Statement by the Vestry of St. Andrew's Episcopal Church

As mentioned in a previous post, the national church has invited each diocese and parish of The Episcopal Church to comment on the proposed Angican Covenant, which will be considered at the next General Convention in 2012.  The parish of St. Andrew's in Albany formed a six-week workshop beginning in January to study the covenant.  After much prayerful consideration, discussion and friendly debate, it was determined that the group would present a resolution to the vestry for possible submission to the national church. 

Whether your parish agrees with the stand taken by the Diocese of Albany or not, your parish has been invited to "engage in discussion of the proposed Covenant" and to submit its findings to the national church for consideration by General Convention.  The reflections of each parish are as welcome to The Episcopal Church as are the decisions of each diocese.  Your parish has been invited to join the national conversation.

The vestry of St. Andrew's approved the following resolution at its monthly meeting on March 21st.  The resolution is substantially the same as the one presented to it by the study group of the parish:

Resolution of the Vestry
   St. Andrew's Episcopal Church
Albany, New York

In response to the invitation extended to all parishes in The Episcopal Church to study and comment upon the proposed Anglican Communion Covenant, this parish of St. Andrew's Episcopal Church in Albany, New York recommends that the General Convention of The Episcopal Church not endorse the Covenant. These are our reasons:

• The Lambeth Quadrilateral of 1888 provides a sufficient base for the unity of The Anglican Communion.
• The discipline that would be imposed by the Covenant is contrary to the traditional autonomy of the provinces of the Anglican Communion [Covenant § 3.2.2] and, in particular, of The Episcopal Church.
• The Covenant would change the balance of Scripture, reason, and tradition by minimizing the role of reason.
• We are concerned that the Covenant would establish an ultimate teaching authority that would impair freedom of conscience by dictating which beliefs and norms are permitted to Anglicans.
• We believe The Episcopal Church should continue to be free to respond to its discernment of God's will.

Comments

[Ann Gaillard]

Following St. Andrew's lead, the Vestry of the Church of St. Luke in Saranac Lake unanimously voted last night passing a resolution not to endorse the Anglican Covenant and to send that resolution to the national Church.

[Joseph M. Liotta]

What Father Brown fails to mention is that the two concentration weeks in Wisconsin can be waived. The program is on line and I've read it. With the waiver it does become 100% mail order, albeit email order.

While it is true that I attend an Episcopal Church in the St. Lawrence Deanery, and I faithfully fulfill many duties and ministries for my home church there, I feel much closer to the people of the Episcopal Diocese of Southwest Florida. Here the whole feeling suits my spirtual life and growth.

All of this change in me started when the leadership of Diocese of Albany went "south" right after Bishop Robinson's Ordination. Nothing is going to change in the Diocese of Albany. I am thankful to God that I have a much more Christian life at least for part of the year. I can't get that in the Diocese of Albany and I'm not alone. That is what the problem with the Diocese of Albany is. The Diocese has turned its back on many of its members.

[Robert T Dodd]

Returning to the point of John White's post: St. Andrews's decision on the Covenant is less important than the careful study that led to it. I wonder how many other DoA parishes took the time to examine the document after Bp. Love and the Standing Committee gave it a free pass.

It is ironic that those who most desire an Anglican contract are least interested in discussing its implications. It's easier to let bishops think for us, but not Anglican to do so and definitely not Episcopalian.

Here's to St. Andrew's Albany, the Diocese of Los Angeles, and New Zealand's Maoris for thinking hard and speaking up!

ROBERT T DODD

[Fr. Christopher Brown]

Actually, the Nashota program has a significant onsite component, with two very concentrated weeks in Wisconsin every few months. It is an excellent program, and a creative solution to the problem that many seminaries are trying to solve, of providing alternatives to expensive onsite programs for non-traditional students.

I suspect that Joe's comment about the Nashota graduate in the St. Lawrence deanery came across more negatively than he intended. The fact is, the priest in question had one of the best ordination exams of that year – and that is compared with Albany seminarians from Yale, Trinity, Nashota House and Oxford. I worked extensively with seminarians as a tutor at General and Union Seminaries in New York City, and she is one of the most gifted theological students I have known. I taught her Greek several years ago and we continue to translate texts weekly. I suspect her Greek is better than at least 90% of the priests in Diocese (and most other dioceses as well). Added to that, she has real pastoral gifts.

I do think it is bad form to speak ill (even by implication) of a priest who is just starting out in one's own deanery.

[Joseph M. Liotta]

Father Longbottom, that convention was a farce regarding the resolution to approve the covenant. I know that for sure because I was there.

It is the same farce that is carried on at Nashotah House and Trinity Seminary.

Why, one could even get a mail order clerical degree from Nashotah House and not even show up. It's happened recently and the person in now a "full fledged priest" in the Diocese of Albany serving as a Rector in the St. Lawrence Deanery.

Our Bishop is a graduate of the instituation and serves on its board of directors. Priests in the Diocese of Albany can now only come from those two places.

That adds to the narrow minded mind-set we are enduring.

[Rev. Robert Longbottom]

I do imagine that the only churches in the Diocese of Albany that will be making individual submissions are those who disagree with the resolution that passed at convention June 2010 in favor of the proposed Alngican Covenant in its current form. Why do I think this? It is not because the churches of the diocese have not discussed the proposed Anglican Covenent. It is because after much discussion at the church level and through voting at convention, most of our churches have given our response to the the national Church that we are in support of the proposed Anglican Covenent in its current form.
This does not mean that Churches, clergy and Vestry who are not in favor of the proposed Anglican Covenant in its current form should not submit their considerations. They very much should. It is just that this diocese and its churches have already done the work of consideration and have passed that along through the resolution at convention last June recommending the adoption of the covenant by the Episcopal Church.

[Robert T. Dodd]

With the time period for comment on the proposed covenant soon to run out (24 April), it is encouraging to see a parish weigh the pros and cons and reach a conclusion. May others follow the lead of Christ Church Hudson and St. Andrew's, Albany! The covenant's implications are much too important to ignore.

Literature on the covenant is vast, daunting. A good entry point is THE ANGLICAN COVENANT, A CHURCH TIMES GUIDE. Accessible through links on Preludium (anglicanfuture.blogspot.com)and Episcopal Cafe', it includes first rate essays for and against the covenant and a richly annotated version of that document. A cover editorial steers a middle path and encourages British dioceses to make up their own minds.

Please make up your mind and speak out. Hey, it's your Episcopal Church and your Anglican Communion!

Robert T. Dodd