At the HOB meeting in Camp Hill, Texas, orthodox and revisionist bishops were divided with a number of borderline bishops who have not joined the Anglican Communion Network, appear ready to do so. If that happens, the number of bishops who could split from the ECUSA in 2006 would reach 19.

Tempers rose when the Presiding Bishop and Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan traded accusations over the Pittsburgh's bishop's role at the Dromantine Center in Northern Ireland where he joined in a celebration party following what appeared to many to be a win for the Global South Primates in getting the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church in Canada temporarily expelled from the Anglican Communion.

Following the flare up, the homoerotic bishop of New Hampshire V. Gene Robinson rose in support of Griswold and implied that Duncan was a liar. Duncan flatly denied any role in persuading the Primates. The Primates were locked down for the entire period there with the only two minders being liberals, one of them being Frank Griswold who had Barbara Braver at his side.

Two orthodox bishops told VirtueOnline that it was their opinion that the "covenant" is a poorly veiled and cynical attempt to buy time to GC2006 so that the revisionist forces can group for decisive victory at that time.

"It seems that the real confrontation will come when the Canadians and the Americans attempt to attend the ACC meeting in June. The Archbishop of Canterbury will be challenged to hold things together, because the global south bishops have already said they will walk out if ACoC and the ECUSA show up (other than for the requested defense of their past actions)."

"We will be counseling our global south friends not to walk out, but to stand their ground, keep the communion together, and firmly ask the ACoC and ECUSA representatives to leave. This will be the crunch time."

It is not schism if a "sect" is excused or removed from the greater Church, said the bishop. "The concern is the ability of the Anglican Consultative Council representatives, comprising some 100 persons from around the globe to be educated as to what's happening before they get there."

"The holes in the covenant are large enough to drive a truck through - and who are they covenanting with anyhow? Already bishops like PA Bishop Charles Bennison are saying they will not abide by the implied moratoria."

One bishop blasted Griswold's "Word to the Church" saying it was little more than assembled file sound bites from past Griswoldian-speak utterances, and if anyone can understand what the letter says they deserve a literary prize for something. They seem to think (and the PB said it) that the Africans and others simply don't understand our ways."

"I suspect that the orthodox leadership, diocesan bishops and others, will soon be gathering to prepare a firm and theological response, hopefully accompanied by palpable action, if for no other reason than that the faithful need to hear from their trustworthy leaders. The revisionists are certainly making the press," said another bishop.

One bishop, who agreed to speak on the record, was David Bena suffragan bishop for Albany who said he voted against the Statement (Covenant) because he thought it was way too weak and possibly duplicitous. "It minimally tries to answer the concerns of the Primates' Communiqué, but, in my opinion, does it without promising any real change. It does not recommend that we accept the Primates invitation to send no delegate to the Anglican Consultative Council between now and 2008, but in fact defers that decision to Executive Council."

Bishop Bena said we should have said that we encourage the Executive Council to act positively on the Primates' request. "By not doing so, we let the Primates down. We did not agree to cease allowing same sex blessings, as was requested by the Windsor Report, but instead chose to respond to the Communiqué, which asked only about RITES of same sex blessings. By stating that we as bishops will not do any of those blessings nor develop any public rites for such blessings, we are then able to NOT say that we will cease allowing them in the Episcopal Church - which is clearly the intent of both Windsor and the Communiqué."

Bena said that it was the first time he voted with the hard Left! "They of course were voting against the Covenant Statement because they thought it was TOO STRONG a statement; I was voting against it because I thought it was TOO WEAK a statement."

Speaking off the record, another orthodox bishop said Duncan asked for a point of personal privilege to answer some of the things the PB had said in his opening remarks. Duncan tried to downplay his and others' parts in being on the periphery of the Primates' Meeting ("Nara and I were vacationing in Ireland; Martin Minns was acting as staff for Peter Akinola in much the same way that Barbara Braver does to FTG..."). When he finished Gene Robinson asked for a point of privilege, and he said "Bob, I don't believe a word you have said; all the evidence in the past points in the opposite direction."

"Both Bishop Bill Swing, (California) and Ed Salmon (South Carolina) saw the interchange as opening a door for some honest discussion among all of us, and they insisted that we deal with what had happened. We spent Wednesday morning discussing why the trust level is so low. I think it was a helpful beginning, but only that," said the bishop.

The issue of whether the ECUSA and the Canadians were suspended or had to "voluntarily withdraw" was viewed by one bishop as saying, "if you politely ask someone who is in your home to leave, it is a (polite) expulsion. How else you could you view it."

In a prepared statement Network leader Bishop Duncan wrote, "I am grateful that the bishops in Texas did finally begin to engage the real concerns of the wider Anglican Communion, although the statement issued falls short of what the primates were looking for."

Among the Anglican Communion Network Bishops present were John W. Howe of Central Florida, Edward Salmon of South Carolina, and William Skilton of South Carolina (suffragan) and James Adams of Western Kansas.

Some Network bishops were not present. They included Bishop Daniel Herzog of Albany. Other bishops came and left early and they included Suffragan Bishop Henry Scriven of Pittsburgh and Bishop James M. Stanton of Dallas. American Anglican Council chairman and Springfield Bishop Peter Beckwith apparently became ill and could not attend. Those orthodox bishops who did not attend Bishop Terry Kelshaw of the Rio Grande, Bishop Keith Ackerman of Quincy, Bishop Jack Iker of Fort Worth, and Bishop John-David Schofield of San Joaquin.

