Episcopalians Elect 1st Female Leader

COLUMBUS, Ohio (AP) - Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori became the first woman to lead any church in the global Anglican Communion when she was elected Sunday to be the presiding bishop of the Episcopal Church.

The choice of Jefferts Schori may worsen - and could even splinter - the already difficult relations between the American denomination and its fellow Anglicans. Episcopalians have been sparing with many in the other 37 Anglican provinces over homosexuality, but a female leader adds a new layer of complexity to the already troubled relationship.

Only two other Anglican provinces - New Zealand and Canada - have female bishops, although a handful of other provinces allow women to serve in the post. Still, there are many Anglican leaders who believe women should not even be priests.

Jefferts Schori was elected at the Episcopal General Convention, where delegates have been debating whether to appease Anglican leaders by agreeing to temporarily stop ordaining gay bishops.

In 2003, the Americans shocked the Anglican world by electing the first openly gay bishop - V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. Placing a female bishop at the head of the denomination could further anger conservatives worldwide and even within the U.S. church. And Jefferts Schori voted to confirm Robinson.

More at:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-5895315,00.html

And a slap-back at the Anglican communion, which strongly warned the Episcopals NOT to elect another gay bishop. So what do they do? They elect a woman instead. :rofl:

''In 2003, the Americans shocked the Anglican world by electing the first openly gay bishop - V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire. Placing a female bishop at the head of the denomination could further anger conservatives worldwide and even within the U.S. church. And Jefferts Schori voted to confirm Robinson. ''

:woohoo:

...upon hearing the news of Schori's election to Presiding Bishop, "Thanks be to God! I'm old news!"

was that Episcopalians aren't afraid to thumb their noses at Canterbury. The Archbishop isn't a pope!

I was exposed to growing up was the Episcopalian Faith. None of that evangelical crap; no horrid rules to follow; they didn't even lean that heavily on the original sin BS - Episcopalians - Catholics w/o the guilt.

...and a pilot! She's married to a research mathematician.

She received a B.S. in biology from Stanford University, 1974; an M.S. in oceanography from Oregon State University, 1977; a Ph.D. from Oregon State University, 1983; an M.Div. from Church Divinity School of the Pacific, 1994; and a D.D. from Church Divinity School of the Pacific, 2001.

http://www.episcopalchurch.org/53785_71139_ENG_HTM.htm

A profile of Jefferts Schori can be found here:

http://www.episcopal-life.org/26724_73917_ENG_HTM.htm

On edit: Added educational info and link.

<snip>

Jefferts Schori doesn’t want to see the church diminish its commitment to either the Communion or the Anglican Consultative Council. “We have to take every opportunity that God sets in front of us to define ourselves and yet continue to engage the rest of the communion.”

She isn’t sure the Episcopal Church is accomplishing that. “At times we cringe before clarity out of fear of political incorrectness or being misunderstood as neo-colonial. We cannot engage in authentic dialogue and reconciliation until we are clear about who we are, what we believe and why … The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion are going to survive if we manage to work together at healing the world.”

<snip>

The bishop is straightforward when asked about the controversy over sexuality issues -- ordination and same-gender blessings. “My sense is that gay and lesbian people are created in the image of God, and we need to recognize that and make place for everyone to share their gifts in whatever way the church and God are calling them to use those gifts. I don’t think that one’s sexual orientation is a bar to ordination.”

Jefferts Schori is married to Richard Miles Schori, a retired theoretical mathematician. Their daughter, Katharine Johanna, 24, is a second lieutenant in the U.S. Air Force, a pilot like her mother.

More:
http://www.episcopal-life.org/26724_73917_ENG_HTM.htm

Right now, everyone is concerned about her gender and her (very laudable) stands on gay issues. But I suspect soon she will assume a leadership role in the churches on environmental issues, because she will be able to speak with unusual authority both as a scientist and as a prelate. Important as gender and sexuality issues are, global warming and other environmental issues will ultimately be far more important, and we will need strong voices speaking on behalf of these issues.

