Bishop Thomas Ely's Response to
Communion Matters: A Study Document for the Episcopal Church

[The Theology Committee of the House of Bishops asked bishops to summarize the insights gained from conversations in their dioceses about the committee's study document addressing the requests made of The Episcopal Church by the Primates of the Anglican Communion in the communiqué issued following their February 2007 meeting in Tanzania. The bishops will discuss the requests at their meeting in New Orleans September 19-25. The response submitted by Bishop Ely to the Theology Committee on September 2, 2007, is below.]

In the Diocese of Vermont, I held six conversations in various locations across the diocese. Each conversation lasted two hours. Total attendance at all six conversations was 225+. 32 of our 48 congregations were represented at one or more of the conversations. (Read a September 14, 2007, article from Episcopal News Service that quotes Bishop Ely's September Mountai Echo column about the conversations: One third of dioceses respond to Bishops' communiqué study document.)

What are some of the gifts of being a part of the Anglican Communion, which you highlighted?
Being connected to others around the world – sense of global connection and global communion; the opportunity to learn about other ministry settings/contexts; opportunities for mission partnerships; our Anglican heritage as a “bridge” church; our historic gift to the larger church of a community able to hold diverse positions, yet remain united in the love of Jesus Christ and the power of the Holy Spirit at work in our midst; diversity of cultures, contexts, experience, languages, worship, approaches, etc. that are part of our life because we are a global communion church.

What did you hear about what the via media and comprehension for the sake of truth might mean for us in today’s context?
We clearly long for this core value of Anglicanism to be embraced throughout the Communion. We identify a clear need to value the via media and comprehension for the sake of truth in the various cultural contexts and experiences around the Communion today. We lament that this is missing, or certainly is not as visible, in the current climate of the Anglican Communion – a climate of much suspicion and disrespect where there seems to be more talking about one another rather than with one another. We need to trust and respect our differences as faithful expressions of comprehensive Anglican theology. We (in The Episcopal Church) need to learn and celebrate more of the great things that are happening in all parts of the Communion and others need to learn about and celebrate more of the great things that are happening in The Episcopal Church. The judgments and demands directed toward The Episcopal Church by those in disagreement with particular actions of General Convention do not honor Anglican comprehensiveness. Less reaction and more interaction is called for if we are to embrace a more comprehensive theology for the sake of truth. Being in meaningful and sustained dialogue with one another is crucial to the integrity of the via media. Truth narrowly defined or determined by a few is not reflective of the Anglican via media. We worry that this principle of our Anglican identity is in danger of being lost or compromised for the sake a false unity.

Were there any opinions about best ways for the Anglican Communion to consult about important matters without a centralization of authority that has not been our tradition over the years?
The Anglican Consultative Council was cited often as potentially the most viable and fruitful means for consultation. The ACC is the only body in the Anglican Communion structure with a constitution. It is also the most broadly representative, including as it does bishops, priests, deacons and laity. Women also have a far greater voice in the ACC than in the other so-called Instruments of Communion. In our conversations there was not support for a stronger role by the Primates in the ACC.  A stronger committee/commission structure within the ACC might also improve consultation. We cite as an example the good work of the Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Mission and Evangelism (IASCOME) in the development of a Covenant for Communion in Mission. There is considerable concern about attempts toward a more centralized structure for the Anglican Communion, especially one that places more decision making in the hands of bishops – primates in particular. If broader consultation is needed, then support should be given to an Anglican Congress rather than more meetings of the primates. There was also strong feeling that by not extending Bishop Robinson an invitation to the Lambeth Conference that the Archbishop of Canterbury was poorly modeling the necessary climate of consultation. Again, why talk about people when you can talk with them? Many were very encouraged by my reports and the other written reports about the recent consultation in Spain involving bishops from the US and bishops from Africa. This is the kind of consultation we need to encourage.

