Anglican Church At Crossroads Over Gay Bishop

The Bahama Journal ^ | 1/16/2007 | Rogan M. Smith, Bahama Journal

[sionnsar]

The Anglican Church is still at a "crossroads" and could split as the bitter debate rages on about how to resolve the issue of ordaining homosexual clergy, according to Archbishop Drexel Gomez.

 

 Anglican Archbishop Drexel Gomez speaks with reporters on Monday.

On Monday, Archbishop Gomez said the consecration of a practicing homosexual in the United States three years ago is still threatening to tear the church apart.

He was speaking during a press conference at the Anglican Diocese in Nassau.

Anglican leaders from around the globe are in the capital this week to try and heal the rifts caused by the appointment of gay bishop, Gene Robinson.

Mr. Robinson’s appointment as bishop of New Hampshire brought an angry reaction from conservatives and religious leaders in the US and all over the world who warned that the church could split.

Archbishop Gomez was appointed late last year by the Archbishop of Canterbury Dr. Rowan Williams to head an Anglican Covenant to examine the fallout in the Anglican Communion.

The archbishop said the Covenant Design Group (CDG) will examine ways in which the member churches in the Anglican Communion could meet as member churches of the worldwide communion and agree to be committed and accountable to one other.

"This is a pivotal moment for the Anglican Communion and that’s why the Archbishop has appointed this group because we cannot continue to drift along as we have been doing, and we’ve had one crisis over homosexuality," he said.

"There is a possibility that we could be faced with another crisis shortly in the communion that will emanate from a group in Australia. There’s a group there that is talking about having lay people presiding at the Eucharist. That’s becoming an issue that’s being talked about more and more and if it does it will present the communion with a serious theological and pastoral issue. Our problem in the communion today is we have no existing mechanism for automatically dealing with these issues."

Archbishop Gomez said the decision to consecrate a gay bishop has brought with it dire consequences.

"We have already lost some members in the United States. I think we have lost some in England, but the greatest threat is North America and Canada unquestionably," he said.

"Our hope is that we can avoid a split, because even if we end up with two kinds of subgroups the question is how do they relate to one another?"

Archbishop Gomez said many leaders have suggested that the Anglican Church devise a model that would allow the church to make accommodations for subgroups, however it has not been explored as yet.

The Archbishop said his position is very clear about where he stands on the homosexuality issue.

"My position is that God, in his wisdom, determined that the human race is made up of male and female persons and that they complement each other. The teaching of the Bible is the coming together of man and woman [and that] constitutes marriage in the biblical pattern. Any other provision will be contrary to the biblical tradition," he said.

The Anglican Church has traditionally tolerated a wide spectrum of beliefs, and its communion includes about 80 million people worldwide.

Archbishop Gomez said theologians continue to press for the church to accept marriage between homosexuals. They want the church to change its biblical premise that only a man and woman can be married. Instead they want the church to accept that any two people who love one another may marry.

"I couldn’t accept that because it is contrary to the teaching of scripture. What is interesting is that no one disputes that in every instance in the Bible in which sexuality is mentioned, homosexual practice is always a negative. It’s never commended in the Bible and even those who are trying to change the anthropology have to admit that the text does not support it. So, they find ways of reinterpreting the text," he said.

"Scholars will always find some linguistic way of getting behind the text to make it imply something else."

[sionnsar]

Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams.

FReepmail sionnsar if you want on or off this moderately high-volume ping list (typically 3-9 pings/day).
This list is pinged by sionnsar, Huber and newheart.

Resource for Traditional Anglicans: http://trad-anglican.faithweb.com
More Anglican articles here.

Humor: The Anglican Blue (by Huber)

Speak the truth in love. Eph 4:15

[kalee]

"Our hope is that we can avoid a split, because even if we end up with two kinds of subgroups the question is how do they relate to one another?"


They can't.

[LiteKeeper]

Tell it like it is, Bishop!

[sionnsar]

I'm a chronicler here, not a pundit, but I see three groups going forward from here.

First are the "reappraisers." 'Nuff has been said here already.

Next two are the traditional elements of the "Elizabethan Compromise", which I'll loosely call the "Evangelical" wing (most of the wwAC, including Africa), and the "Anglo-Catholic" wing (most of the Continuum, with elements elsewhere).

These two basic groups, with their rather separate origins, will not reunite.

[Kolokotronis]

" Next two are the traditional elements of the "Elizabethan Compromise", which I'll loosely call the "Evangelical" wing (most of the wwAC, including Africa), and the "Anglo-Catholic" wing (most of the Continuum, with elements elsewhere).

These two basic groups, with their rather separate origins, will not reunite."

I'll bet the evangelicals survive in some communion with Africa et al, and the Anglo-Catholics end up in Rome and/or Orthodoxy.

[Claud]

I'll bet the evangelicals survive in some communion with Africa et al, and the Anglo-Catholics end up in Rome and/or Orthodoxy.

Indeed. I am guessing that many Anglo-Catholics who grew up on the Branch Theory feel somewhat uncomfortable out there as independent units in communion with hardly anyone.

So sionnsar, do you think the Elizabethan Compromise is essentially dead in the water from here on out?

[sionnsar]

I'm not a pundit but yes, I think it is dead.

The best example of reunification across the spectrum is the APA/REC merger, which has apparently stalled. There is an element of the REC, slogan "No way APA," very opposed to it. (I am also not sure how well the APA will take to the new REC prayer book.)

I also look to my discussions with my bishop -- the only talks going on of which I am aware are with similar Anglo-Catholic provinces. There are none with the Evangelicals. And none at all also with the world-wide Anglican Communion because, as K points out, being in communion with them puts us in communion with TEC and its ilk. (In that sense at least the Continuing churches have a take on communion similar to the Orthodox.)

I don't know about "grew up on the Branch Theory," but I would bet that there are few ex-Episcopalians, now Anglicans, who are happy being "independent units." It's just not natural to us, as my discussions with various Anglican laity in other provinces reveal. (And some clergy too, I will note.) If there were some way to organize these elements to put pressure on the episcopate to resolve their differences, we might see more reunifications.

Long-term is really hard to evaluate, K. If the reunifications do not occur we will probably continue on, but it will be dicey. My own church has grown, despite being rather like the Orthodox in our lack of evangelization (and planted on rather stony soil in the second least churched state in the U.S.), but slowly. Our province is growing too -- our biggest impediment to church-planting is insufficient clergy, but our seminary is not graduating very much above replacement levels for retiring clergy (it could, but it's been maintaining its high standards -- the dropout rate is high).

I do not know what's happening in the provinces without seminaries. I suspect that in time they will wither and die; the influx of fleeing Episcopalians that has sustained these churches is effectively over. Some of them will come over to other Anglican provinces (I am seeing this happen already) -- which would be a reunification of sorts.

But I also see some slow individual attrition to Rome and to Orthodoxy, as K notes. (K will appreciate that the latter cases were to the local Greek Orthodox church, and the former was not a cradle Episcopalian to begin with.) But I don't foresee mass moves in this regard.