...than the fact that she was a woman with views close to my own.

splitting into divergent varieties that occupy different niches.

It's almost as if they're evolving.

It's true! By the way, Episcopalians by and large don't have a problem with evolution. The membership of the denomination is largely well-educated and the clergy all have at least a masters degree.

It took 126 years from the first women "set aside" as "deaconesses" in 1850 until the General Convention allowed women to be ordained to all orders of the priesthood in 1976. During that time, the issue of women in Holy Orders nearly split the Anglican Communion; there is a movement within the American church still that refuses to acknowledge women deacons, priests and bishops. Many of the "global south" Anglican churches that so object to gay clergy have expressed equal antipathy to women servings in Orders.

See Equal Rites for Women: A History of the Ordination of Women in the Episcopal Church.

Episcopal Church Dialog:

Americans: We've ordained a gay guy as Bishop!

Developing Nations: Oh, that's outrageous! That's dangerous! We want to split from you!!

Americans: Well, how about if we just don't ordain any more gay guys?

Developing Nations: Okay, we'll let that one slide. Please send us food?

Americans: Hey, we appointed a chick as Bishop!

Developing Nations: You're destroying Western Civilization with your wickedness!

Americans: Oh, grow-up!

Developing Nations: We'll split away from you!

Americans: No, you won't. We're gonna split away from YOU!

Developing Nations: Fine! But will you still send us food? Our people are starving and hungry.

Americans: But not so hungry and starving that you don't have time to worry about a gay woman bishop in America?

Developing Nations: A GAY WOMAN now, too?

Americans: Heh heh.. no, not YET. We're saving that for NEXT year.

Developing Nations: Not before Monsoon season, okay? Our people are...

Americans: Starving... yeah, yeah, we know. You'll get your food, okay?

Developing Nations: Even if we split away?

Americans: Of course! We're Christians and believe in charity toward the poor.

Developing Nations. Of course. Why should we have doubted you. Now, excuse me while I go tell the press that American Episcopalians are all damned to Hell for condoning homosexuality.

Americans: We didn't say how MUCH food we'd send you...

Developing Nations: Hey.... wait...

Americans: We're kidding. Sally Struthers will be there on schedule, same time, next year.

Developing Nations: With food?

Americans: Yes, with food.

Developing Nations: She's not a lesbian, is she?

Americans: Excuse me... I need to go pray REALLY hard right now.

I just saw somewhere that 3 diocese may leave the ECUSA

I for one will not be sorry to see them go if they do leave

if they are so opposed to the message that God loves us all, they have no place in a denomination that preaches that

The other two?

Quincy (Illinois)
San Joaquin (California)
Fort Worth (Texas)

They're the most likely candidates to leave and leave fast.

I picked this up in the following NYT article regarding the election:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/19/us/19bishop.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

The Rt. Rev. Bavi Rivera, currently serving as Bishop Suggragan (ie assistant bishop) of the Diocese of Olympia (my diocese), was ordained in 1976, one of the very first women to be ordained after the General Convention allowed women to enter Holy Orders. Her father, the Rt. Rev. Victor Rivera, was the Bishop of the San Joaquin at the time, and one of the leading voices against the ordination of women. Not only did he refuse to take part in his daughter's ordination, he subsequently refused to allow his own daughter, and all other women, to serve in a clerical capacity within his diocese. His successor and current bishop, the Rt. Rev. John-David Schoffield (who confirmed me :afraid: ), still refuses to allow any women to serve as clergy within the diocese.

The irony comes from the fact that the elder Bishop Rivera not only took part in his daughter's consecration as bishop in January, 2005, he gave her his own bishop's cope during her investiture. He also acknowledged afterwards that his position on female priests had been wrong and contrary to Christ's teachings, and was very proud of what his daughter has accomplished.

