Posted on 07/21/2005 2:20:34 PM PDT by sionnsar
Connecticut Episcopal Obergruppenfuhrer Andrew Smith stomps on the corpse of the Anglican Communion:
Plans for an international Panel of Reference to investigate divisions between traditionalists and liberals will not affect a key American diocese. The Archbishop of Canterbury’s Panel of Reference has been warned that it will play no role in the battle for alternate Episcopal oversight (AEO) in the diocese of Connecticut, a spokesman for Bishop Andrew Smith told The Church of England Newspaper.
Bishop Smith’s rejection of a mediating roll for the Panel in one of the flashpoints of division within the Communion, demonstrates its irrelevance, critics charge. Liberal American and Canadian bishops who have expressed willingness to work with the Panel have largely granted AEO to dissident parishes, while bishops who so far have refused AEO, will ignore the Panel with impunity, they claim. Bishop Smith Bishop inhibited the Rev Mark Hansen, rector of St John’s, Bristol, Connecticut, for failing to abide by the diocese’s sabbatical guidelines -- and by doing so, the diocese claims, pastorally neglecting his congregation. On the morning of July 13, Bishop Smith, accompanied by lawyers and locksmiths, served notice on the parish secretary that Dr Hansen -- a staunch opponent of Bishop Smith over his support for Gene Robinson -- had been inhibited and would be deposed in six months unless he recanted. The bishop ordered the locks changed and a security guard maintains a 24-hour vigil at the parish.
Karin Hamilton, a spokesman for the diocese, tells us Bishop Smith has made no "mention of the Panel of Reference" and does not envision a roll for it in the present conflict as he wishes to resolve the present dispute "domestically".
This was to be expected as I pointed out here. Even though the affected parishes have appealed to it, participation with the Panel of Reference is entirely voluntary; nothing demands Smith to let the P of R in. But it brings up two questions.
What are you going to do about it, Frank? Assuming you get invited to the next primates meeting, how are you going to explain the fact that one of your bishops has just spit on the rest of the Anglican world? Why shouldn't Anglican primates throw you out of the meeting as soon as you get there? It's called leadership; if I were you and I truly wanted to remain an Anglican, I would get on the phone to Hartford yesterday and lean on Smith hard. Failing that, I would publicly put as much distance between myself and Andrew Smith as I possibly could. Smitty's killing you, Frank.
Second question, of course, is what are you going to do about it, Anglican conservatives? You've got a clear case of an American Anglican who couldn't care less what the Anglican Communion says or does about anything. Are any of you, particularly any of you bishops of the Network, going to publicly demand that Smith back down? If he doesn't, are any of you willing to go into Connecticut and assume oversight of the six dissident parishes, the canons be damned? Are any of you willing to laugh to scorn the inevitable presentment charges?
And if you're not willing to do any of this, if you want to wait and let the process work itself out, why should any of us remain Anglicans at all?
Traditional Anglican ping, continued in memory of its founder Arlin Adams. Do I recall correctly you have something that weighs on on this issue?
Plans for an international Panel of Reference to investigate divisions between traditionalists and liberals will not affect a key American diocese. The Archbishop of Canterbury’s Panel of Reference has been warned that it will play no role in the battle for alternate Episcopal oversight (AEO) in the diocese of Connecticut, a spokesman for Bishop Andrew Smith told The Church of England Newspaper.
Bishop Smith’s rejection of a mediating roll for the Panel in one of the flashpoints of division within the Communion, demonstrates its irrelevance, critics charge. Liberal American and Canadian bishops who have expressed willingness to work with the Panel have largely granted AEO to dissident parishes, while bishops who so far have refused AEO, will ignore the Panel with impunity, they claim. Bishop Smith Bishop inhibited the Rev Mark Hansen, rector of St John’s, Bristol, Connecticut, for failing to abide by the diocese’s sabbatical guidelines – and by doing so, the diocese claims, pastorally neglecting his congregation. On the morning of July 13, Bishop Smith, accompanied by lawyers and locksmiths, served notice on the parish secretary that Dr Hansen – a staunch opponent of Bishop Smith over his support for Gene Robinson – had been inhibited and would be deposed in six months unless he recanted. The bishop ordered the locks changed and a security guard maintains a 24-hour vigil at the parish.
Earlier, on March 29 Bishop Smith gave Dr Hansen and five other priests – known colloquially as the Connecticut Six – until April 15 to recant of their opposition to his policies. Bishop Smith’s threat to depose priests without trial elicited sharp protest from traditionalist bishops who said his actions “amounted to an “unconscionable ecclesiastical tyranny".
