David Chillingworth, Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church,
INTRODUCTION TO SESSION ON ANGLICAN COVENANT
Explain process
Indaba - Inform General Synod Representatives - no Resolution or decision
My progress around the diocese - impressions
What is the issue
Diversity - colonisation - communion - federation - asperation
Positive about covenant - negative about this covenant or this instrument
Nobody imposing this - English dioceses have been rejecting it
Neither the bishop nor the dioceses in the SEC seem to be enthusiastic about the covenant.
Further, from Paul Bagshaw at Not the Same Stream:
Hugh Magee, the No Anglican Covenant Co-ordinator in Scotland, sent this summary of the progress, or otherwise, of the Covenant in Scotland. It comes with the caveat "subject to verification".At this moment, the view to the North cannot pleasant for the two archbishops in England.
If you are at all familiar with the Scottish Episcopal Church, you will know that we have seven dioceses in this Province: Aberdeen, Argyll, Brechin, Edinburgh, Glasgow, Moray and St. Andrews. At this stage, all but the first two of these diocese have held their Synods and all have rejected the Covenant, and a prevailing view (though perhaps not the only one) is that Aberdeen and Argyll will follow suit.
The only fly in the ointment at this stage is the possibility that the Provincial Synod will be asked to make assent to the Covenant a canonical matter, in which case the normal two-year ratification process would be set in motion (assuming such a canon were initially accepted). At this stage, it seems more credible to assume that the Covenant is dead in the water in Scotland.
Bear in mind that the Scottish Episcopal Church has close historical and liturgical ties with the Episcopal Church in the U.S. and is perhaps therefore predisposed to be supportive of its American counterpart, which is seen as a presumed culprit in the present debate. After all, it could be argued that the Anglican Communion itself was born in Aberdeen in 1784, with the consecration of Samuel Seabury to be the first American bishop.
[Off-topic]
ReplyDeleteHOLY CRAP, BLOG RE-DESIGN! :-O
(Thought I'd hit the wrong link.)
Gonna take some getting used to. The lay-out is clean, but VERY spare.
[I'm sorry to see pop-up comment threads still aren't back yet. :-( No, I'm not blaming you, Mimi, just sayin']
Well, back to the getting-used-to.
On-topic: God bless Scotland, and the SEC.
On topic, Kevin Holdsworth also has a new post, "Yes to Communion; No to Covenant", a follow up to his informative "Glasgow & Galloway and the Anglican Covenant", which I believe you may already have commented upon and which can be found at the same link.
ReplyDeleteAt this moment, the view to the North cannot pleasant for the two archbishops in England.
ReplyDeleteDo you hear that sound?
It's the world's tiniest violin, playing "My Heart Bleeds for You".....
I don't trust Scotsman. They wear skirts like women.
ReplyDeleteDavid, I wouldn't worry too much until they start tossing telephone poles at you...
ReplyDeleteJCF, I went with Blogger's new template, which I'm not exactly thrilled with, but I thought the old template would eventually be removed anyway. I like clean and spare, but I'm not sure about the blue borders. The color was the best I could come up with for now.
ReplyDeleteLapin, I have a whole round of fine No Anglican Covenant posts that deserve links, and I will try to get to them.
Doxy, I'm not crying for the two prelates. They brought this mess on themselves.
David, I don't know. There's something about a kilt...
I've seen the men in kilts tossing telephone poles on the tee vee, and I would not mess with them or suggest that they're less than manly men.
God bless Scotland!! Hurrah for the doughty north.
ReplyDeleteI feel the new blogger template is very spare and I miss the old cosy look of the blog but what is life if not change, I guess :(
Agreed with you about the kilt, though, Mimi, with the proviso that the man has to have good legs :)
Cathy, the new template has features that are more efficient and easier to use. There is that. I don't much like what I have either, and I may play around with it further, but I wouldn't like a page that was fussy, either
ReplyDelete