Should Katherine Jefferts Schori have spoken to the General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church?

Katharine Jefferts Schori, Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church, the hitherto principal expression of Anglicanism in the USA, addressed the General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church, meeting in Edinburgh recently.  I say 'hitherto' because there are now breakaway denominations of Anglicans in the USA that are seeing tremendous numerical growth and which may very well surpass the PB's flock in size and strength before very long.  I listened to the audio of her address to the Synod and thought that it was unremarkable and unsurprising, to be honest.  I thought that she might have been more open and forthright about the issues that are devastating her own denomination.  But no.  There was a lot of spin, I have to say.  Things were going alright and could be better, was the tenor.  No mention of schism and decline, not to mention litigation and vastly expensive court cases.  Perhaps the PB was asked to go canny.  Although she was up here in episcopally autonomous Scotland, Rowan is not that far away!  In any case, you can listen to her address to the General Synod here

The PB is a controversial character round the world, to say the least, and is held responsible by many Anglicans for adding considerably to the divisions within the worldwide communion, if not creating a good many of them.  On her episcopal watch, many Anglican priests and congregations believe themselves to have been left with no options but to leave the denomination, departing without being allowed to take their church buildings or assets with them. 

In her speech to the General Synod, the PB speaks about mission, describing it as the very reason for the church's existence.  If we are not engaged in mission, then the church might just as well close its doors.  She says that mission is the healing and restoring of all creation to 'the common weal' of God.  It is about justice and about dignity.  Its purpose is to bring all people together to live in peace.  

It seems a hollow message though, and I am struck by the absurdity of calling people to live together in peace when the denomination is tearing itself apart.  Yet we are supremely good at seeing the speck that is in the eye of another, whilst doing next to nothing about the log that is our own.  I do also wonder how it is possible to speak of justice and dignity whilst ministers and congregations are losing their church premises and livelihoods.

I am sorry that the PB spoke to a branch of the Christian Church here in Scotland, I have to say, and I am also sorry that the Bishops of the Church, to whom God's people look for leadership, gave the PB a warm welcome, and an honoured place, and received her with such joy.  My question is this.  Was the invitation to Jefferts Schori the most sensitive thing for the Scottish Bishops to offer at a time when thousands of fellow Anglicans in the USA are suffering great pain at the divisions of their denomination, and who believe that the PB is the very person who is leading the charge?  I doubt it very much.

Furthermore,  I do wonder about the wisdom of inviting the PB to speak to a denominational Synod for which the same issues that have plagued the health of the Episcopal Church in the USA are as divisive here as they are over the pond.  I know that not all clergy who attended the Synod felt themselves able to remain in the room when the PB got up to speak.

It also strikes me that if the Bishops felt that Jefferts Schori was just the person to have something from God to say to the church at this critical and fragile moment, then those of us in the Church of Scotland can only give thanks that God delivered us when the SCIFU talks about denominational union foundered a couple of years back, for I will not be alone in questioning the wisdom and spiritual judgement of those who would think it right and good to invite the PB to address the people of God in Scotland.

There are complex issues for most branches of the church in Scotland to work through at this point in time, and inviting a controversial character such as Jefferts Schori to speak into the life of the Episcopal Church cannot have done anything constructive for relationships within that part of the church, or between other parts of the wider church.  When the PB speaks of that 'radical hospitality' which the church should offer, we know what she means, and it is an agenda which divides rather than heals, though she speaks much of healing.  

The thing that I noticed most about her recorded speech?  The name of Jesus is not mentioned once.

That should sound the alarm bells ringing.

Soli Deo Gloria