Written by Fr. Damian Macpherson, SA, Catholic Register Special,
Views : 606
Anglican Bishop V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire is seen in this undated photo. In 2003, Bishop Robinson became the first openly gay bishop in the Episcopal Church, and in early June married his male partner in a civil union. The July 16-Aug. 4 once-a-d ecade Lambeth Conference will confront issues such as the ordination of openly gay clerics that threaten to split the Anglican Communion. (CNS photo/Geoff Forester, courtesy of Episcopal Diocese of New Hampshire)
Was the recent Anaheim decision of the 76th General Convention of the U.S. Episcopal Church just one more aftershock in the life of the Anglican Communion, or was it a new and quite serious quake whose thunderous presence and effects were felt all the way to Canterbury, England? We are speaking about the decisions of the U.S. Episcopal Church’s General Convention to bless same-sex unions and to permit the appointment, to all orders of ministry, persons in active same-sex relationships.
The latter decision is of earthquake proportions and sends deep and permanent fissures throughout the worldwide Anglican Communion. This decision, overwhelmingly approved (99-44 with two abstentions), opens wide the doors for the consecration of bishops in active gay relationships and gives final confirmation to the first such bishop, Gene V. Robinson, ordained bishop of New Hampshire in 2003.
While in attendance at the convention, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams appealed to the voting bishops and deputies (laity) “not to take any decisions in the coming days that could push us further apart.” That advice was roundly ignored, reversing a 2006 promise made at the last general convention, to the rest of the Communion, not to consecrate actively engaged homosexual clergy.
Though the decision is a clear break with the remainder of the Anglican Communion and sets a new and difficult precedent, Williams chose not to censure or excommunicate the 2.1-million member  American denomination from the 77-million world wide Anglicans. In his first response to the Anaheim decision, Williams suggested that the Anglican Communion might now be required to move to a two-tiered structure under which certain members, including the Episcopal Church of the United States, could not participate in certain ecumenical meetings or official gatherings of the Anglican Communion —a troublesome state of affairs and one not likely to be easily agreed upon by the U.S. Episcopal Church.
Despite the vagary of it all, it would appear that any resolution strikes a serious blow to the unity of the Anglican Communion and as a consequence places new strains upon the future work of the Anglican Roman Catholic International dialogues with the Roman Catholic Church, and, I would dare say, with the Orthodox. The new situation seems to call into question the hoped for goals set forth in the 1966 common declaration signed by Pope Paul VI and Archbishop of Canterbury Michael Ramsey. Together they called for a dialogue that would “lead to that unity in truth which Christ prayed for, and spoke of a restoration of complete communion of faith and sacramental life.”
To be sure, the Anaheim decision further confirms and strengthens the hand of the newly formed Anglican Church of North America, the conservative alternative to the U.S. Episcopal Church, in its efforts to rescue Anglicanism from doctrinal liberalism and maintain belief in historic Anglicanism. On its way to forming the 39th province of the Anglican Communion, this new and emerging branch of Anglicanism is challenging the legitimacy of the U.S. Episcopal Church and posing a real dilemma over who represents Anglicanism in the United States and Canada.
Giving further credence to the new Anglican Church of North America are Williams’ words. Commenting on the ordination of gay persons to the episcopacy, he notes, “their chosen lifestyle is not one that the church’s teaching sanctions, and thus it is hard to see how they can act in the necessarily representative role that the ordained ministry, especially the episcopate, requires.” The troubled state of affairs within Anglicism leaves many to seek an answer to the question Peter asked of Jesus, “Lord to whom shall we go?” (Jn. 7:68).
As of today no formal Roman Catholic response has been offered in light of the Anaheim decision. Perhaps it will not come until the Anglican Communion itself understands the full implications of what is actually occurring. As Roman Catholics and as people belonging to a church irreversibly committed to the work of Christian unity, it is vital that we continue to invoke the power of the Holy Spirit for us and for our Anglican friends. Their dilemma is also our dilemma. Their pain must be our pain because together we continue to be called by that prayer-filled voice of Jesus to the Father, “that all may be one” (Jn. 17:21).
The truth and strength of our common allegiance is never better known than when tested during times that are difficult and circumstances that are uncertain. As we double our efforts in prayer, which is the soul of the ecumenical movement, we should go forward as heralds of hope and not prophets of doom — confident that the answer to Peter’s question, “Lord to whom shall we go” will lighten up our way in our common pursuit of the truth.
(MacPherson, SA, is the Director for Ecumenical and Interfaith Affairs at the archdiocese of Toronto.)
Opinion 
(0 vote)
