From The Living Church:
The Archbishop of Canterbury has welcomed an endorsement of the first three sections of the Anglican Covenant by the Diocese of Central Florida’s board and standing committee, but said only provinces can officially adopt the covenant.
....
Central Florida also asked the Archbishop of Canterbury to “outline and implement a process by which individual dioceses, and even parishes, could become members of the Anglican Covenant, even in cases where their provincial or diocesan authorities decline to do so.”
Archbishop Williams has no problem with a diocese "endorsing" the covenant, although the endorsement would have no "institutional effect", because “as a matter of constitutional fact, the [Anglican Consultative Council] can only offer the covenant for ‘adoption’ to its own constituent bodies (the provinces).” (My emphasis)
There you have it. A clear statement by the Archbishop. After I'd checked out the link that Ann sent me, I replied to her, "I cannot believe it! It's a miracle!"
Will the words of the Archbishop of Canterbury slow the stampede of dioceses to "endorse" the covenant? Seemingly, "endorse" it is all they can do. Apparently, they can't "become members" of the Anglican Covenant.
Thanks to Mark Harris and Andrew Gerns at The Lead for the link.
UPDATE: From Fr. Dan Martins at the Communion Partners site:
This news is being spun—on both the hard left and the hard right—as a setback to the initiative of the Communion Partners and the signers of the Anaheim Statement. It is, in fact, nothing of the sort. It’s not even news, since this is precisely what the Archbishop told the seven CP bishops who visited him a month ago. Dr Williams is just stating the facts, as dull as they may be.
Read the rest of Fr. Martins' statement at the link.
Well then, I suppose we should all calm down. As the title of Fr. Martins article says "Keep Moving ... Nothing to See Here".
UPDATE 2: And the plot thickens. See Simon Sarmiento at Thinking Anglicans, who references Archbishop Williams' letter to Bishop John Howe in October 2007:
I would repeat what I’ve said several times before - that any Diocese compliant with Windsor remains clearly in communion with Canterbury and the mainstream of the Communion, whatever may be the longer-term result for others in The Episcopal Church. The organ of union with the wider Church is the Bishop and the Diocese rather than the Provincial structure as such.
Well, I said of the recent letter, "I cannot believe it!"
May I assume from the purple garb that the individual pouring his tea is the primate of the new Central Florida "Orthodox Anglican" province?
ReplyDelete(It's almost 2:00 a.m. in these parts, Mimi)
So, did his Archness say the same thing to the Magnificent Seven, and they just didn't get the message? Or do they only hear what they want to hear?
ReplyDeletePaul (A.), see update to the post.
ReplyDelete"A traitor to the Gospel when it counts and a treacherous coward as always", writes a poster on this topic at StandFirm (they're absolutely seething about this over there) Seems Rowan does have the talent to bring together the opposing wings of what is ironically termed the "Communion".
ReplyDeleteSome say that when both sides are coming at you, then you must be doing something right.
ReplyDeleteI would never say that.
Jeffrey John, people--Jeffrey John.
ReplyDeleteNo matter what he says, keep in mind that he cannot be trusted. Doesn't matter where on the theological/ecclesiological spectrum you stand...
He.Cannot.Be.Trusted.
If you remember that, you won't waste too much time and energy parsing his incomprehensible Great Thoughts.
Doxy, yes. That was the first big misstep from which the ABC never recovered.
ReplyDeleteIn an effort to conserve water and energy I have stopped reading Fr. Martins. I feel like I need a bath after some of his posts.
ReplyDeleteSusan, I don't read him regularly, and I can't even remember how I landed at the site today. I found his "nothing to see here" amusing. Also, he seemed to answer Paul (A.)'s question above.
ReplyDeleteThe answer is that they heard what they wanted to hear and reported what they wanted to report with the spin they wanted to spin.
ReplyDeleteRemember their letter:
"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."
Thus by their implication his Archness "encouraged" their supposition that "elements" within Provinces could "adopt" the Covenant.
But then they change language in their "requests of Communion minded members of the The Episcopal Church": They "encouraged" congregations and dioceses to "endorse" the current draft and "record" these "endorsements" on their website. At the same time they urge lobbying for "adoption" of the Covenant by Provinces.
They specifically do not clarify that "adopt" and "endorse" are wholly different verbs, and that "endorsement" is functionally meaningless.
(When you "endorse" a check you don't intend that it be binding? Pfui!)
So Fr. Martins is right: "Nothing to see here" -- other than that the ABC has called the Seven on their carefully calculated spin. But he doesn't want you to know that -- obviously!
Paul(A.), his Archness finally called them on their spin, but Fr. Martins et al. don't want us to know that, and neither does his Archness. What a bizarro world!
ReplyDelete