OUR MALCOLM IS A CANDIDATE FOR BISHOP

We are pleased to announce that the moderator of the No Anglican Covenant Coalition (and convenor for the Anglican Church of Canada), the Rev. Malcolm French, is a candidate to become the next bishop of the Diocese of Qu’Appelle in the Anglican Church of Canada. The list of candidates is here. Malcolm’s profile is here.

Please pray for the selection process in the Diocese of Qu’Appelle.

Malcolm asks that the members of NACC and everyone pray that God's will be done in the vote on the candidates, and I shall so pray.  But what's the harm in giving God a nudge in Malcolm's direction?  I believe Malcolm would be an excellent choice as bishop.  His contribution to the NACC has been outstanding.  After reading Malcolm's profile, I am even more impressed with the qualities of leadership Malcolm offers to the Diocese of Qu'Appelle.

From a maintenance mentality to a mission mentality:

In the heart of our see city is one of the most deprived neighbourhoods in Canada. There are people in communities throughout the diocese who are learning that “more stuff” does not fill their spiritual need. There’s mission to be done and there are people who need to hear the Good News. But to tell them this Good News, we need to have the courage to leave our buildings and to go where they are.

May I insert a loud "Amen!" here?  I just did.

Christian leadership:

Clearly any discussion of Christian leadership must begin with Jesus, who came not to be served, but to serve. Christian leadership – and, frankly, any kind of effective leadership – is focused not on the leader, but on the led.

A teaching that Christian leaders all too often seem to forget.

I did not intend for my post to include such strong advocacy, but once I read Malcolm's profile, I couldn't help myself.  And that's the way it is, as Walter used to say.

WHAT IF THE ANGLICAN CHURCH OF CANADA REJECTS THE COVENANT?

The Anglican Church of Canada needs more clarity around what the “relational consequences” would be for not adopting the proposed Anglican Communion Covenant.

This is one of the key messages that Council of General Synod (CoGS) members said the church must convey when the 15th Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) meets in New Zealand Oct. 27-Nov. 7.

All member provinces of the Communion have been asked to report on progress made in response to the covenant, which has been recommended as a way of healing divisions triggered by debates over the issue of sexuality.
....

Emerging from small group discussions, some CoGs members said there’s a lot of uncertainty around what happens when a province decides to adopt or not adopt the covenant. Critics of the covenant have long warned that adopting it could result in a two-tier Communion.

Although a comprehensive study guide on the covenant was prepared and recommended for Canadian Anglicans, “there’s not much interest in discussing it,” reported members of one CoGS discussion group. “We’re not sure why,” they added.

By now, most people know what I think of the Anglican Covenant, and I hope, in the end, that the ACofC will vote to reject, as I hope that my church, The Episcopal Church, will vote to reject at General Convention in July.

H/T to Kurt Wiesner at The Lead.

THE ANGLICAN COVENANT - GET THE GAYS

Lisa Fox at My Manner of Life posted a splendid letter from the Diocese of Rupert's Land in the Anglican Church of Canada on the Anglican Covenant.  We all know that the roots of the covenant are in the Windsor Report.  The letter spells out plainly and clearly what many of us well know to be true but continue to tiptoe gingerly around.

Finally, of course we are aware of the reason that this document has been born, but on which the document is entirely silent, namely, the matter of gay and lesbian persons’ rights in regard to marriage, ordination and consecration.

Yes.  Further, Lisa says:

I appreciate the observation that the people who forced the Anglican Covenant are silent on the bigotry that spawned it -- namely, their hatred of gay/lesbian people and our relationships. Thank you, Rupert's Land, for pointing to that. Many of us point to the ugly heritage of racism in our history. Someday, I hope the proponents of the Anglican Covenant will be named as the bigots they are. Their supposedly Biblical hatred of gay men and lesbians is the veneer behind which they hide. One day, they will be remembered alongside the bigots who repressed the Africans in South Africa and the African-Americans in the U.S. South. 

The two statements point out that the original intent of the covenant was to 'get the gays',  and 'get' TEC for ordaining a gay bishop, and 'get' the Anglican Church of Canada for allowing same-sex blessings, though you won't ever hear the proponents of the covenant say such a thing in public.

Read the whole of Lisa's post, which includes the entire text of the letter from the diocese. 

ANGLICAN CHURCH OF CANADA - LEGAL AND CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES IN THE ANGLICAN COVENANT

From Canon Alan Perry, a priest in the Anglican Church of Canada at his blog Insert Cathchy Blog Title Here:

The Governance Working Group of the Anglican Church of Canada has released its report on the legal and constitutional implications of the proposed Anglican Covenant, as requested by the General Synod. In addition to the report, there is also an executive summary.

Definitional Concerns lists no fewer than nine key terms in the proposed Covenant that are left undefined. This is a concern because, as the report states, “the Covenant is more than a statement of belief or intention; it is a legal document.” Exactly. And as a legal document it requires clarity of definition. For without clarity, the report says, it is “difficult to know the full nature and extent of the obligations which would be undertaken by adopting the Covenant.” That being the case, it is difficult to understand how any Synod can responsibly vote to adopt the Covenant.

Under the rubric of Procedural Concerns, the report discusses seven difficulties with the dispute-settling process in the proposed Covenant. For example, the report raises concerns about the vagueness of the process in section 4.2. (See my comments in this vein here.) It also notes that the process fails to guarantee the principles of Natural Justice. I have also analysed this issue in two parts here and here. Furthermore, there is no right or mechanism to appeal a decision of the Standing Committee.

Even if you don't read the entire report, do have a look at the executive summary. It's well worth taking the time, because, as I see it, the document has implications beyond the Anglican Church of Canada.

Lionel Deimel, of the Diocese of Pittsburgh in the US, also comments on the Canadian church report.

Today, however, the Anglican Church of Canada released a document that, although it does not draw the obvious conclusion that the Covenant should be rejected because it is incompetently written, most definitely establishes that it is incompetently written. One cannot, in fact, read “Legal and Constitutional Issues Presented to the Canadian Church by the Proposed Anglican Covenant” without concluding that the text of the Covenant is a train wreck.

Lionel notes from a story in Episcopal News Service that the Executive Council of The Episcopal Church received a report from the Standing Commission on Constitution and Canons, which will not be published until later because, as council member Rosalie Ballantine said, “We’re reluctant to have it out there” because some people may assume that decisions have already been made."

In the interest of transparency, I'd hope that the Executive Council will rethink withholding the report, unless there are very serious reasons for doing so. The decision in favor of secrecy following on the heels of the Anglican Church of Canada's quick release of their document invites unfavorable comparison.

As Jim Naughton says at The Lead, "Conversely, the Anglican Church of Canada, which apparently regards its members as adults, has released its report...along with an executive summary...."

Transparency is the best policy, except for the gravest of reasons, and what people may assume does have the ring of gravity sufficient for withholding release of the document until a later time.