Transcript of the Maine Bishops in conversation about the Lambeth Conference
On August 14, ten day after they returned from the Lambeth Conference, Bishop Stephen Lane and Bishop Chilton Knudsen sat down with Canon for Communications, Heidi Shott, to talk about the conference and what’s to come in the Anglican Communion, the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of Maine.
Heidi Shott: How do you contrast your personal experience at the Lambeth Conference … of meeting and listening to bishops from across the Anglican Communion … with the Archbishop of Canterbury's final presidential address in which he asked Provinces to uphold the three moratoria: ordinations of persons living in a same gender union to the episcopate; the blessing of same-sex unions; cross-border incursions by bishops.
Bishop Chilton: There was a real incongruity for me - a real disconnect - between the quality of the interaction with other bishops at Lambeth in terms of collegiality and mutual understanding and willingness to understand one another’s context and the particular pressure those contexts bring, a kind of mutuality, a sort of horizontal connection, and then on this last day to have what felt like to me a hierarchical, top down directive from the Archbishop of Canterbury, which I’ve never seen happen in my years as a bishop and I also have a sense is not really consistent with primus inter pare -- the “first among equals” to use the latin we have in the Anglican Communion. He was acting more in a kind of Papal authority in my mind, so, as I listened to him, my respect for him and his office was undiminished but I was troubled by this disconnect.
Bishop Stephen: I thought the conference created space and that all of the bishops worked very hard at coming to understand one another, creating space for one another and learning to respect one another’s contexts. I felt the final address closed the space back down. It was disappointing after all the hard work and the expressions of respect to have the Archbishop say, “You all in North America need to toe the line.”
Bishop Chilton: He wasn’t asking so much as saying, “If you do not do this I’m telling you that the communion will fragment.” In that regard, he was operating in two capacities. I think one is as the point person, the point of contact, the sort of figure of connection for the Communion. So presumably he’s telling us what he knows of the Communion in terms of its state of fragility at the moment. But also he was in a magisterial role. It wasn’t exactly, “I, Rowan, am asking you,” but more, “I’m letting you know that if you choose not to abide by these [moratoria], bad things will happen.”
So that’s how I would frame that. For me it was very clear that of the three moratoria, two of them are very specifically directed at the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada. Unfairly I believe. Same-sex blessings are going on all over the Communion, not just our part of it. That’s a well known fact. Also there are gay bishops all over the Communion. The difference for us is that we have a gay bishop who is open about that so I feel as though we have been unfairly targeted and asked to put our gay and lesbian members at risk in order to satisfy a Communion that is not looking at the whole of itself in terms of what happens and where.
Bishop Stephen: There were really parallel processes going on at Lambeth. There was the work the bishops were doing and then there was the more formal work of the Covenant Design Group and the Windsor Continuation process. I often felt there was a disconnect between the two processes in the conference. Clearly, there is a majority opinion – how large a majority is unknown – that the moratoria have been helpful to the Communion as a whole. So I imagine there is some majority that says they should continue. I felt, however, that the work the bishops did gave us room to be true and faithful in our own contexts and respectful of one another. This reiteration of the importance of the moratoria at the end felt like it shut down the work that we had done over the previous two weeks. I think for us in this Church, we’re not prepared to select one group of the baptized to pay the penalty or the price for the union of the rest. So we have important conversations coming up within this Church.
Bishop Chilton: It’s important to let our folks know that nothing is imposed on the Episcopal Church from the outside. That isn’t meant to sound rebellious or indifferent to unity, but it’s not fair to step aside from the understood channels of the governance of our Church, the polity as you know. So, although we’ve received these specific thoughts from the Archbishop of Canterbury and hear them, whether we take them on as a part of our life is really not up to a couple of bishops to decide. That’s wrestling that will have to happen at General Convention [in the summer of 2009]. As the Windsor Report itself says, we are Episcopally-led but synodically-governed, synodically meaning the gathering of all the orders of ministry in faithful deliberation.