Two diocesan bishops, J. Jon Bruno of Los Angeles and Charles E. Bennison of Pennsylvania said they would not obey the moratorium and they would not cease allowing their priests to bless same-sex unions in their dioceses.

None of this stopped the spin put on the meeting by the Episcopal News Service which declared that a 'new day' of collegiality had dawned in the Episcopal Church.

The Covenant Statement adopted March 15 "represents continued growth in new and healthier behavior," said Nevada Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori who clearly was not seeing what a significant portion of the bishops saw.

She echoed the party line when she said that the unanimously adopted "Word to the Church," by the House of Bishops "reflected a fresh spirit of mutual forbearance and reconciliation among us" and "the beginning of a new day in our life together."

The Archbishop of Canterbury opined that the HOB was a "constructive response" showing "a real willingness to engage with the challenges posed" but significantly did not use the word "covenant".

Because of the one year moratorium on consecrating new bishops, four dioceses -- Southern Ohio, Southwest Florida, Tennessee, and West Texas (suffragan) -- have all agreed to reschedule their elections from 2005 to 2006 so that consents will be addressed by General Convention, according to Bishop Clay Matthews of the Office of Pastoral Development within the Office of the Presiding Bishop. Three additional dioceses -- California (San Francisco Bay Area), Eastern Michigan, and Northern California -- have already scheduled elections for 2006, and consents will therefore come to General Convention, Matthews said.

An additional three elections are pending and have not yet been publicly announced, Matthews said. He added that consents to the election earlier this year of a new bishop of the Virgin Islands are not impacted by the Covenant Statement.

Revisionist and liberal bishops gave hints that all was not well in oblique references to the discord. "A direct encounter from the people who represent different dimensions provided an opportunity for us to work toward a deeper level of honesty," Mark Sisk, Bishop of New York said. Bishop Victor Scantlebury, suffragan of Chicago, said after the meeting that the exchange should be "kept in perspective," noting that the House is resilient and fully competent in meeting conflict as it arises. Bishop Jon Bruno of Los Angeles said the ways in which conflicts were addressed represented "catalysts for positive change."

Perhaps recognizing that all was not well and going to that much beloved "deeper place" of his was not quite so easy, Griswold observed: "There are times when something occurs and then the community has to reflect more deeply -- I think that Sabbath space provides just such an opportunity to reflect, and also to recognize that we are part of a larger conversation."

According to the ENS report, Griswold, throughout the meeting kept calling for a "realignment of energy that allows us to ask what is the mission, what are we asked to do for the sake of our world. We very carefully sorted out the energies among us and dealt with them in a deliberate and respectful way," Griswold said.

There is incredible denial going on. One of these days Frank's "energy" force fields will breakdown, said another bishop.

In a final flight of fantasy the HOB called on the U.S. Senate not to open the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge for fossil fuel drilling.

As one bishop observed, perhaps the HOB needs to drill a little deeper into the Bible to find God's will for sexual behavior. That's far clearer than whether or not we ought to drill for oil in the northern tundra.

But the biggest blast at the HOB came from American Anglican Council leader Canon David C. Anderson. He ripped into the "covenant" declaring, "How can faithful Episcopalians view such doublespeak from Episcopal leaders as anything but duplicitous? With regard to the so-called moratorium on consecrations, I am outraged that the House of Bishops drew equivalence between single or married individuals with those living in homosexual partnerships. To place a moratorium on all consecrations not only takes the episcopacy hostage to the homosexual agenda but also places several dioceses in crisis. Canon law requires that bishops must retire at age 72 - what happens in those dioceses where their bishop faces mandatory retirement?"

Anderson then blasted the Covenant Statement and the Word to the Church calling it insulting to the Primates of the Anglican Communion. "While it aims at specific requests of the 2004 Windsor Report and the 2005 Primates Communiqué, it fails to fulfill clear expectations outlined therein. The House claimed to affirm the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral 1888, and yet they failed to repent of their decisions and subsequent actions contrary to Scripture as well as Anglican faith and order. Note there is no affirmation of the authority of Scripture or Lambeth 1.10, which were upheld by the primates. Are there not two mutually exclusive views presented in this covenant?"

Anderson ripped into the moratorium on the blessings of same-sex unions singling out J. Jon Bruno, Bishop of Los Angeles, who, he said, violated the spirit of this pledge before the sun set on the covenant's passage. "He told the Los Angeles Times he would "not impose his 'conscience' on priests in the six-county Los Angeles diocese. They are free to bless same sex unions if they wish, he said." Anderson said even the clergy in dioceses that already practice same sex blessings will be allowed to choose whether to continue the practice."

Anderson pointed out that bishops like William Persell of Chicago, who would be willing to pitch in and help run those dioceses are revisionist bishops who will be placed in dioceses rather than individuals duly elected by diocesan convention. "This is an appalling idea that represents a great threat to biblically faithful dioceses and congregations." Anderson then lit into orthodox bishops who supported the covenant statement saying he believed they made a clear error.

Anderson then blasted Griswold for attacking an orthodox bishop as well as several faithful clergy and lay people saying his actions were "deplorable and inexcusable. I call upon him to issue a public apology."

"The Covenant fails to offer long-term, sustainable solutions and at best simply postpones inevitable conversation about the clear and ultimate choice before us - walking together or walking apart. I am thankful for the bishops who upheld orthodoxy and worked in good faith to voice the irreconcilable differences that mark the House of Bishops. I urge all bishops to make their choice and to be honest in articulating those choices. The mandate of the primates is before us all: Choose this day whom you shall serve."

Said a bishop to VirtueOnline, "I am quite sure the speculation is correct: the next General Convention will decide it all."

END