There is further irony, too. The canons that authorized the ordination of women had a "grandfather" clause which allowed bishops holding office at the time in 1976 to refuse to ordain women as priests and to refuse women from serving as clergy within their diocese. All bishops granted this exemption from Canon Law have since retired, so Bishop Schoffield and a few others are who continue this ban are in direct violation of church law anyway, and could (theoretically) be stripped of clerical privileges and kicked out of office. I expect that if any of these dioceses try to leave the Episcopal church, this is exactly what will happen.

I really do feel that the "reasserters", "traditionalists", "conservatives" or whatever you want to call them have been shown, for the most part, exceptional care by the more liberal majority and, indeed have been priveleged in some ways in terms of their influence and standing.

Old fable: Christ is the Anglican Communion's foundation, and compromise is the basement. Everything else is built up from there. The moral is that while compromise may be dark, damp and unpleasant, it is often times a better choice than the tornado raging above, provided we don't cower down there in fear when it is merely windy.

The Church of England was born in compromise, when Elizabeth I defined the "middle way" between extreme Catholicism and extreme Protestantism. After the American Revolution and the dissolution of the state church in the former colonies, compromise allowed the creation of the Episcopal Church of the United States of America. Compromise kept the church together when the ordination of Absalom Jones as the first black deacon in 1795 and first black priest in 1802 threatened to rip the American church apart. Compromise kept the church together when women were allowed ordination as deacons in 1970 and to all orders of clergy in 1976. And compromise will, no doubt, keep the church together until gay men and women are recognized as also having a calling to the priesthood as they are.

Personally, I feel that the church has been too willing to compromise, which has led to the current set of problems in the United States. Every deacon, priest and bishop vows in writing, as a signed contract: I do solemnly engage to conform to the doctrine, discipline, and worship of The Episcopal Church. Violation of canon law is a direct violation of that ordination vow, and should be grounds for immediate dismissal. But alas, the Episcopal Church continues to cower in the basement.

Meanwhile, the Talibangelicals that make up the majority of provinces in the Anglican Communion have no basements at all. I would even go so far as to say that their foundation is pure Biblical literalism, untainted by anything resembling Christ.

I started ignoring those attention whores when they first started leaving over the revised prayer book back in the 1970s. Why it's 1928, all over again.

One of the pillars of the Episcopal Church is that its dogma isn't immutable.

to "leave" the ECUSA over a change in the prayer book ... or the daily worship... because that affects me. A gay bishop in NH has nothing to do with me.

I personally mourned the loss of the 1928 because it was part of my childhood, but I dealt.

I still don't like the new hynmal!

I mourned the 1928 prayer book for the same reason but in the end I thought there were some good changes in the newer book and dealt with it. Then those women were ordained....

ECUSA is one of the more democratic, big tents out there for Christian faiths. I've long thought that if you disagree that strongly with your denomination and you're not willing to work it through within your faith, it's time to move on. :hi:

...that don't approve of women's ordination (much less the ordination of a out gay man), but I can't find a source for that. The ten dioceses that have affiliated themselves with the Anglican Communion Network (the lead traditionalist group in the ECUSA) are:\

Albany
Central Florida
Dallas
Fort Worth
Pittsburgh
Quincy
Rio Grande
San Joaquin
South Carolina
Springfield

The leadership of this group is centered in Texas. Between my country and my church, I've had just about enough Texas for awhile. (Apologies to Texas liberals, who really know how to fight the good fight!)

...the three dioceses that won't ordain women, per this NYT article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2006/06/19/us/19bishop.html?_r=2&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

ta-da! You guessed it! MONEY!

Because the liberal ECUSA has all the land and the churches while the various new Anglican congregations are all holed up in strip malls.

Look for big, big court cases coming up. One will be right here in Tallahassee.

This woman looks like a great choice for our church.

...I'd be inclined to let the conservatives take their property with them. Vaya con Dios and don't let the chapel door hit you where the good Lord split you. Of course, defining what is "their" property would create a few tussles.

I was amused to read one post on a conservative blog that said the conservatives should just leave without their property and they could buy it back for pennies on the dollar when the liberal churches go bankrupt.

