A Test of Faith

The Episcopal Church of The United States is meeting in solemn session to determine it's path to embark on for eternity. There have been many resolutions that have been drafted in response to the Windsor report. None of these which respond directly to the concerns of the report but rather dance around the fringes of truth.

It is obvious that almost all of the resolutions as they are currently drafted fail to meet the concerns of the Anglican community as a whole as well the areas addressed by the Windsor report. Basically, at this point in time, it also appears that ECUSA has no intention of correcting its head strong slide away from Christian morality.

As a result of these actions, or should I say skirting around the truth, many prominent church leaders have looked the proposed resolutions and expressed grave concerns to their lack of concrete answers. Such is the case of Dr N. T. Wright, Bishop of Durham. The concluding remarks of his paper on these actions are presented below.


The Choice before ECUSA
by the Bishop of Durham, Dr. N. T. Wright June 2006

Conclusion
19. It is very important not to let the plethora of material, in the official document and in all the various commentaries on it, detract attention from the central and quite simple question: Will ECUSA comply with the specific and detailed recommendations of Windsor, or will it not? As the Resolutions stand, only one answer is possible: if these are passed without amendment, ECUSA will have specifically, deliberately and knowingly decided not to comply with Windsor. Only if the crucial Resolutions, especially A160 and A161, are amended in line with Windsor paragraph 134, can there be any claim of compliance. Of course, even then, there are questions already raised about whether a decision of General Convention would be able to bind those parts of ECUSA that have already stated their determination to press ahead in the direction already taken. But the Anglican principle of taking people to be in reality what they profess to be, until there is clear evidence to the contrary, must be observed. If these resolutions are amended in line with Windsor, and passed, then the rest of the Communion will be in a position to express its gratitude and relief that ECUSA has complied with what was asked of it. Should that happen, I will be the first to stand up and cheer at such a result, and to speak out against those who are hoping fervently for ECUSA to resist Windsor so that they can justify their anti-ECUSA stance. But if the resolutions are not amended, then, with great sadness and with complete uncertainty about what way ahead might then be found, the rest of the Communion will have to conclude that, despite every opportunity, ECUSA has declined to comply with Windsor; has decided, in other words, to walk apart’ (Windsor 157). My hope and earnest prayer over the coming week will continue to be that that conclusion may be avoided. May God bless the Bishops and Delegates of ECUSA in their praying, thinking and deciding.

As Christians the most difficult thing to do in this secular world is stand up for the truths of our faith as set out in the Bible with out compromise. One can not be a cafeteria Anglican and remain true the basic tenet’s we profess to believe.

There are many parishes in ECUSA that are trembling at home as to the possible action to be taken by this Synod of 2006. We reverently pray that their fears may be in vain and their ancient Christian faith restored.