem, to the point that he was guzzling beer in the dugout. Because he was so important to the team, however, the manager had no choice but to ignore it. Finally, in the last big game of the season, Mel Famey was brought in with the bases loaded and the score tied in the bottom of the ninth, drunk as a skunk. Indeed, he was skunked – throwing four straight balls to walk in the winning run. As the jubilant winning team made its way off the field, one of the players glanced into their opponents’ now empty dugout and was dismayed to see all the empty beer cans. “What in the world?” he said, shaking his head.

“Oh,” replied a teammate, “that’s the beer that made Mel Famey walk us.”

Sorry…couldn’t resist!

[14] Posted by Lori on 03-03-2007 at 10:18 PM • top

The reference to MGD makes me wonder if he has a clue as to what the initials stand for. More alphabet soup.

[15] Posted by Gulfstream on 03-03-2007 at 10:18 PM • top

Justin is shocked:

advocacy of MGD? Now they’ve really gone over the edge!

Nah.  Trudeau managed to wreck even the once-marvelous Canadian brewing industry, and clueless moderns like Ingham have no idea any more of the works of high (as it were) art that Labatt and Molson once produced.  What do you expect?

[Long sigh for yet another mark of civilization now erased.]

[16] Posted by Craig Goodrich on 03-03-2007 at 10:57 PM • top

Right from the very start.  I thought first, “Oh, brother”, as I read his opening Rotary Club referral to the PB.  I didn’t want to read a thing more.
But then I went back and read it again and realized that RIGHT HERE is the Michael Ingham difficulty, especially as applied to his interpretive spin of scripture :

“MI: Thank you your grace. Grace is a name applied usually to females but in our Anglican churches it has only been applied to men until you came along. And that is wonderful.”

I don’t have time to spell it out right now.  See if you see what I see.

[17] Posted by Rob Eaton+ on 03-03-2007 at 11:50 PM • top

Rob Eaton+

I did see that but all the comments and thoughts I had would have sent me to the minors.  I wonder if Ingham knows what he said and how it reads.  And how did Matt keep typing after hearing it?  I would have choked trying to keep from laughing.

[18] Posted by Rom 1:16 on 03-04-2007 at 12:06 AM • top

Unless I am mistaken, no mention of God, 1 mention of Jesus, and apparently the very silly transference of an acclamation from the Nunc Dimittis concerning the fulfilment of God’s promise of salvation in Jesus, to the PB. ‘A light to lighten the Gentiles’ indeed!

[19] Posted by driver8 on 03-04-2007 at 03:05 AM • top

Well, Rob+, I have not been given “grace” to see yet what gave you a chuckle, though I can only imagine +MI’s reaction when he is questioned why we should promote Miller Genuine Draft (MGD)!  Perhaps on this point I have been granted the indulgence of Invincible Ignorance!

[20] Posted by Milton on 03-04-2007 at 08:37 AM • top

Yes Milton (and ors)...how strange Bp Ingham feels compelled to correct scripture AND JESUS that it and He got it wrong about wide and narrow implications for the way to Life, both here and hereafter.
I suppose for them it makes their argument on all sorts of topics so much easier to defend and argue, but at the sdame time the same word has warnings about doing this sort of thing, but maybe Bp Ingham doesn’t know that because he doesn’t seem to have read it.

[21] Posted by Brian (Aussie) on 03-04-2007 at 06:05 PM • top

Is it just me, or is anyone else amazed that lately so much of what is said by the reappraisers—be they Bishops, clergy or laymen—is almost immediately refuted by the Scripture already scheduled to be read from the lectionary?  Makes me wonder what they think when they read or hear it…“Hmmmmm, no, Jesus surely couldn’t be talking to ME!!!  He must mean something else…”

[22] Posted by Lori on 03-04-2007 at 06:16 PM • 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.