Episcopal Church 77th General Convention News Thread

According to the GC website it was discharged.

 

Good points, the vast majority of the Anglican Communion is still very orthodox and on our side, especially the global south.

You make a very good point here. As Anna has mentioned before, if the conservatives/moderates/orthodox Anglicans who left TEC over the last 40 years would have stayed the course, we might be looking at a completely different church. Small amounts of Episcopalians have left the church over issues like women's ordination, women bishops, abortion, ordaining gay priests/bishops, the 1979 Prayer Book, Bishop Spong, toleration of pagan priests, and over many other issues. The far left progressives have stayed the course, while many conservatives have just given up and left. The result of this is about 20 continuing Anglican denominations that are almost completely irrelevant and divided.

Maybe i'm naive, but I don't think for a minute that the actions of this GC represent a majority of Episcopalians. Even some of the more socially liberal Episcopalians are "shell shocked" by what TEC is becoming. It's sad that such a minority was able to gain a foot hold and gain control of TEC, however, like you said, they stayed the course.

 

I know, and it's a wonderful feeling.

 

Consular,
[Sidebar: I've gotta give you credit. I think something good did happen in those "42 minutes." That and your name change seems to have brought out your respectful and compassionate side. It's good to see.]

It is difficult for the individual Episcopalian to know exactly what to do--especially when we are not part of the vestry or laity representatives to the General Convention. Though, usually the laity serves their conservative Parishes well, unless they have a hidden agenda that does not become known, until the General Convention.

I think we are all trying to prayerful assess the best action in cooperation with our Rectors.

 

^ Exactly.

 

I agree, I plan on seeing how my Rector and parish respond to all this. If the plan is to continue as everything is normal and put our head in the sand, then God help us/them. This GC was an epic disaster and i'm pretty up fed up with the whole mess. I mean this is a Church that rejected a resolution that required lay leaders to be formed as Christians!! I guess it's now ok to have lay leaders of other faiths or even no faith! After all, we must be as inclusive as possible! I mean, theoretically, a Church could employ a cross-dressing atheist to teach Sunday school...nice! I don't plan on making any rash decisions, however, the thought of putting this mess in the rear view mirror is tempting.

I just can't understand how they can say that this is where the "spirit" is guiding the Church. So, I guess the "spirit" that is guiding the majority (roughly 60+ million) of the Communion in the opposite directing is wrong and the tiny TEC is right? How about the spirit guiding the Catholic, Orthodox, and evangelicals? I guess they have the wrong "spirit" guiding them too. The leadership acts like spoiled children...

 

Does all this put any of you Episcopalians in the mind of joining the Anglican Church in North America? Or perhaps going to Rome or the Orthodox? What are your long-term reactions to this pretty much blatant attack on Christianity?

 

Leaving TEC is something that has been in the minds of most of us on here for some time now. I actually created a thread on the matter a handful of months ago. If I left TEC, I would be greatly saddened, after all, i'm relatively new to this whole Anglican thing and i'm quite fond of it. I'm also, like many on here, not the type to give up. All of this said, it appears that we may be approaching a time when being an Anglican and remaining in TEC is no longer possible. I plan on talking to my Rector and seeing the response of my parish. I'm also keeping an eye on the CoE, with the hope that they pick an Archbishop who has the guts to challenge TEC.

If I can no longer stay in TEC in good faith, then I will be looking into continuing Anglican churches (like ACNA and others) and perhaps the Orthodox Church as well. I have no plans to go to Rome.

 

It's tough. I really don't want to leave my parish. There are several good ones in this diocese, but I could see them falling like dominoes. Our bishop, of course, is voting for all this revisionist junk and talking down to us. We aren't "ready" for it yet, but he supports it for those who are. My own rector and our bishop publicly disagreed over all this revisionism recently.

Again: I love this parish, the clergy, the people, and everything about it. I love the Anglican Communion. I do not see how our parish will be allowed to continue, and I don't like living in dread of GC every three years. If I leave, it weakens the orthodox voice by one more, and it hurts a parish that is trying to do things the right way. I guess I don't know what to do.

We don't have any ACNA options nearby. If I left, I would go Catholic. Maybe. Or maybe I'll wait for ACNA to give me options.

 

Valid question.

As we've discussed before, if no orthodox Episcopal Parishes/Dioceses, had broken away; we may be in a different position. But what is done is done; and I really can't pass judgement on those who left TEC. I talked to my Rector about why some have broken away, rather than staying to fight for orthodoxy. Things go on behind the scenes that we don't always know--such as liberal Bishops pressuring Parishes to conform to and support the same-sex agendas. In good conscience, the Parishes felt they had no choice, but to break with TEC. Who could blame them?

We'll have to talk to our Rectors and see what they suggest.

I did start a new thread entitled, An Episcopal Community of Partners in Anglican Mission, which explains how Communion Partners are working for change within the Communion---but will mention it here.

Episcopal Community of Partners in Anglican Mission. You can check to see if your Bishops and Rectors are on the list; and also see the work of CP to restore orthodoxy in TEC. They address some of the controversial issues of the General Convention.

Sadly, our Bishop is not on the list of Communion Partners:
Communion Partners, Bishops

My Parish Rector is on the list of Communion Partners:
Communion Partners, Clergy

CP Bishops' Minority Report on AO49 and D008

Title IV Exposed (amicus curiae brief in the Fort Worth case)

Communion Partner Clergy Advisory Board Support for the Indianapolis Statement
"As members of the Communion Partner Clergy Advisory Board we applaud and support the statement of the Communion Partner Bishops in response to the 77th General Convention resolutions A049 and D008. Like the bishops, we have also vowed at ordination that we “believe the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments to be the Word of God, and to contain all things necessary to salvation; and I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of the Episcopal Church” (BCP, p. 526). As stated in the Bishops’ statement, the actions approved in these two resolutions at General Convention in Indianapolis are clearly contrary to sacred Scripture and to the doctrine and discipline of the Episcopal Church as we received them at our ordination."

