From Bishop William Love of the Episcopal Diocese of Albany:
Diocesan Update
October 20, 2009
Dear Brothers and Sisters in Christ,
During its regularly scheduled October 5th meeting, the Standing Committee of the Diocese of Albany passed a resolution endorsing the four sections of the Third (Ridley Cambridge) Draft of the Anglican Communion Covenant. In addition, the Standing Committee is recommending that the same or a similar endorsement be placed before the Diocesan Convention for adoption.
As the Bishop of Albany, I concur with the resolution passed by the Standing Committee and its recommendation that a similar resolution endorsing the Anglican Communion Covenant, (once it appears in its final form) come before the Diocesan Convention for approval. In preparation for that, in the coming months, we as a Diocese, will study and discuss the proposed Covenant in order that we can make an informed decision at Diocesan Convention. A copy of the Third (Ridley Cambridge) Draft of the Anglican Communion Covenant can be found on the Anglican Communion Official Website: http://www.anglicancommunion.org/commission/covenant/ridley_cambridge/draft_text.cfm Part four of the Ridley Cambridge Draft is currently under revision. By Thursday, we will have it posted on our website and any changes will be posted as we receive them.
The Reverend Paul Hartt, President of the Standing Committee, sent a letter to Archbishop Rowan Williams and The Reverend Canon Kenneth Kearon at The Anglican Communion Office, informing them of the Standing Committee’s endorsement of the Third (Ridley Cambridge) Draft of the Anglican Communion Covenant and their hope that it would be adopted by every province of the Anglican Communion. A copy of the letter was sent to Presiding Bishop Katherine Jefferts Schori.
I conveyed my personal support of the Third (Ridley Cambridge) Draft of the Anglican Communion covenant, to Archbishop Rowan Williams and the Reverend Canon Kenneth Kearon when I and six other bishops of The Episcopal Church met with them seperately in London during a private meeting on September 1st.
Faithfully Yours in Christ,
+ Bill
UPDATE: From the comments:
Grandmere,
Some readers may be confused by the reference to the cathedral. Albany Via Media and members of the Cathedral of All Saints wanted to invite Joan Gunderson from the continuing Diocese of Pittsburgh to speak. Bp. Love got wind of it and said "no way!" So we were shut out, because the Bishop feared that the speaker would be critical of the Diocese of Albany. But we will find another venue and let you know when she is coming.
Faithfully,
John White
Diocese of Albany
Thanks for the clarification, John.
Wednesday, October 21, 2009
"what Rowan should have said? "
From Clayboy:
In the meantime I say only this: to all of you who are seeking reform in the search for a papacy exercised in charity and collegiality, to all of you who are seeking a faith that continues to update and renew itself from its ancient springs in the light of reason and the contemporary experience of God’s Spirit, to all of you wish to pray in your own language without being forced to conform to the past glories of a dead tongue, to all of you who seek to exercise ministry in service rather than power, to all of you who prefer the vesture of humility to arcane Renaissance pomp as re-envisioned by Prada, to all of you I say a warm welcome always awaits you around our altar tables. For however you treat us, we will still try to treat you as our brothers and sisters.
Now go read the rest at Clayboy's site. His real name is Doug Chaplin. He serves as an Anglican priest in Worcestershire, UK. Methinks he will not be amongst those who make the journey cross the Tiber to Rome.
Picture added by me.
Thanks to Tim and Ann for sending the link.
"Small Earthquake In Rome?"
From Bishop Alan's Blog:
Assimilating a lot of people who perhaps have struggled, and some might even say haven’t made a raging success of living within their own tradition, you’ll get two sorts of “convert”:
1. people who really should try out and perhaps are called by God to be part of the Roman tradition: Hip, hip, hooray!
2. people who aren’t terribly good at living in any tradition on anything but their own terms.
The second sort of convert will carry on inexorably being as they are, because it’s personality based and they can’t help it. This may not be good news for your own people. Where, for example, does it leave genuine Roman Catholic clergy who have faithfully and heroically struggled and somehow managed to live within their Church’s discipline, because they sincerely believed it was necessary, to know that Auntie in Rome is now doing a Post-Modern family promotion for married Anglicans, but you’re not invited? However delighted I was that Auntie is now being jolly and Post-Modern to the Anglicans, I’d hope she manages to find some way, after all these years, of being jolly and Post-Modern to me…
Aye, and that's the truth. And, of course, you should read Bishop Alan's post in its entirety.
Bishop Alan is Area Bishop of Buckingham in the UK.
