Two more responses to "Primatial Vicar" Proposal

Integrity has responded as follows:

Integrity President Susan Russell commended the alternative primatial oversight proposal developed in New York earlier this week and announced today: “It is a proposal steeped in the classical Anglican approach of “both/and’-protecting the polity of The Episcopal Church while offering a pastoral response to those who hold a minority theological opinion.”

Russell went on to say: “Since this meeting was attended by Canon Kenneth Kearon, Secretary-General of the Anglican Communion, I think it is fair to assume that the Archbishop of Canterbury supports this proposal. Integrity
urges those dioceses that have requested alternative primatial oversight to accept this proposal so we can all get on with the work of the Gospel. It is long past time to put these divisive issues to rest and unite as one to do the work of God-such as striving to end the AIDS pandemic and proclaiming together the Good News of God in Christ Jesus.”

***

Stand Firm has posted comments by Bishop Iker here:

While I am grateful for the efforts of those who crafted the proposal, I find it unacceptable and unworkable in its present form.

Perhaps it needs to be clarified that we have not requested someone to serve as “the Presiding Bishop’s designated pastor” to us; we have appealed for an alternative primate. Nor has this appeal been made to the Presiding Bishop, but to the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates of the Anglican Communion. We expect a suitable response from them at the Primates’ Meeting in February.

This new proposal is deficient in that it seeks to reinforce the PB’s authority over us rather than provide an acceptable alternative. We cannot accept a Primatial Vicar appointed by her and accountable to her, who “could” function for her only when so delegated by her. In addition, the provisional nature of the proposal does not meet our needs for a long-term solution to our irreconcilable differences.