A Statement from the President of the American Anglican Council on Communications Issued by the Episcopal Church House of Bishops

March 17, 2005
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Contact:Cynthia P. Brust770-414-1515

The Covenant Statement and the Word to the Church issued by theEpiscopal Church’s House of Bishops is insulting to the Primates of the Anglican Communion. While it aims at specific requests ofthe 2004 Windsor Report and the 2005 Primates Communiqué, it fails to fulfill clear expectations outlined therein. The House claimed to affirm the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral 1888, and yet they failed to repent of their decisions and subsequent actions contrary to Scripture as well as Anglican faith and order. Note there is no affirmation of the authority of Scripture or Lambeth1.10 upheld by the primates. Are there not two mutually exclusive views presented in this covenant?

Bishops also declared a moratorium on blessings of same-sexunions, but J. Jon Bruno, Bishop of Los Angeles, violated the spirit of this pledge before the sun set on the covenant’spassage. In an interview with the Los Angeles Times Tuesday evening, he said he would “not impose his ‘conscience’ on priests in the six-county Los Angeles diocese. They are free to bless same sex unions if they wish, he said.” Episcopal News in LosAngeles clearly underscored the loophole in their report as well:“…the bishops said they themselves would refrain from performing such blessings for the time being. Clergy in dioceses that already practice same sex blessings will be allowed to choose whether to continue the practice.”

How can faithful Episcopalians view such doublespeak fromEpiscopal leaders as anything but duplicitous?

With regard to the so-called moratorium on consecrations, I am outraged that the House of Bishops drew equivalence betweensingle or married individuals with those living in homosexualpartnerships. To place a moratorium on all consecrations not only takes the episcopacy hostage to the homosexual agenda but also places several dioceses in crisis. Canon law requires thatbishops must retire at age 72 – what happens in those dioceseswhere their bishop faces mandatory retirement? William Persell,Bishop of Chicago, has said that he and others are more thanwilling to pitch in and help run those dioceses. In other words, revisionist bishops will be placed in dioceses rather than individuals duly elected by diocesan convention. This is an appalling idea that represents a great threat to biblically faithful dioceses and congregations. Although orthodox bishops in attendance generally supported the covenant statement believing it had useful components in it, I disagree and believe they made a clear error.

Finally, I am struck by the conciliatory nature and carefully nuanced phraseology of the Word to the Church that belies the attack of the Presiding Bishop on an orthodox bishop as well as several faithful clergy and lay people. His actions are deplorable and inexcusable. I call upon him to issue a public apology.

In summation, the House of Bishops claims a desire to remain part of the world-wide communion but seems not to understand what that entails. The Covenant fails to offer long-term, sustainable solutions and at best simply postpones inevitable conversation about the clear and ultimate choice before us – walking together or walking apart. I am thankful for the bishops who upheld orthodoxy and worked in good faith to voice the irreconcilable differences that mark the House of Bishops. I urge all bishops to make their choice and to be honest in articulating those choices. The mandate of the primates is before us all: Choosethis day whom you shall serve.

--The Rev. Canon David C. Anderson
President of the American Anglican Council