Dr. Hansen told us the charges leveled against him by the diocese were “specious". While acknowledging that he had taken a sabbatical with the blessings of his vestry, he contested Bishop Smith’s claim that the parish had been pastorally neglected, noting that two retired clergy, the parish deacon, and the rector of a neighboring parish were filling in during his absence. He also stated that he met with the suffragan bishop of Connecticut on July 1 to discuss his sabbatical. Dr. Hansen also rejected Bishop Smith’s claim that his whereabouts were unknown, saying he continued to reside in the parish rectory and his telephone was in working order. Dr. Hansen told us that on April 12, attorneys for the Ct Six wrote to the diocese “beseeching Bishop Smith that he refer our differences to the Panel of Reference". No response to the request has been made as of our going to press.
Karin Hamilton, a spokesman for the diocese, tells us Bishop Smith has made no “mention of the Panel of Reference” and does not envision a roll for it in the present conflict as he wishes to resolve the present dispute “domestically".
–The Church of England Newspaper
"Mediating roll ?"
"Ich bin ein Berliner" comes to mind.
Can't say why, precisely...
You don't have to go any further than Subject lines on FR to see worse...
It would have been more appropriate for Clinton.
"Ich bin ein Hamburger...and I'd like a little cherry pie on the side, please. Heh heh."
It would have been more appropriate for Clinton.
"Ich bin ein Hamburger...and I'd like a little cherry pie on the side, please. Heh heh."
The problem here is that Pres. Bp. Griswold would have to act; he'd have to speak clearly and forcefully to Bp. Smith and actually tell him to obey an authority beyond his own diocese. And he's very likely not going to do that.
Actually, a "Berliner" is a pastry, even in Berlin.
The letter to the parish by the rector was not a sabbatical it was a letter of resignation. It clearly says he was not coming back.
http://www.ctdiocese.org/news/march15letterbristol.pdf
When it was said he was on a sabbatical, I was mislead into believing that the Rector had taken a leave and intended to return. That is not the case according to this letter.
If the rector leaves in a CT diocese, the normal process is the appointment of a search committee which begins the work of selecting a new rector. This process is done in connection with the Diocese.
In as much as nothing was done along the lines of establishing a search committee, it appears that this parish would be with a supply priest indefinitely.
As much as I disagree with Smith and believe he is more than capable of abusing his power, after reading that letter I liniked to, I am not as shocked about this. Smith did have an obligation to step in even though he did overreact.
I understand that it is possible to take a sabbatical as part of the final days of ones posistion.
Here is the problem. It seems as if Smith was not told the rector was leaving, only that he was on sabbatical. This leaves the impression that the Priest is returning.
At some point someone faxes the letter of resignation to Smith. He is under the impression that the Rector is returning but finds he was not told their is a vacancy.
What does he do? It is his responsibility to see that a parish takes the necessary steps to fill the posistion. It is also the vestries responsibility to provide notice to the diocese that the rector has left. In short, Smith has an obligation to the members of a parish who have not uphold their responsibility and may be misleading him.
It looks to me like this parish was doing the dardenest to avoid beginning the search process under Smith and in doing took steps that created a credibility problem.
I leave this as a second question that I am know wondering about.
The CT diocese has great health care insurance. Why did the rector need to leave to get health care?
Which is why you liked my double pun about how the "mediating roll" in the divided Anglican church made me think of "Ich bin ein Berliner".
I simply don't understand the problem. Smith is the ordinary...he is free to do within his See what he chooses to do. If he chooses to make his Diocese completely apostate, its his business.
On the other hand, there are places where people who are offended by the direction of the ECUSA (and Smith) can go that still fundamentally believe and practice orthodox Christianity.
Well, no. The effects do not stop at the borders of his diocese, same as the effects of other decisions taken within ECUSA. Your argument is much the same as is raised by the ECUSA reasserters.
"... there are places where people who are offended by the direction of the ECUSA (and Smith) can go that still fundamentally believe and practice orthodox Christianity."
Yep, just as RC women who hanker to be priests can go to ECUSA. But it's so much more fun to fight from within, to change the organization and to re-make things the way you want them to be.
This is even going on now in the East. Imbued with the true Western progressive spirit of adventure and dynamism, entire Greek (I will not call them Orthodox!) parishes are installing pipe organs and pews and are even replacing olive oil lampeda with paraffin candles. Next step? GIRL ACOLYTES?
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.