Posted on 06/14/2003 2:28:43 PM PDT by altura
James M. Stanton: Confirmation would deepen divisions, likely cause rupture 06/14/2003
By JAMES M. STANTON / Special Contributor to The Dallas Morning News
Ten bishops have been elected recently by Episcopal dioceses in the United States. Generally, these events do not draw more than local attention in the press. But the election of the Rev. Canon V. Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire has drawn worldwide attention.
The reason: Canon Robinson lives openly in a homosexual relationship.
Individual dioceses in the United States may elect their own bishops. These elections must, however, be confirmed in a two-step process by all the other dioceses in the country, just over 100 in all, and also by the bishops who head these dioceses. That's because bishops are ordained for the whole church, not just for a diocese. The 10 recently elected will come before the General Convention, acting on behalf of the church, in Minneapolis in July. The outcome is an open question.
Canon Robinson's confirmation and eventual consecration would deepen already existing divisions in the Episcopal Church and likely occasion a rupture in the worldwide Anglican Communion. The reason for this is simple:
• The teaching of the apostles, found in the New Testament, limits sexual intimacy to a man and a woman bound in holy matrimony.
• A bishop is ordained to uphold and continue the apostles' teaching – as the Prayer Book says, "to be one with the apostles."
• As a bishop, Canon Robinson would be a living contradiction of the apostles' teaching.
There are voices that propose a change in the apostolic teaching, or even reject it. At the 1998 Lambeth Conference of Bishops (which included more than 800 bishops worldwide), 88 percent reaffirmed the historic teaching, and the Most Rev. Rowan Williams, the new archbishop of Canterbury, has said that this action reflects the mind of the church. Perhaps no other social issue has received as much attention, study and debate in the church. And yet the apostolic position remains the official position of this church.
The confirmation of Canon Robinson would in effect change church teaching. Significantly, this change would not have come about by a deliberate and informed action having to do with the substance of our teaching on sexuality, but by the unilateral action of a single diocese with approval by a single branch of a communion that understands itself to be both catholic and apostolic. Such an action would certainly undermine the unity and witness of the communion.
And some have argued that it would be an illegitimate use of the Episcopal Church's power. Its own constitution declares the Episcopal Church to be a "constituent member of the Anglican Communion ... upholding the historic Faith and Order" of that communion. As such, confirmation would be unconstitutional.
A dispute with the Diocese of New Westminster in the Anglican Church of Canada has already occasioned division in the communion. That diocese, acting unilaterally, issued rites for the blessing of same-sex unions. Archbishop Williams responded, "In taking this action and ignoring the considerable reservations of the church ... the diocese has gone significantly further than the teaching of the church or pastoral concern can justify." He added, "I very much regret the inevitable tension and division that will result from this development." Thirteen Canadian bishops have declared that a state of impaired communion now exists with that diocese, and a growing number of archbishops from the communion have done so as well. (At this writing, 16 of 38!)
One can only imagine the response of the rest of the church to the Episcopal Church if the election of Canon Robinson is confirmed.
The Anglican Church worldwide, and the Episcopal Church in the United States, have repeatedly asserted the need to extend pastoral care and welcome to all people, including persons of homosexual orientation. This, too, is a part of the apostolic teaching. But the recent steps taken by New Westminster and New Hampshire are divisive and confront the whole Anglican Church with the question of its faithfulness to its own sense of vocation and order. On this basis, I oppose both actions. I stand with my colleagues worldwide.
Some will say the direction taken by New Hampshire is the leading of the Holy Spirit in a new age. But the apostles' teaching is that the Spirit leads to unity with God and one another, not to greater division. And nowhere is the Holy Spirit seen in the New Testament to contradict God's revelation in prior ages.
Some will say the growing conflict is about justice and compassion. But without faithfulness to the apostles' teaching – the church's charter – only disorder will be the result. And disorder never leads to either justice or compassion.
Episcopal Bishop James M. Stanton, 56, of the Dallas Diocese, has had a formidable role in the worldwide Anglican Communion arguing against same-sex unions.
I was not surprised at all when I heard he had been made a Bishop. He came out of a more conservative Protestant denomination (can't remember which one he said it was), originally, and converted to Episcopalianism after having been a minister in his earlier denomination. "Father Jim" as we knew him is top-notch. He even volunteered to join the Army Reserves as a military chaplain when he was in our parish. He has a tough row to hoe as a Bishop in the leftwing Episcopal church. I know he is fighting the good fight, and I wish him every success. I wish he could become Presiding Bishop!
I did not know this, but, given the strong pressures toward leftism throughout the Episcopal hierarchy, I am not surprised that he suffered a lot of stress. I am glad he is back at work, now.
Once, when he was our priest, he gave a sermon on homosexuality in which, if I remember correctly, he said the practice was sinful, but that there are many sins, and we are all sinful, which is certainly true. I was not surprised when he left our church, disappointed but not surprised. He was clearly very gifted and was destined for a big future.
I just remembered what a friend in the church told me about a brief conversation she had with him just before he left. She said she hoped he would be PB one day, and he chuckled and said, "Don't wish that on me." One of the good guys.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.