If I may, I step ever so gently into this discussion. I rarely visit the blogs, and even more rarely contribute to them; but obviously for those of us who are, at present, committed to the CPP (Communion Partners Plan) this is an important moment to give more fuller expression to the meaning, purpose and hopes of those of us who have gathered around the Plan.
TomRightmyer asks a crucial question; "...what happened in the low church evangelical parishes in the last quarter of the 19th century." Let me suggest we step just a bit further back -- to the late 1700's; and up until 1836 when one of the most well-known of our evangelical fathers, Charles Simeon, died finishing his 54 year tenure as vicar/rector of Holy Trinity Church, Cambridge, UK.
Simeon, as most of us know was living in the time of the growing Methodist movement -- when, frankly, many were "fleeing" a dying Anglican church for the new, spirit-filled promises of the Methodist hope. Simeon did not go...most who study him (as I have) believe that he probably would have responded to those leaving with great charity, "I understand your conviction and decision, I just don't share it." Simeon is often a figure to whom our mentors John Stott and Paul Zahl point as one of those primary evangelical "lights" in very dark times.
He remained. Stepping even further back to the beginning of his ministry at Holy Trinity; his first ten years -- ten years -- were miserable -- he faced tremendous opposition not only from his wardens and leaders; but the greater city. But he remained faithful -- he stayed put; he preached with fervor and passion. And after that first decade, the hearts of those in his parish began to melt. Over the next 44, he began to slowly gather around him young men to counsel and mentor them toward evangelical/orthodox theology, preaching and praxis, (think Henry Martyn -- one of Simeon's shining stars).
By the end of Simeon's long, faithful, persistent and consistent commitment, the face of Victorian Anglicanism (and even culture) began to slowly shift. One historian has suggested that Simeon's faithfulness may very well have saved the dying Anglican church from its (last) step toward extinction.
Perhaps we are at that point again, not simply because of the pervasive revisionist agenda that so pervades our gatherings, Conventions and GC's; but also because (in my mind) so many have left the battlefield.
I certainly understand -- very much -- why someone (parish, Bishop,
Diocese) might want to finally raise the white flag and go elsewhere. But there are other options...that is what Simeon believed. I still remember after GC '03 calling my mentor John Stott and catching him in his office only days after those dark days. He responded, "I know why you are calling..." When I asked him, "Where do we go from here?" His response was "Well, first of all...don't leave."
I suppose that Godly counsel has stayed in my mind and heart since that moment. Again, I understand why many would choose to leave...but quite frankly, I see very little measurable growth in any of the break-away movements (albeit the population does grow, but usually by the addition of more breakaways parishes...not necessarily new individual members -- though I will admit there is certainly some). In my ongoing conversations with those who have broken away (a la AMiA or CANA), I can point to more than one crucial figure in that mix who has said "If I had to do it over again...I would not have left." We do not hear that publicly, but those who have made that confession note the drain of resources and energy and the diversion away from mission into a land of litigation. Again, I confess, I know this is not the case with everyone -- many have experienced a kind of "fresh" start, and freedom from the ties that so bind evangelical/orthodox clergy who remain in TEC. But how long will that last?
The devil has a field day when we are divided, and any thinking person has to believe that darkness will (and in my mind already has) creep quickly into the break-away movements as well.
So, why choose to stay? The Communion Partner Rectors and Bishops (and
Archbishops) are clear about who they are and that for which they stand.
Someone in this blogging conversations suggested a kind of "institutionalism" among this circle. Far from it...in my discussions with the rectors group; we are not only committed to the larger Communion and our presence in it, and TEC; but we are also crystal clear that we will not capitulate to any agenda that runs contrary to the authority and traditional interpretation of Holy Scripture, (not only around matters related to human sexuality, but also creedal faith, atonement, original sin, conversion, salvation, sanctification, etc.) We remain because we have not been called (as some of our brothers and sisters have) to leave. We remain to give others who are not called to leave a solid place to cling to one another. We remain to say that the orthodox voice IS an authentic piece of the Anglican/Episcopal tapestry.
As we do remain, we remember Daniel in Babylon; Jeremiah's wasteland of an audience; the dry bones that Ezekiel was called to preach to -- despite ongoing opposition. None were given the option to "leave;" and all had to stay. We of course, remember our Lord who "wept" at the Jerusalem who not only rejected the prophets, but rejected Jesus. He did not leave -- He was not given "another" Jerusalem -- when His message was ignored, reviled, rejected...He did not move onto Egypt or Ethopia or Rome; He stayed, in the midst of a land that almost completely ignored His message, and by the end, His prayer in Gethsemane was that someday all who followed Him would be "one," and "brought to complete unity," (John 17). Can we honestly say that is where we are today? Are we anywhere close to "complete unity?"
Not just within the Anglican family (with our many divisions); but within the greater Body of Christendom?