 

Just so this thread doesn't die or end in sorrow and despair, please refer yourselves to the lovely post of the Hackney Hub where he highlights resolution C083

C083 -- The Bible ChallengeRESOLVED, that the House of Bishops concurring, That every Episcopal diocese, cathedral, church and mission shall invite their entire membership and people beyond their church to read the entire Bible in 2013.
​

Apart from the satisfaction of seeing how some people will react to certain passages in the divine scriptures (), this resolution by itself is extremely beautiful and shows that the Spirit of the Lord never fully abandons those who have been baptised, even in our greatest sin and wickedness. Praise God.

 

Good point Anna, we don't know what happened behind the scenes that would cause individual parishes or even a whole diocese to leave.

My Bishop is not on the list either, which doesn't surprise me much as he is fairly socially liberal. That said, i'm fairly certain he opposed communion without baptism and he supported the resolution that requires a "super-majority" vote in order to dissolve the ministry of a Bishop. This resolution passed and is significant because it curtails the power of our Presiding Bishop. No longer can an accused Bishop be punished by a simple majority. This resolution passed due to a coalition of conservative. moderate, and even many liberal Bishops. However, the usual suspects voted against it (Gene Robinson, Mariann Budde).

Read more here:

http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=16295

 

This is a great resolution and i'm actually surprised it passed. It's amazing that the same church that says lay leaders don't have to be Christians, encourages the entire membership to read the entire Bible in 2013.

 

Consular,
We do have to give thanks for any positive that comes out of this General Convention. I pray the Holy Spirit will convict hearts with truth in the reading of Holy Scripture.
Isaiah 55:11

English Standard Version (ESV)
11 so shall my word be that goes out from my mouth;
it shall not return to me empty,
but (A)it shall accomplish that which I purpose,
and shall succeed in the thing for which I sent it.
Cross references:

1. Isaiah 55:11 : ch. 40:8

 

Sean,
It is surprising it passed, especially after the "gasps in the room," when 1 Corinthians 6:9 was read from the ESV.

I'm wondering what Bible version will be used in Parishes committed to blessings of same-sex unions. I really can't think of any that would support their position. Do you know of any?

 

I don't know of any that support their position. Certainly, none of the Bibles on their "approved" list would support same-sex unions/blessings or ordaining cross dressing, no gender priests.

I really feel for transgendered people and those who struggle with gender identity, I can't imagine the type of pain and confusion they have to live with. That being said, study after study has shown that gender identity issues are most often mental issues and need to be addressed that way. Studies have also shown that changing their sex causes more damage. It's scary to think that a person with mental issues could be put in leadership positions and put in charge of our children. The loving thing to do would be to offer them help and counseling. I fear that TEC may be causing these people long term damage.

 

Did you check to see if your Rector is on the list of Communion Partners?

I'm really curious how many of our forum members have Bishops and/or Rectors in the Communion Partnership. Here are the links again, if anyone else wants to check:

An Episcopal Community of Partners in Anglican Mission.

Communion Partners, Bishops

Communion Partners, Clergy

Your Bishop opposing Communion without Baptism and supporting the "super-majority" to dissolve the ministry of a Bishop, is encouraging.

I read the article. I'm rather shocked about the vote. But it seems no one was more stunned than Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori.

 

LOL, even my liberal Catholic parish said I had to be baptised to start reading.

I don't understand the motivation - they act like politicians afraid of losing office. The hierarchy of PECUSA seem afraid of some sort of electorate, as if the church were connected with the state somehow. They make a bunch of ideas that are as radical as possible, as if to say "look! we're with the contemporary in-crowd just like everyone else!" Where do they get their compulsive need to be as tolerant, secular, and inclusive as possible? It's so over-the-top it's almost parody.

When I was an atheist I justified the homosexuality with which I still struggle, by defining it as part of my very identity or human makeup; "inevitable" genetics, and all that. Having made a good Christian friend of an older man who understands psychology, it has become clearer by the day that all such problems originate in the past, the mind, or even in a soul that is refusing to repent for a past sin. No human being is a label; 'a homosexual' is wrong, 'a human being' is right. We have many subtle layers that get messed up by original sin. It's wonderful how complex God made us, and at the same time it's sad how abused our beauty can be: both by ourselves and others.

I may be out of step with PECUSA in believing homosexuality, transvestism, and transgender notions belong on the DSM IV, but to be honest they don't command any respect anymore, morally-speaking. Even if they were experts in psychology, spirituality, and biophysics, they'd probably deny that a blue pupil is a blue pupil if people associated 'blue' with racism, sexism, or homophobia.

We must be very clear in recognising how much BS has been imbibed by modern Christian culture, and God has set up TEC as a sad but prominent example of it. It's cartoonish in proportion.

 

My Rector is not on the list. I've always suspected that my Rector is a "not rock the boat" type of leader. My Rector fully supports tradition and orthodoxy, yet is the kind of person to try to make everybody happy. I'm not saying that there is necessarily anthing wrong with people or Rectors like that, however, sticking our head in the sand isn't working well for us.

 

The cause of same-sex affection is a tough one. Those who have been sexually abused as children can develop same-sex affection for a number of reasons.

I also think there can be a genetic predisposition to same-sex affection. It's difficult to understand; and I certainly don't have the answers.

I just know that we are called to live according to the Gospel of Christ. We are given instructions/commandments in the N.T. regarding the way we live our lives; and any sexual activity outside the Sacrament of Marriage is condemned.