What Hope for Orthodox Episcopalians?

A helpful exchange in the midst of this long but interesting discussion at Pontifications:

27. Fr. Dow Sanderson Says: March 1st, 2006 at 4:47 pm
The conversations have digressed a bit from the original question: What will “Network” dioceses do after the expected General Convention Disaster (Disaster II or III or IV?)…The lawsuits, property/money/pension issues aside, Where would they go as whole entities? The “Network” (wretched name BTW) can’t “declare” itself a church. With what is it in communion? Either it could allign itself with an individual Southern Cone diocese (a la AMiA), or the little remnant could wait for some Lambeth judgement, holding on for dear life until 2008. I don’t know any traditional Anglo-Catholics who want to go further out on a limb. Individual conversions seem to some as the only practical solution (as Fr. Kimel has done), but to whom do whole parishes/dioceses turn if the dear sweet Anglican experiment ultimately fails (or as many have suggested, has already done so)? It is a very painful place to be. So when you don’t know where to turn, it is understandable that some network bishops have stated that they aren’t leaving ECUSA. They have no choice. There isn’t a something else.

36. pontificator Says: March 1st, 2006 at 6:00 pm
Re #27: Father Sanderson, what do you think about the possibility of the creation of a parallel province? Matt over at Stand Firm is holding out the hope that the 7th Convocation will form the basis for such an ecclesiastical entity.
I suppose the Network hope is that ++Rowan will expel ECUSA, excluding the Network dioceses, from the Anglican Communion (does he have the authority to do this?). The Network dioceses would then become the “authentic” Anglican presence in the U.S. Perhaps then on this basis, appeal could be made to the courts, on the basis of the ECUSA Constitution, to legally separate those dioceses from ECUSA and allowing them to keep their property. Is this the hope?

48. Fr. Dow Sanderson Says: March 2nd, 2006 at 10:08 am
Re: 36. Pontificator, I linked over to STAND FIRM and read Matt’s piece. Clearly his notion of a parallel province would provide more immediate relief, but it would depend on a large scale and immediate defection.
I think your scenario is the more likely. Bishops, even the best of them, tend to move slowly when their own hides are at stake. Furthermore, as I said in my first post, the Network cannot simply say, “Here We Stand” and nail up their theses and declare themselves church. As I see it, the purpose of the Network is mainly to identify the orthodox within the Apostate body. The Windsor report clearly offers the most Catholic ecclesiology the Anglican Communion has ever seen. The hope is that it will be implemented in some way that both recognizes the faithful remnant, and at the same time disciplines the wayward. It is a faint hope, perhaps, but it is the only hope. If that does not happen, then perhaps there could be some continuing Anglican body of Evangelicals or others for whom the “visible church” is inconsequential. Anglo-Catholicism (of the traditional sort) would have the final stake driven in its heart. Have you read the book Anglo-Papalists? It is an interesting history of how the “advanced” members of Catholic party of the C of E always saw themselves as a provisional structure. By the way, a full house at COHC yesterday for four Ash Wednesday Masses. We introduced the Gregorian Canon, just coincidentally making our liturgy now coincide with (ahem) The Book of Divine Worship.

Keep us in your prayers.