I'm very grateful that Sarah Hey sent this reminder yesterday to her mailing list about the failure of the House of Bishops at the 2003 General Convention to affirm that “Holy Scripture (contains) all things necessary to salvation: so that whatsoever is not read therein, nor may be proved thereby, is not to be required of any man, that it should be believed as an article of the Faith, or be thought requisite or necessary to salvation,” as set forth in Article VI of the Articles of Religion established by the General Convention on September 12, 1801."

Sarah writes:

During all the chaos of General Convention 2003, one resolution was quite useful. It was resolution B001 and was an attempt to leave the convention with an affirmation of what we as Episcopalians believe.

Interestingly enough, it failed to pass. But . . . there was a roll call vote, and so we have on the record who voted for the resolution, and who voted against. Some have said that this was the most important action of that General Convention.

Sarah suggests that you:

Read the resolution below (follow the link) and see what you think about it -- as well as who voted for and against it. Follow this link to the complete message in Sarah's email archives.

Shortly after the 2003 General Convention, The Rev. Jeff Black wrote an revealing article explaining the significance of the failed B001. Closing his article, Jeff wrote:

Beyond the coldness, something deeper was revealed - a serious breach of personal integrity. These Bishops require whoever wishes to be ordained by them to swear something. In fact each ordinand must say, "I solemnly declare that I do believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testament contain all things necessary for salvation." If you don't swear that, you don't get the job. Think of the hypocrisy of refusing personally to affirm what you require your subordinates to swear!

To the Bishops who voted against this resolution: I am a priest of no especial repute, having served for 28 years, so I have no position from which to command your attention or to compel your agreement. But as a brother in Christ, I tell you that you have deeply insulted your office, that I believe you owe repentance to God and an apology to the entire church. You have, by your action, forfeited any authority over me.

Follow this link to Fr. Black's full article.

1 Comment • Print-friendly • Print-friendly w/comments • Share on Facebook

Comments:

So glad you put this up, Andy. I agree that it was the defining action of GC 2003—more revealing of what was under the water in the iceberg of sexuality issues that exploded there. I had never read Fr. Black’s letter though, and it so poignantly expresses the deep heart ache that he and so many others felt over this ASTONISHING rejection of the apostolic faith by those who were supposed to be its GUARDIANS! But there it was—and there it still is—PROOF of the depth of the problems in the Episcopal Church. Both Kentucky bishops, (both now nominees for Presiding Bishop), were among those rejecting B001 (actually I think only two of the 7 nominees signed it-Parsley and Jenkins). Thus the aftershock of B001 continues in those of us watching them sell themselves as candidates for the highest position of leadership in our denomination! One would not believe any of this if not actually watching it unfold! So onward to Columbus they go.

[1] Posted by BettyLee Payne on 05-26-2006 at 07:20 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.