Another thing I might say is I come to this conversation from a particular personal experience. Thirty years ago the ordination of women was opposed by a majority of the Anglican Communion. But the Episcopal Church stood in what I call one of the Martin Luther places: You know, Martin Luther’s famous utterance “Here I stand, I can do no other” [before the Diet of Worms in 1521]. We had to make a decision even aware that the majority of the Anglican Communion was not approving or ready to receive the ministry of ordained , in particular women bishops. So we prayed, we deliberated, we talked and we went ahead against the majority believing that this was the call of the Spirit. Now many years later more and more provinces in the Communion ordain women. More and more provinces will ordain women as bishops. And it happened because we stood in the Martin Luther place and made a difficult decision. So I can’t look at this current majority/minority issue except through the lens my own experience, recognizing that the majority position is not necessary the will of God.
Heidi Shott: Can you say more about the character of the conversations that went on in your study and discussion groups?
Bishop Stephen: I think it’s true for all of us that in the context of the conference, outside of our own settings and in the privacy of our discussion groups, we had some room for conversation that allowed us to listen to points of view that we may not hold ourselves. We worked really hard to hear others and to share our own perspectives and they worked hard to hear us. And then we’d all go home and have to deal with the realities that we face there. I think there was an elasticity about the conference that was really healthy and good. I don’t think it means that people won’t continue to hold the points of view that they’ve formerly articulated or that they deal with in their synods. I do think, however, that in the midst of this we came to some new understandings and new respect. I think all of us began to understand at a much deeper level the importance of context and who the baptized are. The church is very different in different places and those realities shape how the church proclaims the Gospel and how it understands the Gospel and how it is faithful to the Gospel.
Bishop Chilton: In the privacy of conversations that were Bible study size, eight people, or indaba group size, 40 people, with an understanding that nothing said in the room went outside the rooms, as trust built over the day-by-day meetings, a number of bishops from provinces of the Communion that are known to be opposed to the Episcopal Church’s openness to the ministry of all the baptized confessed to me that there was a lot of peer pressure to hold a line. That they would leave the conversation and share with other bishops from their home province that they had found their minds opening up to other possibilities and they were quickly chastised. So there is a peer pressure effect that operates in all directions but I know that nothing is simple. This Lambeth was a patchwork. So if you’re looking at just that one square of the issue of gay and lesbian people in the life of the Church, it’s fabric that’s got all kinds of designs on it and each one of the designs on that fabric piece is going to say “I am the truth” but you’ve got to keep in mind that it’s a montage. The whole patchwork though is really of importance.
One more thing: The sense of autonomy that provinces have in the Anglican Communion is inherent. It’s in our bloodstream; it’s in our DNA. It isn’t just Americans being feisty. It’s everywhere. It’s a funny kind of post-colonialism if you will. “No central authority’s going to tell US how to be the Church!” And I heard that from Australia, from New Zealand, from parts of Asia, from other parts of Africa. So there’s a bunch of dynamics here and to put it into one or two sentences is unfair to the complexity of it.
Another thing: The presence of gay and lesbian people in the exhibit hall and at fringe events was respectful, prayerful, witnessing. So I was glad they were there. Many bishop who went to their events or took the time to talk, came away with the experience that we all know because we have an incarnate God. Because when we talk to someone in the flesh, they are no longer an issues. They are a person and our mind changes, not necessarily our big position but our sense of urgency about this issue softens.
Heidi Shott: Please talk about the development of the reflection paper. Is anything in it binding?
Bishop Chilton: This document that represents the compilation of indaba group reports was the product of a team of writers who were up all night and under the deadline. It was not adopted by the convention or formally acted upon or anything in final form. It was given to us about an hour or so before we all went to bed on the last night. We had opportunity to give input to it during its development but at no point have we seen the entire document. We commented on pieces. In my view comments were made that are not adequately reflected here. So it is an imperfect process. It’s important for our people to know that this does not represent an outcome that has any binding authority. It’s simply “what everybody talked about.” And here it is all compiled for you.
Heidi Shott: You described that, +Steve, at the summer chapel meeting last week. That you see this document as a summary of what was said and discussed.
