April 19, 1999
To the clergy of Bethlehem
Dear Colleagues,
How does one treat theological minorities in the Church?
In the past few days, two bishops have declared themselves out of
communion with other bishops of our Church. Another bishop is withholding
aid to brothers and sisters in Africa because he disagrees with the
way their bishop voted at Lambeth. I find these actions, one each
from the left and the right, to be extreme, and in neither case do
I think the persons involved have considered all the theological
and ecclesial implications of their actions.
In response to this increasing polarization, I am taking several
actions that I want you to know about in advance. They come from
my asking myself what do I and others who support the ordination
of women, liturgical reform, and a number of the other changes which
have occurred in the Episcopal Church owe to those on the right whom
church leaders may have, for whatever reason, offended? I
cannot and will not indulge myself in the presumption of confessing
the faults of the "other side," so there is nothing here about
what gestures I think that people of other points of view ought to
make toward people like me and many of you. It is my own conscience
and the responsibilities of my office that weigh on me.
FIRST, regarding General Convention in Denver. I think I may claim
to know something about liturgical history, and thus feel comfortable
observing that in the American church, no prayer book was ever imposed
as harshly as the 1979 book was imposed in some places. The result
has been the loss of some Episcopalians and the wounding of a substantial
number of others. It is important to recognize the historical fact
that in church and state, the majority has always had to contend
with the temptation to totalitarianism.
Consequently, if I can get the required number of bishops as co-sponsors,
I will try to bring to the floor of the 2000 General Convention legislation
that will add to our long list of corporate apologies one to those
who have been alienated or whose faith has been injured by any insensitivity
in imposing the prayer book of 1979. (That there are those who suffer
because of sexist, racist and classist language in the church is
clear to me, but again, that is not the point of this document.)
It is very much more than appropriate that this legislation begin
in the House of Bishops.
Similarly, if I cannot accomplish it in the Liturgical Commission,
I will try to get on the floor of Convention legislation requiring
that "supplemental liturgical material" include the 1928 prayer book.
If that fails I will seek to begin in 2003 the process of constitutional
modification that will permit the use of any prayer book adopted
by this Church since its first book of 1789.
SECOND, regarding the particular ministry of the Diocese of Bethlehem
to the Episcopal Church. We like to consider our diocese "community-based,
not issue-driven," and I think that history bears out that self-assessment.
I therefore have decided to share the hospitality and openness that
we enjoy with those who consider themselves marginalized by changes
that have taken place in the Church. You know that I do not qualify
for membership in the Episcopal Synod of America. However, without
reservation, I regard them as sisters and brothers in Christ, fully
members of the Episcopal Church, who have more in common with me
that otherwise. They are not to be patronized as backward or unenlightened:
Convention has made it clear that the positions they hold are to
be protected as legitimate theological stands. I have accordingly
given permission to two bishops associated with ESA to enter this
diocese to preach and celebrate the sacraments at any time. I understand
myself to be creating something like a "city of refuge" for those
who, for whatever reason, find it desirable to worship with like-minded
bishops, just as Bethlehem is already a safe place for people of
other points of view.
It is important for me to make sure that you know that no person
or organization solicited me on this matter, but that the offer came
from my own reflection, prayer and struggle to be faithful to the
gospel of Christ.
It is possible that people from several neighboring dioceses would
attend events at which these ESA bishops preside. However, my action
will most directly affect the Diocese of Pennsylvania, where a long-standing
dispute between some ESA parishes and the diocesan leadership has
come to a kind of impasse now that the "flying bishops" are no longer
permitted in Pennsylvania. I can take absolutely no public position
on the rights and wrongs of the positions and strategies adopted
by the Bishop of Pennsylvania and the rectors and vestries of the
ESA parishes, as I may be called upon to help adjudicate it. I have
nonetheless struggled in my own conscience with the plight of those
people, particularly children, who have no power in this situation,
and who are in danger of becoming something like hostages in an ecclesiastical
stand-off.
Initiatory rites are primarily (although not exclusively) focused
on the Christian development of individual disciples. The need of
these persons to get on with things in their walk with God ought
not to be put on hold while parochial and diocesan leaders work on
their problems. Accordingly, when Bishop Parsons comes to Bethlehem
in May, he will be celebrating initiatory rites, certainly including
Confirmation. Let us remember that these are not rites implying fealty
to a particular person or territory, as is the case in ordination:
these rites are concerned with much more important issues of faith
and life. The bishop confirms as an apostle, a representative of
the Catholic Church, not as caliph of a local clan. Although I consider
the issues of theology and church order now at stake in the Diocese
of Pennsylvania to be very important, and pray every day for their
resolution, they must take a back seat to our sacramental life. Dialog,
in my view, is always more honest if undertaken in a hostage-free
environment.
In this regard, I remind you that it has never been my policy to
second-guess you about whom you present for Confirmation and related
rites, and that policy will not change.
Because I am someone who joyfully and thankfully ordains women,
and is a member of the national commission charged with producing
a plan for the creation of a new prayer book, and so on, I know that
my actions may seem strange to some of you. I know that among my
fellow bishops there will be some who will take vigorous exception
to what I am doing, and others who will dismiss it as quixotic or
myopic. I do not ask that anyone agree with me, but I do ask that
you as colleagues, sisters and brothers, believe that this policy
is the expression of my deepest convictions about the primary importance
of the sacramental mysteries of which the Church is steward, and
of my pastoral concern for those who desire the blessings of Confirmation
but cannot receive it for reasons outside of their control.
If you have serious concerns about any of what I have written, it
is my request that you call or visit me for direct conversation rather
than initiate protracted correspondence. I am also open to discussing
this at our monthly Bible studies. In addition, you may, as I have
said before, call me at home about anything before 11 p.m. I crave
your prayers.
This comes, as always, with my respect and blessing.
Faithfully,
+Paul
Bishop
CC: Bishops in the Commonwealth
Bishops Parsons and Ackerman
The Primate
Other clergy concerned
return to Addresses index page
Please direct any
questions or comments to the webmaster@diobeth.org