The Partners Plan is (again in my mind) one pathway toward following the lead of the great prophets and our Lord. We may never live to see the fruits of faithfully staying and faithfully preaching (recognizing -- FULLY
-- that those who do leave, are also faithfully living into their vocational call as well). But, what if -- what if those who have left in the last decade had stayed...continued to fight the tide of revisionism? What would Virginia look like? Florida? What would happen if Pittsburg chose to stay put? Certainly it is not easy, and likely continued opposition will prevail, but were we -- any of us -- promised an "easy" road? Did any of us plan on preaching without tremendous opposition -- in some cases, even persecution?
I had an interesting letter recently from a parishioner who departed TEC and the Diocese of Texas when Good Shepherd, Tomball, Texas left. She wrote eloquently about the process that parish moved through to make its decision to leave TEC. Then she said, "I hope that you and St. Martin's will continue to uphold the orthodox faith to make a difference in The Episcopal Church." How ironic? I wrote her with my good wishes, and then clearly said, "Every time a parish, or a group of Christians like you make the decision to leave, it certainly makes it more difficult to do the very thing you have asked me to do...nevertheless, we will try and do just that."
I urge those consdering departure, to consider the CPP, (whether Diocese, Bishop, Rector or Parish). It is not a perfect solution; far from it. But as one of my colleagues who has been in this battle for a very long time recently said to me, "This is my only viable option...I just don't have a 'plan B.'"
Those who do join us, must gently, and respectfully, live into the parameters of the Windsor Process. We are transparent -- to our parishes, our Bishops, and whatever wider audience may develop. Some Bishops will oppose participation, some will give no objection, some will encourage -- some may very well be hostile to it. We intend to respond faithfully to one another, and to respect the boundaries and authority of our Bishops.
This is not yet another "group" with one foot out the door; or even an eye toward the door handle. This is a fellowship -- a place to belong with a common mind, common heart and common purpose -- to strenghten our ties to the greater Communion, to other like-hearted Archbishops, Bishops and Rectors, and to, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, grow -- however slowly -- breathe the biblical and creedal faith and orthodox theology with a loving, yet consistent, evangelical fervor on those dry bones, where ever we encounter them.
If you are a rector ...and interested in joining us -- be transparent -- discuss it with your bishop and your vestry...then send your full name, contact information, Diocese, Bishop, parish and number of baptized members to CPRectors@stmartinsepiscopal.org . As of 4 June, the consitutent membership of the rectors who have signed onto the plan is over 25,000 people. Please pray for us and for the plan.
Faithfully,
Russell Levenson, Jr.
Rector, St. Martin's
Houston, Texas
TomRightmyer asks a crucial question; "...what happened in the low church evangelical parishes in the last quarter of the 19th century." Let me suggest we step just a bit further back -- to the late 1700's; and up until 1836 when one of the most well-known of our evangelical fathers, Charles Simeon, died finishing his 54 year tenure as vicar/rector of Holy Trinity Church, Cambridge, UK.
Simeon, as most of us know was living in the time of the growing Methodist movement -- when, frankly, many were "fleeing" a dying Anglican church for the new, spirit-filled promises of the Methodist hope. Simeon did not go...most who study him (as I have) believe that he probably would have responded to those leaving with great charity, "I understand your conviction and decision, I just don't share it." Simeon is often a figure to whom our mentors John Stott and Paul Zahl point as one of those primary evangelical "lights" in very dark times.
He remained. Stepping even further back to the beginning of his ministry at Holy Trinity; his first ten years -- ten years -- were miserable -- he faced tremendous opposition not only from his wardens and leaders; but the greater city. But he remained faithful -- he stayed put; he preached with fervor and passion. And after that first decade, the hearts of those in his parish began to melt. Over the next 44, he began to slowly gather around him young men to counsel and mentor them toward evangelical/orthodox theology, preaching and praxis, (think Henry Martyn -- one of Simeon's shining stars).
By the end of Simeon's long, faithful, persistent and consistent commitment, the face of Victorian Anglicanism (and even culture) began to slowly shift. One historian has suggested that Simeon's faithfulness may very well have saved the dying Anglican church from its (last) step toward extinction.
Perhaps we are at that point again, not simply because of the pervasive revisionist agenda that so pervades our gatherings, Conventions and GC's; but also because (in my mind) so many have left the battlefield.
I certainly understand -- very much -- why someone (parish, Bishop,
Diocese) might want to finally raise the white flag and go elsewhere. But there are other options...that is what Simeon believed. I still remember after GC '03 calling my mentor John Stott and catching him in his office only days after those dark days. He responded, "I know why you are calling..." When I asked him, "Where do we go from here?" His response was "Well, first of all...don't leave."
