Visit Your Local PBS Station PBS Home PBS Home Programs A-Z TV Schedules Watch Video Support PBS Shop PBS Search PBS
Religion & Ethics NewsWeekly -- An online companion to the weekly television news program
Keyword Search
Topic Index Stories by Week
Home
Current Stories

Perspectives
Profile
Web Exclusive
Survey
Headlines
Election Coverage
Special Issues
TV Schedule
Calendar
Newsletter
Subscribe or unsubscribe to the E-mail Newsletter, or edit your preferences.
The Series
About the Series
Funding
Biographies
Awards
Credits
For Teachers
Overview
Lesson Plan List
Tips
Teacher Resources
Resources
Viewer's Guides
Videotapes
Featured Sites
Feedback
Contact Us
Story Suggestions

INTERVIEW:
Rev. David C. Anderson
August 1, 2003    Episode no. 648
Read This Week's November 7, 2008
Go
Read more of Kim Lawton's interview with the Reverend Canon David C. Anderson, president of the American Anglican Council:

On the significance of the General Convention:

Photo of Rev. David C. Anderson For the Episcopal Church it's the most defining moment since the church was basically put together after the American Revolution. If either of two actions -- approval of Gene Robinson [as bishop of New Hampshire] or approval of same-sex unions, marriage, blessing -- were to occur, it would represent a departure from established Christian doctrine, which is really serious because it calls into question not only the relationship of the Episcopal Church as a Christian church [but also] the relationship of the Episcopal Church as an Anglican entity. This decision, which fundamentally departs from Christian doctrine as given and practiced for 2,000 years, is just huge.

On consequences for the Episcopal Church:

If this happens, it is going to call into question the role the Episcopal Church has within the global communion. It's going to produce a lot of problems in a very local sense. Parishioners, when they read the paper, are going to show up at church with that article, waving it in their rector's face, wanting to know, "What are you going to do about this?" The anticipation is that on the local level there will be significant upset. Churches may try to decide, "What do we do?" Entire dioceses will try to decide, "What do we do?" The word I want to get out to them is, "Stay put, sit tight, let's work this through." But the reality is some people will be so impatient, so frustrated and angry, that they will act precipitously, and we will lose some members immediately.

One of the important things is that there is a fairly high commitment among those of us who oppose this that we are not leaving. We are part of the Anglican Communion, part of the Anglican Church; we don't intend to go anywhere. But there is an understanding that if the Episcopal Church USA makes decisions that fundamentally take it out of even the Christian faith, let alone the Anglican Church, what does that do to their relationship with the global communion? The argument could be made that the Episcopal Church will be taking a schismatic action and setting itself up to separate itself from the Anglican Communion. But we're not going to leave; we're going to stay put and fight.

On the autonomy of local provinces in the Anglican Communion:

There is an interdependence among them, and one of the questions will be, when the primates sit down to deal with this if it happens -- and I'd love for it to not happen, but if this happens and the primates have to deal with it -- what kinds of actions will they take against the Episcopal Church USA? And that's not known, but they could declare impaired communion or even a more serious statement, and so I really don't know exactly. But the danger is that there could be a structural disintegration of the Episcopal Church; that's the danger, and we even, by our actions, put such stress on the global Anglican Communion that it puts the integrity of the global communion and its relationships at risk.

On unity:

I believe unity is very important, but if it is as important to the presiding bishop and to the House of Bishops and the General Convention, as many of the liberal leaders say it is, then I would anticipate that they would vote in a way which preserved that unity and did not take a step toward making themselves schismatic.

On turmoil within the church:

I think it's producing a very hard time for many people. I think that almost every one of the leaders in the Episcopal Church who are of the orthodox mind also have friends and people they know very well who are gay. People they care about, some people who are in committed relationships -- we will continue to love and care for them. We can't say yes to the relationship, but we want to continue to be able to love the people and care about them; sometimes they're family members, sometimes they're neighbors, sometimes they're just long-time friends. But the whole dialogue winds up creating such stress that the truth is relationships are injured, and that's a tragedy.

