...of the Episcopal Church who met with the Archbishop of Canterbury recently, all members of the "Communion Partners", from Thinking Anglicans:
As seven representatives of the Communion Partner Bishops, we are grateful to have met with the Archbishop of Canterbury to discuss our concern in light of the recent actions of the General Convention and the subsequent nomination of candidates “whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on Communion” (General Convention 2006, B033).
At this meeting we expressed our appreciation for his post-convention reflections, “Communion, Covenant, and our Anglican Future,” and were especially interested in his statement about whether “elements” in Provinces not favorably disposed to adopt the Anglican Covenant “will be free … to adopt the Covenant as a sign of their wish to act in a certain level of mutuality with parts of the communion.”
Given our commitment to remain constituent members of both the Anglican Communion and The Episcopal Church, we are encouraged by our meeting with the Archbishop. We agree with him that our present situation is “an opportunity for clarity, renewal and deeper relation with one another - and also Our Lord and his Father in the power of the Spirit.” We, too, share a desire to “intensify existing relationships” by becoming part of a “Covenanted” global Anglican body in communion with the See of Canterbury. We also pray and hope that “in spite of the difficulties this may yet be the beginning of a new era of mission and spiritual growth for all who value the Anglican name and heritage.”
We understand the divisions before us, not merely differences of opinion on human sexuality, but also about differing understandings of ecclesiology and questions regarding the independence or interdependence of a global communion of churches in discerning the mind of Christ together. However, we also shared our concern that the actions of General Convention have essentially rejected the teaching of 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 as the mind of the Communion, and raise a serious question whether a Covenant will be adopted by both Houses at General Convention 2012.
At the same time we are mindful that General Convention Resolution D020 “commended the Anglican Covenant proposed in the most recent text of the Covenant Design Group (the “Ridley Cambridge Draft”) and any successive draft to dioceses for study during the coming triennium” and invited dioceses and congregations to “consider the Anglican Covenant proposed draft as a document to inform their understanding of and commitment to our common life in the Anglican Communion.”
Therefore, at this time we make the following requests of Communion minded members of the The Episcopal Church and the wider Anglican Communion:
1. We encourage dioceses, congregations and individuals of The Episcopal Church to pray and work for the adoption of an Anglican Communion Covenant.
2. We encourage dioceses and congregations to study and endorse the Anglican Communion Covenant when it is finally released and to urge its adoption by General Convention, or to endorse the first three sections of the Ridley Cambridge Draft and the Anaheim Statement, and to record such endorsements on the Communion Partners website (www.communionpartners.org).
3. We encourage bishops, priests, deacons and laypersons of The Episcopal Church who support the adoption of the Anglican Communion Covenant to record such endorsement on the Communion Partners website.
4. We encourage dioceses and congregations, in the spirit of GC2009 Resolution D030, to engage in “companion domestic mission relationships among dioceses and congregations within The Episcopal Church.”
5. We encourage Bishops exercising jurisdiction in The Episcopal Church to call upon us for service in needed cases of Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight.
6. We encourage relationships between Communion Partners and primates, bishops, provinces and dioceses in other parts of the Communion, in order the enhance the ministry we share in the life of the Communion.
7. We invite primates and bishops of the Communion to offer their public support to these efforts.
+Mark J. Lawrence, South Carolina
+Gary R. Lillibridge, West Texas
+Edward S. Little, II, Northern Indiana
+William H. Love, Albany
+D. Bruce MacPherson, Western Louisiana
+Michael G. Smith, North Dakota
+James M. Stanton, Dallas
There you have it. Why was it necessary for the seven bishops to visit with the ABC before making this statement? Why did the ABC choose to meet with them? Did the bishops tell tales along the journey?
And we are to visit THEIR website to express our support for the covenant. Those who express support for the covenant at their website will not actually be signing on to the covenant, but I'll wager that the "Communion Partners" will strive to make it appear that they are doing just that.
Thanks to Lapin for the link.
UPDATE: Ann Fontaine informs us at The Lead:
D030 refers to the Blockade of the Gaza Strip - we believe the bishop intended to refer to B020.
I just read this on the Episcopal Cafe and was frustrated - at best.
ReplyDelete(What happened to the Episcopal Church that was founded during the Revolution and was an independent entity?) I fail to see how this will "help," in any way. This is such an, "I'm right and you need to change your way of thinking," action.
It is actually D020 -- D030 is about Gaza. See notes at Episcopal Cafe´ and my comments there in the story.
ReplyDeleteOops - B020 is the companion relationship resolution
ReplyDeleteCiss, I don't see it as helpful, either. I hope that the covenant dies before TEC has to vote on it at GC12.
ReplyDeleteAnn, I added an update.
It is obvious what the Self-Important Seven did, schlepping over to England hoping to curry favor with the ABC. Maybe +++Rowan bought their pretty lies, but he'll probably never say. How do I know they lied? Look no further than the power grab they've made.
ReplyDeleteIt's equally obvious what ELSE they did; they performed a blatant end run around the head of their order, our Presiding Bishop. Didn't like what the "Little Woman" said, so they went to get an answer they liked better. Evidently they want the OK to circumvent all three houses of TEC. I don't think we ought to encourage their behavior.
Now comes this obnoxious statement of pseudo-imperative. If you didn't notice their arrogance in naming themselves as DEPO representatives, you should have. Their hubris quotient is in the red zone.
I am waiting for ++Katherine to take this out of their hands, and hoping we laity have the sense to refuse their demands. The SI Seven want their agenda rammed through, and to do it they've appealed to moderates, hoping they'll splinter our parishes and dioceses further. Did you appreciate the call to join their band of neuralgic Orthodites?
They make it clear they will have no patience with process; they've demonstrated a lack of confidence in General Convention to act prayerfully and conscientiously. Now they step in, calling us to do their bidding. We've been asked to give them further unwarranted power. After that display of disrespect and arrogance? I don't think so.
I have no interest in giving up my rights to anyone; especially those who have total lack of respect for others, whose reason for living is to grasp power.
Cheryl Mack
Cheryl, I agree with all you say. I noted that the bishops appointed themselves DEPO representatives. We'll see where they go with this. If they move forward on DEPO, that may be where the PB will step in.
ReplyDeleteOnce again, they use the "creating facts on the ground" strategy. Just say this is how it is, and it will be so. Sometimes the strategy works, as we've seen with the Windsor Report, which has come to seem the law rather than simply a report.
You're right, Mimi. What a quiet coda to the noisy overture of last week! I think Rowan must have put them in their place, and provided a chill pill.
ReplyDeleteTobias, I doubt that the Magnificent Seven received much satisfaction from Rowan.
ReplyDeletePS: I'm glad you're not angry with me for my outburst at your place. ;o)
Yes, D020 is on Anglican Relations -- World Mission Legislative Committee adopted a substitute resolution for the one originally authored by Dan Martins and sponsored by Christopher Wells and (I think) Bruce Robison. The original resolution urged fast-track adoption of the Ridley Cambridge Draft (I don't have it in front of me) whereas the substitute suggests study of the covenant (among other resolves, one of which includes partner relationships in the Anglican Communion).
ReplyDeleteHere is a postscript: Check out the interview with the Lead at Episcopal Cafe and the interview with the Presiding Bishop.
ReplyDeleteCiss, thanks for the recommendation. It's a good interview. With Jan, who commented at The Lead, the reporter was well prepared as was Bishop Katharine. He did not ask her about the Magnificent Seven.
ReplyDelete