THIS IS A GOOD THING . . . REALLY

So, the House of Bishops have issued a series of resolutions in response to the Dar es Salaam Communique. I was a little nervous about this meeting and expressed some concerns to my bishop at a deanery meeting just before he left for Camp Allen. I reading through the document, I, for one, am both pleasantly surprised and very satisfied with what has come out of that meeting.

It's late, and I really need to get to bed, but I wanted to comment on a couple of those resolutions.

First:

Resolved, the House of Bishops affirms its desire that The Episcopal Church remain a part of the councils of the Anglican Communion; and

Resolved, the meaning of the Preamble to the Constitution of The Episcopal Church is determined solely by the General Convention of The Episcopal Church; and

Resolved, the House of Bishops believes the proposed Pastoral Scheme of the Dar es Salaam Communiqué of February 19, 2007 would be injurious to The Episcopal Church and urges that the Executive Council decline to participate in it; and

Resolved, the House of Bishops pledges itself to continue to work to find ways of meeting the pastoral concerns of the Primates that are compatible with our own polity and canons.

We are an autonomous church. We are willing to work with others in the Communion. We will not allow ourselves to be bullied into submission. Thank you.

Second: Since our General Convention of 2003, we have responded in good faith to the requests we have received from our Anglican partners. -- Responding in "good faith" doesn't mean submitting to an "every demand . . . or else" form of repentance.

Third: We have been repeatedly assured that boundary violations are inappropriate under the most ancient authorities and should cease. The Lambeth Conferences of 1988 and 1998 did so. The Windsor Report did so. The Dromantine Communiqué did so. None of these assurances has been heeded. The Dar es Salaam Communiqué affirms the principle that boundary violations are impermissible, but then sets conditions for ending those violations, conditions that are simply impossible for us to meet without calling a special meeting of our General Convention. -- Putting forth conditions on membership, or requirements for acceptable actions of repentance, while ignoring your own responsibilities is irresponsible at best and hypocritical at worst. Log? Speck?

Finally: Most important of all it is spiritually unsound. The pastoral scheme encourages one of the worst tendencies of our Western culture, which is to break relationships when we find them difficult instead of doing the hard work necessary to repair them and be instruments of reconciliation. -- Claiming the need for separation based on puritanical interpretations of orthodoxy totally ignores this fact. It seems to me that the conservative primates of the AC and the members of the AAC/ACN are playing the part of the eldest brother in the parable of the prodigal son/loving father.

I might post more about this later, or I might not; we'll see. In the meantime, you can go visit Mark Harris or the Daily Episcopalian if you want more stuff.

And now, bedtime. Wednesday Lenten Breakfast comes early tomorrow.