A Resolution to Adhere to the Recommendations of the Windsor Report
by The Rev. Douglas Taylor-Weiss (Nov 9, 2004)
Resolved, that the 136th Convention of the Diocese of Central New York call upon all parties addressed by the recommendations of the Windsor Report to adhere in all humility and without condition to those recommendations as the only basis available for the further perfecting of our life together in conformity with the cross of Christ Jesus our Lord. To wit,
We call upon Bishop Adams as a bishop of the Episcopal Church to lead us in expressing our regret that the bonds of affection were breached by those voting for and participating in the consecration of Bishop Gene Robinson; (para. 134)
We call upon Bishop Adams to lead us in expressing our regret also for the consequences which followed that consecration; (134)
We call upon all other bishops in the Episcopal Church to likewise lead the church in such expressions of regret; (134)
In the event that Bishop Adams, or any other bishop, be unable, in good conscience, to express such regrets sincerely, we call upon them to announce their withdrawal from representative functions in the Anglican Communion in order to create the space necessary to enable the healing of the Communion;(134)
We call upon all members of the Communion to accord appropriate respect to such conscientious decisions; (134)
We call upon Bishop Adams, and all bishops, to declare a moratorium on the election and consent to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate who is living in a same gender union until some new consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges; (134)
We call upon Bishop Adams, and all bishops, to honor the Primates? Pastoral Letter of May, 2003, by not proceeding to authorize public Rites of Blessing for same sex unions; (143)
We call upon all bishops who have authorized public Rites of Blessing for same sex unions to express regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached by such authorization; (144)
In the event that such bishops be unable, in good conscience, to express such a regret sincerely, we call upon them to announce their withdrawal from representative functions in the Anglican Communion; (144)
We call upon those bishops who believe it is their conscientious duty to intervene in provinces, dioceses and parishes other than their own to express regret for the consequences of their actions, to affirm their desire to remain in the Communion, and to effect a moratorium on any further interventions; (155)
We also call upon such bishops to seek an accommodation with the bishops of those dioceses whose parishes they have taken into their own care. (155)
We call upon all those clergy and laity who will adhere to these enumerated recommendations to carefully engage all other recommendations of the Windsor Report for the good of the Church and for the glory of God.
Explanation
The proposer of this resolution agrees wholeheartedly that the Windsor Report is defective and imperfect in many ways. However, this may in fact be providential. Our membership in Christ requires our willingness to submit to an imperfect church, to be "numbered with the transgressors." Here and now God is calling us to sacrifice our demand for the "perfect" report and to "be subject to one another out of reverence for Christ" (Eph. 5:21). All of us can live with the recommendations of the Windsor Report. Let us then "choose life," that we and our descendants may live. The assumption of this resolution is that adherence to the recommendations of the Report comes first and becomes, in effect, the ticket to participation in further discussions critiquing and perfecting it. Such adherence is to be unconditional: the Report is not to be viewed as a "deal" but as a calling.
The Report invites the "Episcopal Church" to express the regrets described in the first three bullets above. This resolution recognizes that the Episcopal Church speaks not only through General Convention but also through the bishops speaking as pastors leading their people in repentance, worship and service.
The Report's paragraph 134 is difficult to understand. That there are two distinct matters over which the Church is to express regret is grammatically clear (". . . express its regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached in the events surrounding the election and consecration of a bishop for the See of New Hampshire, and for the consequences which followed," emphasis added.) These two objects of "express regret" are divided in the resolution?s first two bullets. More difficult is discerning the agent of the passive voice that declares that "the bonds of affection were breached." That that agent must, in fact, be those voting for and participating in the Robinson consecration is demonstrated by the following paragraphs (emphasis added):
[T]he divine foundation of communion should oblige each church to avoid unilateral action on contentious issues which may result in broken communion. It is an ancient canonical principle that what touches all should be decided by all. (51)No province, diocese or parish has the right to introduce a novelty which goes against [the current teaching of the Anglican Communion as a whole] and excuse it on the grounds that it has simply been put forward for reception. (69)Paul is quite clear that there are several matters . . . in which there is no question of saying ?some Christians think this, other Christians think that, and you must learn to live with the difference?. (89)[I]f [something] is indeed ?adiaphora?, is it something that, nevertheless, a sufficient number of other Christians will find scandalous and offensive, either in the sense that they will be led into acting against their own consciences or that they will be forced, for conscience?s sake, to break fellowship with those who go ahead? If the answer to the latter question is ?yes?, the biblical guidelines insist that those who have no scruples about the proposed action should nevertheless refrain from going ahead. (93)[T]hose involved [in the Robinson consecration] did not pay due regard, in the way they might and, in our view, should have done, to the wider implications of the decisions they were making and the actions they were taking. (130)
It is of course true that the Lambeth Commission cannot order any American bishop or convention to comply. Neither can the Anglican Consultative Council, the Primates? Meeting, the Lambeth Conference or the Archbishop of Canterbury. Neither can this resolution. We who endorse a voluntary communion of churches must now demonstrate that such an arrangement can, in fact, operate as part of the one, holy, catholic and apostolic Church. The question is simple: "Do we really want unity within the Anglican Communion?" (66)
The Rev. Douglas Taylor-Weiss SS. Peter & John, Auburn