I'd like to scoff at the idea of the liberal congregations going bankrupt, but...around here it could play out that way. The conversatives that have left the five churches (all but one ECUSA church in Talla) have been the vast majority of the congregation, and in at least one case, the "old money." St. John's, the mother church of the diocese, split down the middle with half staying and half going, but the entire staff, all the priests (3 or 4) and the whole vestry went conservative. The big difference here was that one of the splitter bought..BOUGHT.. an empty church. KaBang! Brand new parish with everything in place. The other parishes, however, the split off folks are renting storefronts, etc.

...so it seems improbable to me. Probably need to broaden my perspective. Conservatives are very much in the minority here, although we did have three parishes split off and submit themselves to the Bishop of Uganda.

On edit: typo fixes

And so a new priest would be named, interim. Then the parish (what was left after the others left) would call a new priest, approved by the bishop.

Might mean new small parishes in nice churches for a while. Too bad about that. (That was sarcasm, by the way).

The diocese owns the churches, the land, everything.

So they can leave, but they leave with the shirts on their back -- so long as they're not vestments belonging to the church!

And as nasty of me as it sounds, I'm feeling a lot like "good riddance".

Good for her!!!
:bounce:

We attended the same parish in Corvallis, Oregon long before she became a priest.

She always seemed personally impressive somehow, so I'm delighted that she was elected.

LL (posting from Japan, where it's 4:45 PM Monday, or, according to my computer, 2:44AM Monday) :-)

I think the Church does a pretty good job in placing very exceptional folks as Bishops. I have never kown one who was "ho-hum."

;-)

...and the role of the conservative faction in the Episcopal Church:

http://blog.edow.org/weblog/2006/06/the_story_they_missed.html

"Scanning the wires tonight, I have become weary of the privileged place that the Anglican right is receiving in news stories about the election. What about these brave campaigners who are still less than 1/10th of the house of bishops (12 of the 180+ voting today) who have endured years of condescension from their brother bishops who don�ft know enough to recognize their own sexism? Where were they in today�fs stories? Kathrine Jefferts Schori wouldn�ft even be a priest without the likes of Barbra Harris. So why is it that she isn�ft in today�fs stories and the usual American Anglican Council-types are? (Not that I mind people quoting the Rev. David Anderson speaking against he Episcopal Church. As the Larry King show demonstrated the other night, there are few things more beneficial for our Church than to have David Anderson speak against it.)

The press loves conflict and the quick interview, no matter how small the group causing the conflict might be. It is worth repeating here that when the clergy and lay deputations of each diocese were asked to confirm Jefferts Schori�fs election, she received what amounts to 90 percent of the vote. In politics this is a landslide. In the Episcopal Church, somehow, it shows we are rent asunder."

http://blog.edow.org/weblog/2006/06/the_story_they_missed.html

I was having a crappy morning, and this was just such welcome news!

From parish priest to bishop.
Most people don't know that unlike the RC and Methodist Churches, where the bishops have absolute authority over assigning the clergy, we don't.
How can anyone at all see a theological barrier to female clergy?
The only injunctions are in Pauline letters where Paul says he does not permit a female to have authority over a male...
The later requirements for bishop are that he be married to only one woman and be sober -- once again, that is Pauline writing, not the Gospel.
Out of Scripture, Tradition, and Reason, the Gospel trumps all of them.
Jesus never made any sexist remarks, to my knowledge!
If we are indeed a "generation of holy priests" through our common baptism, then should not all who have been at the font be allowed to be behind the altar?

I am afraid that a great deal of litigation will ensue. The national church will try to get possession of the dioscean property and various parishes will try to get control of dioscean property...

Will we end up as splintered as Orthodoxy?

More discussion here:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=102x2345863

"If the average Anglican is as you describe ( a black woman under 30, earns two dollars a day and is evangelical) she is dealing with hunger, inadequate housing, unclean water and unavailability of education. These are the places where I would start. The issue of sexuality comes along much higher on the hierarchy of needs.”