Were there observations about how, in the midst of sharply differing views in the church, we can live in mutual forbearance long enough for the church to discern God’s will?
The parable of the wheat and the weeds was frequently cited, as well as the struggles recorded in the Acts of the Apostles as the early Church grappled with its need for mutual forbearance as it sought to discern God’s will. There was strong feeling that the current practice by some to not share in eucharistic fellowship with those with whom they are in disagreement is not helpful and communicates a corrupt theology about the place of Eucharist in our common life. The perceived manipulation of God’s table in the service of a human agenda (however strongly, deeply and faithfully held) was seen as counter-productive. A recommitment to the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral was mentioned, especially the section on "The Historic Episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its administration to the varying needs of the nations and peoples called of God into the unity of His Church” (BCP p.878), which seems a forgotten principle of our Anglican heritage. An increase in mutual trust, respect, toleration, listening and learning, and connecting in mission would serve us all well. The challenge of agreeing to disagree, while at the same time maintaining love and charity with one another, remains among the most essential work we have before us if we are to stay together as the Anglican Communion. None of the participants in our conversations supported as a solution the idea of The Episcopal Church leaving the Anglican Communion, but some expressed the conviction that if we were in some way asked/forced to leave that we should do so gracefully in the hope of continuing to reach out in mission.

What insights or suggestions came forth about the response of the House of Bishops to the requests of the Primates Meeting?
There was much affirmation for the response of the HOB in March 2007, because it affirmed the importance of our polity while asserting our desire to remain as full partners in the Anglican Communion. Whatever response is made should take its cue from the March response and from the recent good work of the Executive Council. The HOB should not directly respond to the two specific requests (demands) for clarification from the primates (consents and blessings), because both are matters properly addressed by the General Convention. It would be inappropriate and disrespectful of the General Convention for one House to interpret the action of the whole. Likewise, attempts to form “Common Covenants” among the bishops would severely undermine the authority of General Convention. We tried that earlier with the moratoriums on episcopal elections and blessings of holy unions by bishops and it proved unhelpful at best and arrogant at worst. The HOB should call upon the Anglican Communion to more fully embrace the constitutional reality and structure of the Anglican Consultative Council – whose very name aptly suggests what is needed at this juncture of our life. Perhaps calling for a fuller discussion of the role and function of the ACC would be helpful. The HOB should indicate support for the Covenant for Communion in Mission developed through IASCOME and adopted by the ACC. Using the language of Ron Heifitz, the HOB should avoid developing or endorsing “technical change” when “adaptive change” is the issue in the Anglican Communion today. There should be no stepping back from our commitment to the full inclusion of gay and lesbian persons in the life and ministry of The Episcopal Church. We need to respect the various local contexts within The Episcopal Church, as well as the Anglican Communion, and provide for a wide spectrum of pastoral care for gay and lesbian couples, as well as for those who are in disagreement with their bishops or the actions of the General Convention. Such care needs to be within the framework of the Constitutions and Canons of The Episcopal Church – such as the carefully worked out framework of Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight (DEPO) – and the actions/resolutions of the General Convention. Folks in Vermont want to move forward in mission but not backward in terms of our commitment to gay and lesbian Christians. The pressures of time and arbitrary deadlines that do not respect our polity are less than helpful. Some wonder why the loud and negative voices from Africa seem to carry more weight than the more moderate voices from Africa.

Other comments?
In addition to those present for these conversations, I received many emails and phone calls. These expressed similar sentiments to the comments noted above. There were also a few people present at the conversations who did not speak, but who hold opinions contrary to the majority of those expressing their opinions. Those persons sought me out for personal conversation which I accommodated as best I could and invited their further comments via email – although none was forthcoming. I did not sense from those who spoke to me in private a desire to leave The Episcopal Church, or even that we should acquiesce to the primates' demands, but rather sadness that the church they love seems constantly focused on matters of human sexuality. While they do not embrace some of the decisions of General Convention, their bigger concerns seem to be, “Is there a place for ‘me’ in The Episcopal Church?” and "When will the focus shift back to our mission?"

Go to Anglican Communion Index on this site
Go to Primates' Meeting of February 2007 Index on this site
Go to the Covenant Proposals for the Anglican Communion Index on this site