I suppose that Godly counsel has stayed in my mind and heart since that moment. Again, I understand why many would choose to leave...but quite frankly, I see very little measurable growth in any of the break-away movements (albeit the population does grow, but usually by the addition of more breakaways parishes...not necessarily new individual members -- though I will admit there is certainly some). In my ongoing conversations with those who have broken away (a la AMiA or CANA), I can point to more than one crucial figure in that mix who has said "If I had to do it over again...I would not have left." We do not hear that publicly, but those who have made that confession note the drain of resources and energy and the diversion away from mission into a land of litigation. Again, I confess, I know this is not the case with everyone -- many have experienced a kind of "fresh" start, and freedom from the ties that so bind evangelical/orthodox clergy who remain in TEC. But how long will that last?
The devil has a field day when we are divided, and any thinking person has to believe that darkness will (and in my mind already has) creep quickly into the break-away movements as well.
So, why choose to stay? The Communion Partner Rectors and Bishops (and
Archbishops) are clear about who they are and that for which they stand.
Someone in this blogging conversations suggested a kind of "institutionalism" among this circle. Far from it...in my discussions with the rectors group; we are not only committed to the larger Communion and our presence in it, and TEC; but we are also crystal clear that we will not capitulate to any agenda that runs contrary to the authority and traditional interpretation of Holy Scripture, (not only around matters related to human sexuality, but also creedal faith, atonement, original sin, conversion, salvation, sanctification, etc.) We remain because we have not been called (as some of our brothers and sisters have) to leave. We remain to give others who are not called to leave a solid place to cling to one another. We remain to say that the orthodox voice IS an authentic piece of the Anglican/Episcopal tapestry.
As we do remain, we remember Daniel in Babylon; Jeremiah's wasteland of an audience; the dry bones that Ezekiel was called to preach to -- despite ongoing opposition. None were given the option to "leave;" and all had to stay. We of course, remember our Lord who "wept" at the Jerusalem who not only rejected the prophets, but rejected Jesus. He did not leave -- He was not given "another" Jerusalem -- when His message was ignored, reviled, rejected...He did not move onto Egypt or Ethopia or Rome; He stayed, in the midst of a land that almost completely ignored His message, and by the end, His prayer in Gethsemane was that someday all who followed Him would be "one," and "brought to complete unity," (John 17). Can we honestly say that is where we are today? Are we anywhere close to "complete unity?"
Not just within the Anglican family (with our many divisions); but within the greater Body of Christendom?
The Partners Plan is (again in my mind) one pathway toward following the lead of the great prophets and our Lord. We may never live to see the fruits of faithfully staying and faithfully preaching (recognizing -- FULLY
-- that those who do leave, are also faithfully living into their vocational call as well). But, what if -- what if those who have left in the last decade had stayed...continued to fight the tide of revisionism? What would Virginia look like? Florida? What would happen if Pittsburg chose to stay put? Certainly it is not easy, and likely continued opposition will prevail, but were we -- any of us -- promised an "easy" road? Did any of us plan on preaching without tremendous opposition -- in some cases, even persecution?
I had an interesting letter recently from a parishioner who departed TEC and the Diocese of Texas when Good Shepherd, Tomball, Texas left. She wrote eloquently about the process that parish moved through to make its decision to leave TEC. Then she said, "I hope that you and St. Martin's will continue to uphold the orthodox faith to make a difference in The Episcopal Church." How ironic? I wrote her with my good wishes, and then clearly said, "Every time a parish, or a group of Christians like you make the decision to leave, it certainly makes it more difficult to do the very thing you have asked me to do...nevertheless, we will try and do just that."
I urge those consdering departure, to consider the CPP, (whether Diocese, Bishop, Rector or Parish). It is not a perfect solution; far from it. But as one of my colleagues who has been in this battle for a very long time recently said to me, "This is my only viable option...I just don't have a 'plan B.'"
Those who do join us, must gently, and respectfully, live into the parameters of the Windsor Process. We are transparent -- to our parishes, our Bishops, and whatever wider audience may develop. Some Bishops will oppose participation, some will give no objection, some will encourage -- some may very well be hostile to it. We intend to respond faithfully to one another, and to respect the boundaries and authority of our Bishops.
This is not yet another "group" with one foot out the door; or even an eye toward the door handle. This is a fellowship -- a place to belong with a common mind, common heart and common purpose -- to strenghten our ties to the greater Communion, to other like-hearted Archbishops, Bishops and Rectors, and to, with the aid of the Holy Spirit, grow -- however slowly -- breathe the biblical and creedal faith and orthodox theology with a loving, yet consistent, evangelical fervor on those dry bones, where ever we encounter them.
If you are a rector ...and interested in joining us -- be transparent -- discuss it with your bishop and your vestry...then send your full name, contact information, Diocese, Bishop, parish and number of baptized members to CPRectors@stmartinsepiscopal.org . As of 4 June, the consitutent membership of the rectors who have signed onto the plan is over 25,000 people. Please pray for us and for the plan.
Faithfully,
Russell Levenson, Jr.
Rector, St. Martin's
Houston, Texas
