Paterson to ECUSA: Regrets

[ENS, Philadelphia] John Paterson, bishop of Auckland and chair of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), told the Executive Council that he hopes General Convention will rigorously debate the Windsor Report while keeping in mind the communion that Anglicans share. (ENS Photo by Cynthia Black.)

Episcopal News Service

 

Okay, so I must admit that this was completely unexpected. Of course, I have heard that Paterson is a beacon of hope in the ACC, but this confirms that. If you go to the link you can read the full text of his remarks.

Of special interest to me are a couple of points. First, and perhaps most poignant, his heartfelt apology for the actions of ACC's Nottingham meeting:

"I apologize and at the same time I commend your representatives for the manner in which they managed to somehow stay with the body that was treating them so badly," Paterson said.

Paterson also talks about how the ACC can serve as a central point for interfaith and ecumenical dialog. His point being that an international representative body is easier to approach than "43 independent member churches." I want to be open to this, and I do not want to question Paterson after such a profoundly healing moment, so it is difficult for me to express that I feel that members of other faiths are not necessarily served by a watered down presentation of our witness.

For TEC to continue with the ACC only serves the dialog that we have with other ACC members. We are climbing the ladder, and reaching down to pull them up. But, as we know, there are many churches who remain on the ground -- some of them digging holes into the stagnant status quo.

As an aside at this point, I would like to point out that there are many who accuse TEC of somehow bowing to culture in its approval of LGBT clergy, and not being counter-cultural. How can someone get away with a statement like this? How can anyone say that the full inclusion of our lesbian and gay sisters and brothers is a product of the greater culture? What are these people smoking? The greater culture is in the same place as the Network, the AAC, the ACC, and the Bush administration, the congress, and the Supreme Court. Namely, that there is no such thing as full inclusion or equal protection. Sure, Brokeback Mountain won some Academy Awards, but it was not a box office blockbuster. Simply take a look at this list of the top 150 box office winners of all time. How many gay themed movies do you see? ZERO! When you are confronted by the claim that TEC is bowing to the greater culture, remind the speaker that San Francisco has not yet tooled an army to take over the rest of the world -- not yet anyway.

[End of digression.]

Suffice it to say that when it comes to dialog on this or any other issue, we are not served by allowing the ACC to speak on behalf of TEC.

Paterson also very strongly states that TEC has acted in accordance with the Windsor Report in an exemplary fashion. His words:

My next word is one of commendation. Along with a number of others in the Communion, I take the view that the Episcopal Church thus far has been exemplary in the attention that you have given to the recommendations of The Windsor Report. Of course you have your General Convention soon, and that body will make up its own mind about these matters. The process of reception is moving along, and at considerable cost to your own ministry and mission the Episcopal Church has acted carefully and well. I hope that the call in The Windsor Report for all Provinces to exercise generosity and charity as the process gathers pace does not go unheeded. Those qualities are yet to be shown by some.

Any of the bishops who have acted within the province of TEC, and in disregard of DEPO, since Windsor have thumbed their nose at its recommendations. And many in the US who have sought such oversight have continually pointed to a need for TEC to repent of its actions at GC-2003. They tend to express that we have ignored the entirety of the document by not acting in a way that Windsor does not call us to act. Windsor does not call us to enter a special General Convention to respond to this one recommendation. The moratorium on confirmations of episcopal elections has proved sufficient to act accordingly. But the din is loud -- "Why have they not yet repented?"

It is my opinion, and I feel very strongly that TEC should not apologize for her actions in 2003 if we truly believe that God has called us to act. Now, people that I really respect have pointed out that there are instances where assemblies have acted prayerfully in a way that they felt truly called by God to act, and have erred. If that is true, then so be it. I would not expect them to apologize for their actions because all an assembly can do is pray for the guidance of the Holy Spirit. As people of faith, should we doubt that God is faithful?

***

Finally, I have been reading a wonderful little book called Understanding the Windsor Report. Actually, one of my favorite "Orthodox" Episcopalians, Paul Zahl, is a co-author of the book. (Sorry Paul, I hope you don't get in trouble because I openly display my fondness for you.) I'm struck how the other author, Ian Douglas, expresses disregard for those of us who want to add a fourth leg to the three-legged stool of Anglicanism -- the leg of "experience." There is, of course, the realm of religious experience, but that's not my concern here. I'm interested in an empirical argument here. There can be a philosophical debate about whether reason can exist without experience, and that might be fun to steer off into, but I simply feel it is necessary to state the necessity of experience so that we can enter dialog with those on the other side of the debate.

A thesis from experience might be: Have you ever known someone who was a partnered lesbian or gay person that lived their life in every way -- other than sexually of course -- in accordance with the scriptures? (I add the portion between the dashes because we all know that the so-called orthodox point of view is that sex with someone of the same biological sex is not in accord with scripture and I don't want to alienate my dialog partner from the outset.) The fact is that many people I know must answer that they do know such people. If Jesus is faithful to his words in Matthew 25, and you know someone who is gay or lesbian who visits the sick and imprisoned, feeds the hungry, clothes the naked, and even loves God with all their heart, mind, and soul -- what are we to do with this experience? Shall we deny it? And, as Jesus is addressing panta ta ethne (all of the nations), does this mean that they still have to follow the strictures of Jewish Law? I believe that he is addressing those who fall outside of the confines of The Law, and will gladly discuss why if need be.

We cannot witness without our experience. Such a witness would be empty to say the least. That's it for this blast. I just got some of the best news I've had in a long time and will share that here soon.

Comments

[Marshall Scott]

You know, back in the olden days on the Mountain (I graduated from Sewanee almost 26 years ago now), the blessed Third Leg, Reason, was understood as "reasoned reflection on experience." The experience was the matter of the reflection, in light of the faith. Thus, thinking through your question would mean applying faithful reason to the experience of GLBT persons we have known. That's certainly been part of what shaped my perspective: my own experience of GLBT persons living out the Gospel to the best of their ability, showing various fruits of the Spirit. How can God not want that? How can we not bless it?

The Methodists, of course, do talk about Experience as a separate source of authority, but I'm not sure whether they want anyone to apply reason to it.

[Kelly]

"Have you ever known someone who was a partnered lesbian or gay person that lived their life in every way -- other than sexually of course -- in accordance with the scriptures?"

I've never met anyone, of any sexual orientation, that lived in complete accordance with the scriptures. Can you honestly say that you have? I've been working on it for just over 10 years now, and I'm nowhere close. In fact, the most "holy" people I've had the privelege of knowing have been those that recognized most deeply their own need for God's mercy and forgiveness, because they didn't fool themselves into thinking they were perfect.

Just a thought from an Episcopal missionary struggling with her own imperfections. Blessings.

[Bosco Peters]

Great to see such enthusiasm for a fellow-Kiwi!
From a Kiwi blogger "Liturgy" www.liturgy.co.nz
If ever you get links on your site - let's link :-)