Assimilating a lot of people who perhaps have struggled, and some might even say haven’t made a raging success of living within their own tradition, you’ll get two sorts of “convert”:
1. people who really should try out and perhaps are called by God to be part of the Roman tradition: Hip, hip, hooray!
2. people who aren’t terribly good at living in any tradition on anything but their own terms.
The second sort of convert will carry on inexorably being as they are, because it’s personality based and they can’t help it. This may not be good news for your own people. Where, for example, does it leave genuine Roman Catholic clergy who have faithfully and heroically struggled and somehow managed to live within their Church’s discipline, because they sincerely believed it was necessary, to know that Auntie in Rome is now doing a Post-Modern family promotion for married Anglicans, but you’re not invited? However delighted I was that Auntie is now being jolly and Post-Modern to the Anglicans, I’d hope she manages to find some way, after all these years, of being jolly and Post-Modern to me…
Aye, and that's the truth. And, of course, you should read Bishop Alan's post in its entirety.
Bishop Alan is Area Bishop of Buckingham in the UK.
Quote Of The Day - Tobias Haller
There's No Place Like Rome:
As Dorothy learned, of course, they always had the power to do so, as indeed many had, individually, before them. Just click the heels of the ruby slippers three times and say, "There's no place like Rome; there's no place like Rome; there's no place like..." And Anglicanism they will say, was just a colorful dream populated with familiar figures.
May they find peace in their new abode. I prefer this side of the Tiber Rainbow.
As I do.
Tuesday, October 20, 2009
More On The Joint Statement
If you read nothing more about the Joint Statement from +Rowan and +Vincent, read Elizabeth Kaeton's excellent post at Telling Secrets linking the commentary from Lambeth about the new plan by the Vatican to incorporate Anglo-Catholics into the Roman Catholic Church and Lambeth's lack of response to a draconian new law proposed in Uganda:
Read it all.
And you really should read Lionel Deimel's blog post titled "Looking on the Bright Side":
H/T to The Lead.
The response to the statement by the Episcopal Church is short and of the taking-it-under-advisement variety, which is for the best, as there is no need for a hasty response.
On the other hand, Mark Harris at Preludium posts the rather hasty (of necessity!) letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury to the bishops and primates of the Anglican Communion. An excerpt:
+Rowan was so busy consulting with Roman Catholic bishops in England and Wales, that he missed consulting with bishops and primates in the Church of England and the Anglican Communion. Oh dear!
Meanwhile, there's been 'radio silence' from Lambeth Palace concerning the new law in Uganda making "aggressive homosexuality" a capitol offense. Those found "guilty" are sentenced to death.
The "crime" has carried with it a life sentence and prohibition from any treatment for HIV/AIDS, but this is a much more aggressive attack on those the Ugandan government considers "aggressive homosexuals".
Guess the law hasn't been "aggressive" enough.
Read it all.
And you really should read Lionel Deimel's blog post titled "Looking on the Bright Side":
The announcement was surely not a surprise. A number of Anglo-Catholic groups in the U.S. and elsewhere have appealed to the Vatican for such an arrangement, and the Vatican has not been unsympathetic. (One immediately thinks of the letter of support sent to the so-called Plano meeting of Episcopal Church dissidents in October 2003 by the current holder of the papal office.)
H/T to The Lead.
The response to the statement by the Episcopal Church is short and of the taking-it-under-advisement variety, which is for the best, as there is no need for a hasty response.
On the other hand, Mark Harris at Preludium posts the rather hasty (of necessity!) letter from the Archbishop of Canterbury to the bishops and primates of the Anglican Communion. An excerpt:
I am sorry that there has been no opportunity to alert you earlier to this; I was informed of the planned announcement at a very late stage, and we await the text of the Apostolic Constitution itself and its code of practice in the coming weeks. But I thought I should let you know the main points of the response I am making in our local English context – in full consultation with Roman Catholic bishops in England and Wales – in the hope of avoiding any confusion or misrepresentation. I attach a copy of the Joint Statement that I agreed to make alongside the Archbishop of Westminster, the President of the Bishops' Conference of England and Wales. It can also be found on my website.
It remains to be seen what use will be made of this provision, since it is now up to those who have made requests to the Holy See to respond to the Apostolic Constitution; but, in the light of recent discussions with senior officials in the Vatican, I can say that this new possibility is in no sense at all intended to undermine existing relations between our two communions or to be an act of proselytism or aggression. It is described as simply a response to specific enquiries from certain Anglican groups and individuals wishing to find their future within the Roman Catholic Church.
+Rowan was so busy consulting with Roman Catholic bishops in England and Wales, that he missed consulting with bishops and primates in the Church of England and the Anglican Communion. Oh dear!