Bishop Stephen: I think that’s the only way it can be understood: Eighteen faithful writers trying to summarize, fairly, what was said in their groups of 40; developing consensus where it seemed like ten of the groups said the same thing. So that’s how the document was put together. We got to check back on certain sections of it. We had some feedback on the environmental sections, some feedback on the section on biblical authority, but, for most of it, there was no back and forth check-in process. It was done as +Chilton said, late at night by some really tired people. I’m impressed that the writing is as good as it is. But it really is only a summary of conversation.
Heidi Shott: The reflection paper calls upon the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada to uphold "a season of gracious restraint" to allow for more consideration of how the Churches of Anglican Communion can continue to walk together. For the Episcopal Church, which through official acts of General Convention has been clear that gay and lesbian members are full members of the church, how can we honor the request to continue the moratoria without asking our gay and lesbian members to bear the whole burden?
Bishop Chilton: I think it’s important to say that moratoria are not universally enforced. There is no moratorium about anything at all except a moratorium we [General Convention 2006] enacted called BO33 that says we [the Episcopal Church] would refrain from consecrating a gay, partnered bishop until further notice. So there is no other moratorium in place. There are three moratoria proposed, including one that has already been violated since Lambeth which has to do with incursions. That’s a word for border crossings by bishops from other parts of the Anglican Communion into a province without the permission of the bishop of that province or into dioceses without the permission of that bishop, a normal, appropriate, courteous action systematically violated. So the suggestion of moratoria is really an utterance from a simple majority position. Because there was no voting, no resolutions, no head-counting at this conference. I think it’s important for us not to talk about majorities except in a suggestive kind of way.
The Episcopal Church has no moratorium on blessing people of the same gender, whatever shape that takes. [General] convention has consistently refused initiatives for us put some kind of ban or restraint on such blessings. We’ve actually enacted legislation at convention that’s said we’re of different minds about that but we’ll always be attentive pastorally the needs of gay and lesbian people. So of the moratoria there is only one province in the whole Anglican Communion that has adopted one of the three formally. And that’s us in BO33, which I think was passed under duress and was the product of what I regard as a very clumsy discernment process.
Bishop Stephen: I think it’s fair to say that the folks who weren’t there have rejected a relationship with the Episcopal Church at this point. So their opinion about moratoria is unknown and probably would be viewed as inadequate because they really want separation or they want a repeal or they want a number of other things. I think the final document simply states the reporting of the various indaba groups, and it was the consensus of the writers of that document that there was a majority in favor of instituting various moratoria.
Bishop Chilton: The conversation about the issue of [same-sex] blessings is shaped for us by the fact that states in our union authorize civil unions for gay and lesbian people. It’s also important that blessings of same-sex unions are happening all over the globe in the Anglican Communion. There is a targeting of the Episcopal Church as the sort of bad guy in all this for reasons that are complicated. But I reject the burden for being the target for energies that really belong throughout the whole communion. I’m just feisty about that, I guess.
The May Anglican Consultative Council is only one step in the development of the Windsor Continuation and the Covenant Development process. It’s possible that an Covenant may specify penalties but a covenant is years away from formal adoption . In many cases it would have to be enacted though multiple bodies that don’t meet very often. So the issue of penalties or the casual talk you hear about the Episcopal Church being excluded or demoted or any of those terms really is very speculative, it’s years down the road. The only way that could happen would be if the whole Communion agrees to some kind of particular centralized process, and I don’t see that happening. I don’t know whether you do or not.
Bishop Stephen: I don’t.
Bishop Chilton: I don’t see there being that kind of centralization of magisterial authority.
Bishop Stephen: And for a variety of reasons: some have constitutional impediments that would require major changes in their constitutions which will not occur. For others, I think it is a legacy of colonialism and they refuse to have any outside authority define for them what it means to be Church. And for other I think it is a matter of simple respect. They expect their life to be respected, they will respect others’ lives and therefore, out of that respect, they will not vote to impose a uniform standard on the Church. So I think it’s a long way off, if at all.
I think in Maine we’ve worked very hard to make sure there is room at the table for everyone. That has not changed. That will continue to be our perspective on these matters. Everyone is welcome. Every one has a place at the table. We will continue to honor and support the ministries of gay and lesbian people. We will continue to support the participation of gay and lesbian people in the life of all of our congregations and nothing has changed in Maine or in the Episcopal Church. We’ve had this conference. It’s been important in terms of new relationships. Any changes or adjustments or innovations or anything like that are years away and will require the action of General Convention. so I want to be clear that in Maine we will continue as we have and we’ll continue to invite everyone to be at the table.