Continue to top of next colum
Tools:
E-Mail this article
Resources
Much of America as well as the entire world is watching, but much of the world is concerned about the sexualization of the church, and when someone takes a precipitous action within the United States and does something that is seen to be contrary to Christian doctrine, it goes on the Internet, and the mullahs in Nigeria, perhaps in Kaduna or Jos, they read that off the Internet at Friday prayers, and it is an embarrassment and a danger to the Christians who live there. I mean, we live in a global community now.

It's very emotionally laden because most of us have family members or close friends who have left the Episcopal Church over issues of the faith and the seeming departure from orthodoxy. We really want to hold the Episcopal Church to the faith that was delivered to us, that we have lived by, and that, all of a sudden now, some desire to change.

How many people will leave has a great deal to do with what kinds of decisions are arrived at after General Convention as bishops might take counsel with their dioceses at special conventions, or as rectors work with their parishes. But it has an explosive possibility.

On Scripture and human sexuality issues:

Some issues are still under active discussion, for example, the role of women in ordained ministry. I support women in ordained ministry. I've prepared and sent forward a great number of women into the ordination process. But I know that within the Episcopal Church that is a divided issue, and most of the global communion of Anglicanism does not accept it. So it's not really a settled issue.

With regard to sexuality, that touches very much on the moral fiber of a person and how they live out their sexual expression of who they are. It changes the Christian doctrine in the sense that, well, some people are saying, we know more now than they knew back then. But if Holy Scripture is inspired by God -- and if it's not, then what good is it? -- but if it is inspired by God, are they prepared to say God was dumber then and he's gotten smarter as the years go by? I don't think so. God revealed to his people what his intention for human life was and how we are to live. That has come down, and I don't think God has changed his mind or become better educated.

I think that the role of women within leadership is one that we are struggling with, and the struggle isn't settled. So that's not a done deal. As supportive as I am, that conversation is not over. The issue of sexuality and homosexuality and the role of marriage, what marriage is, is just a very key part. The early writers, the Apostle Paul, make the comparison of the relationship between Christ and his Church to be the role, really, of a husband and wife. The presupposition Jesus has is that marriage is one man, one woman in a lifelong, bonded union. This is a total departure from that. Once we make this departure, if we're going to put Scripture aside and say, well, we are going to evaluate it under new rules, where do we stop? Why can't one woman have several husbands or one man have several wives, or why can't several people be united in a communal type of commitment?

Some of the underlying problems in the Episcopal Church that go under the question of sexuality are really the authority of Scripture: Is Scripture accurate, is it God-breathed, or is it simply commentary that some people wrote down about conversations they either had or imagined they had with God? If it's that, it doesn't have much weight. But if it's God-breathed, if it's actually what God wanted to say, it has huge consequences. That's one of the issues: How do you give authority to Scripture? The second issue is, who is Jesus? Is he the Messiah for the world, the Savior, or is he simply standing in line along with other religious leaders? Jesus is great for the Christians, but every other faith group has their person and you pick whatever works for you? That frame of reference, a polytheism almost, has been creeping into the Episcopal Church. If one holds to that, one may be Episcopal, but one can't argue that they are Christian because Jesus said, "I am the way and the truth and the life, and none come unto the Father but by me." That's an extremely exclusive claim. If Jesus is telling the truth, then we have no business hiding that message or holding it back. It needs to be shared with everyone.

I think the future of the Episcopal Church and even the future of the Anglican Communion is at stake. This is a point at which, I think, history pivots.

Did you like this story? How can we improve our program or Web site?
Resources

Read the Cover Story on the looming Episcopal Rift.









TOP
© 2007 Educational Broadcasting Corporation. All rights reserved. PBS Privacy Policy Produced byThirteen/WNET New York