`Irregular action' among Anglicans

Christian Century, Feb 23, 2000

THE CONSECRATION by several foreign Anglican primates of two American priests as bishops is causing an uproar within the U.S. Episcopal Church, with many seeing the move as a direct challenge to church authority and tradition. "I am appalled by this irregular action," Frank T. Griswold, presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church, said in a comment on the consecrations, which took place on January 29 at St Andrew's Cathedral in Singapore.

A group of conservative Anglican leaders, unhappy with what they see as an increasingly liberal U.S. church, consecrated two American priests, John H. Rodgers and Charles H. Murphy, as bishops in the Singapore ceremony. A string of issues, especially the willingness of many U.S. bishops to accept homosexuals within the church, has prompted growing criticism by some Anglican leaders outside the U.S. Homosexuality was the most divisive subject discussed at the Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops in 1998.

Those performing the ceremony were Emmanuel Kolini, archbishop of the Province of Rwanda, and Moses Tay, archbishop of the Province of South East Asia. Joining them were Bishop John Ruchyahana, also from Rwanda, and two retired U.S. bishops, Alex Dickson, former bishop in West Tennessee, and Fitzsimmons Allison, former bishop in South Carolina.

The bishops said they hoped to plant "Anglican missions" in the U.S. which would be receptive to their conservative message. The group said the move was done amid a "crisis" within the Episcopal Church "in an initiative aimed at reversing a 30-year decline of 30 percent" in the denomination's membership.

Their action immediately drew fire from a wide range of fellow bishops and church leaders, who said the ordination constitutes an affront to Anglican tradition, in which bishops of specific geographic areas have authority over issues of ordination. "Bishops are not intercontinental ballistic missiles, manufactured on one continent and fired into another as an act of aggression," commented Archbishop Michael Peers, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada.

Given that the two Americans were ordained by bishops outside the U.S. and that it was not clear on whose authority the men could now act as bishops, it was highly unlikely that they would ever be given official recognition by the U.S. church, officials said. According to some observers, the move was an apparent attempt by a conservative faction within the worldwide Anglican Communion to try to consolidate different conservative groups. Jim Solheim, director of the Office of News and Information of the Episcopal Church, termed the move a major step for conservatives because it challenges existing church polity.

The move's implications are far-reaching, Solheim said, because it raises the issue of a possible schism within the church. "Once you challenge the polity of Anglicans, based on a geographical diocese headed by a bishop, you are inviting chaos." Ian Douglas, who teaches at the Episcopal Divinity School, agreed, saying that the move is highly significant because "of the global implications of different provinces getting mixed up in, or inserting their authority into, other autocephalous [self-governing] churches in the Anglican Communion--namely the Episcopal Church, USA." The real issue raised by the latest move, Douglas said, is about power--"in particular, power to define Anglican identity and authority."

In a letter to fellow U.S. bishops on January 31, Griswold contended that those participating in the ceremony had largely "fomented" the "purported crisis" they claimed exists. He said the church they were criticizing "bears very little resemblance to the church we actually know, which is alive and well and faithful." Griswold charged that the action would serve to "confuse and alienate the faithful in the pew, who see structures beyond the congregation as conflictual and focused on concerns unrelated to mission."

A statement from the office of George Carey, the archbishop of Canterbury and head of the Anglican Communion, said the move is a matter of "grave disappointment" because "such consecrations are irresponsible and irregular, and only harm the unity of the communion."

The move was also criticized by some conservative church leaders who said that while they understand the motivation for the action, they are deeply concerned about its implications for church unity. "While I appreciate the concern and frustration that has prompted this action, I wish to express my profound disappointment that these consecrations have taken place at this time and in this manner," said Harry Goodhew, archbishop of Sydney and a prominent conservative.

Bishop James Stanton of Dallas, who heads the conservative American Anglican Council (AAC), was an observer at a recent meeting in Kampala, Uganda, in which a group of conservative bishops met to discuss plans for the consecration of the two new bishops. Stanton said he had asked them not to take "precipitate action," according to Episcopal News Service in New York. In a statement issued on January 31, the AAC said that while it had hoped that the consecrations could have been avoided, the act marked "the beginning of a new reality for the Episcopal Church." The denomination's leadership, it said, had "utterly failed to recognize the magnitude of the crisis that is tearing apart our church."