It’s also important to say that those whose perspectives on these matters might be described as traditional or conservative in some ways understand that their participation in our life is wanted and needed and they also have a place at the table. We are not in the business of excluding anyone from Christ’s table here in Maine.
Heidi Shott: Archbishop of Southern Africa Thabo Makgoba said, "Where I come from the sacred and humane are seen as one stream that flows and feeds one another." As one of the biggest worldwide networks of any kind, the Anglican Communion has the both the potential and the capacity to be very effective in the effort to fight extreme poverty. How do you feel the Lambeth Conference will contribute to partnerships and efforts to halve extreme poverty in the world by 2015 and achieving the Millennium Development Goals? How can the Diocese of Maine be a part of those efforts?
Bishop Stephen: Each of us in our indaba groups was asked how we as bishops intended to support the MDGs and the effort to end extreme poverty. All of us as bishops considered that question. Each of us brings home to our diocese a new sense of urgency about that and a desire to look at how each of our dioceses functions and ask the question: “Can we as a diocese make a deeper or wider contribution to the fight against poverty?” There was real consensus around the importance of this and real commitment to giving the Gospel concrete shape in terms of action against poverty. For many of our brothers and sisters around the world this is the most important thing: It’s HIV/AIDS, it’s education, it’s clean water, it’s climate change and that’s really what’s important in their lives.
AIDS orphans are a huge issue for the Anglican Church in many places with bishops actually adopting a number of orphans personally in order to support them. One bishop’s spouse in my wife’s conversation group has already adopted nine AIDS orphans in her community. I think we came away with a sense of real solidarity around these issues and a real commitment to go back home to talk about the ways we can cooperate to make a difference.
Heidi Shott: Any last comments?
Bishop Chilton: A great thing that happened at the Conference was the coming together of ecumenical and interfaith folks who lived among us, took part in our conversations, and took some time up front to address the conference in various ways. That was a lovely witness and a beautiful experience for me, especially talking to an Orthodox prelate about the ministry of women. The Orthodox Church is very clear that that is a question that lies ahead of them. So those interactions were a beautiful part of the conference.
Another courageous part of the conference that I think was a part of our strength and solidarity was spending a whole day talking about the issue of violence against women and children. We did some self-examination around how we participate or are complicit in looking the other way or in declining to have policies of prevention and protection. Everybody had personal stories to offer about injuries that have been experienced, including injuries in the context of the Church. That was a very humbling day. The group I was with did a lot of honest truth-telling. It was well done and we did it in the context of Bible study and with some chancel drama that brought the point home. I want to flag session as a real first for such a cross-cultural discussion on such a sensitive, sensitive issue.
One last thing. There was opportunity given to us to do carbon off-setting - for us to make contributions to designated organizations through the conference office. All of us who were there were aware that we used a lot of fuel and that we consumed a lot of resources. In many ways issues like our presence at Buckingham Palace kind of sit uncomfortably with the commitment to the alleviation of poverty. So the carbon off-setting program allowed us a way to make a difference, and I want it on record that the Diocese of Maine participated significantly.
Bishop Stephen: I think the story of the martyrs of Melanesia underlay a lot of the conference in terms of the presence the Melanesian brothers and sisters. They processed the Gospel at the opening Eucharist. Their martyrs were commemorated at the closing Eucharist. They were members of the chaplaincy team, part of the group that lead prayers everyday and were available to bishops for counsel. They played their music in various places. So they were a real presence.
At the opening Eucharist everybody said, “Who are these people who dance around in grass skirts and process the Gospel in a boat…in a little canoe?” And some people were disconcerted by that. Some were impressed, but others were saying, “Oh, what is this?” By the end of the conference, we understood that here in our midst were people who had given their lives for the Gospel, who died for peace, who were actually icons for the cost of discipleship. We went from saying “Who are these people?” to saying “These are wonderful witnesses of the Gospel and deserve not only our respect but our affection and support.” I think that was a wonderful thread that ran through the whole conference.