"Thank You, Bishop Spong"
See Lavender Wolves for Bishop Spong's latest statement on inclusion and equality for LGTB persons. Mike says:
I'm about at the end of my tolerance for discussion of certain aspects of inclusion and equality for LGTB folks, too. To a large extent I agree with Bp. Spong, but I'd stretch his limits a bit.
Bishop Spong feels that it is way past time to treat the haters as if their argument has a moral and intellectual equivalence to the voices of inclusion and equality. I've felt that way for a long time, and I'm happy to see such a strong statement from Bishop Spong.
I'm about at the end of my tolerance for discussion of certain aspects of inclusion and equality for LGTB folks, too. To a large extent I agree with Bp. Spong, but I'd stretch his limits a bit.
Joint Statement By +Rowan And +Vincent
From the Anglican Communion News Service:
I'm trying to wrap my head around the meaning of the statement. It appears to me that the Archbishop of Canterbury is cooperating with the authorities in the Roman Catholic Church to have members of his flock in the Church of England (and the Anglican Communion?) leave to join the church of Rome, while holding on to their Anglican liturgical traditions, and that he sees this as a win-win solution to the problem of the disagreement within the CofE and the AC over women and gay bishops. And we should all come rejoicing bringing in the sheaves?
Now of course, I could be wrong in my reading of this statement, so please, if you can, clarify for me just what the hell is going on here.
H/T to Madpriest, who has more on this announcement.
UPDATE: The article in the Guardian sheds light. It appears that Rowan may have been caught by surprise. If you play with fire, you should not be surprised if you get burned. Rowan should have known that the Vatican will not share authority with what they consider to be just another "apostate, heretical, and schismatic" church.
His face should redden. But then he goes on to speak words of appeasement. We are still friends. When will Rowan take his place in the world of reality?
UPDATE 2: From the New York Times:
Paul Richardson seems to be a tad more reality based than his boss, but it seems ludicrous to me to suggest that this stance by the Vatican will "galvanize the ecumenical dialogue".
UPDATE 3: The post is overlong already, so I'll provide links only to the National Catholic Reporter and Andrew Brown at the Guardian.
H/T to Jim Naughton at The Lead.
Joint Statement by The Archbishop of Westminster and The Archbishop of Canterbury
Today's announcement of the Apostolic Constitution is a response by Pope Benedict XVI to a number of requests over the past few years to the Holy See from groups of Anglicans who wish to enter into full visible communion with the Roman Catholic Church, and are willing to declare that they share a common Catholic faith and accept the Petrine ministry as willed by Christ for his Church.
Pope Benedict XVI has approved, within the Apostolic Constitution, a canonical structure that provides for Personal Ordinariates, which will allow former Anglicans to enter full communion with the Catholic Church while preserving elements of distinctive Anglican spiritual patrimony.
The announcement of this Apostolic Constitution brings to an end a period of uncertainty for such groups who have nurtured hopes of new ways of embracing unity with the Catholic Church. It will now be up to those who have made requests to the Holy See to respond to the Apostolic Constitution.
The Apostolic Constitution is further recognition of the substantial overlap in faith, doctrine and spirituality between the Catholic Church and the Anglican tradition. Without the dialogues of the past forty years, this recognition would not have been possible, nor would hopes for full visible unity have been nurtured. In this sense, this Apostolic Constitution is one consequence of ecumenical dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion.
The on-going official dialogue between the Catholic Church and the Anglican Communion provides the basis for our continuing cooperation. The Anglican Roman Catholic International Commission (ARCIC) and International Anglican Roman Catholic Commission for Unity and Mission (IARCCUM) agreements make clear the path we will follow together.
With God's grace and prayer we are determined that our on-going mutual commitment and consultation on these and other matters should continue to be strengthened. Locally, in the spirit of IARCCUM, we look forward to building on the pattern of shared meetings between the Catholic Bishops Conference of England and Wales and the Church of England's House of Bishops with a focus on our common mission. Joint days of reflection and prayer were begun in Leeds in 2006 and continued in Lambeth in 2008, and further meetings are in preparation. This close cooperation will continue as we grow together in unity and mission, in witness to the Gospel in our country, and in the Church at large.
+ Vincent + Rowan
I'm trying to wrap my head around the meaning of the statement. It appears to me that the Archbishop of Canterbury is cooperating with the authorities in the Roman Catholic Church to have members of his flock in the Church of England (and the Anglican Communion?) leave to join the church of Rome, while holding on to their Anglican liturgical traditions, and that he sees this as a win-win solution to the problem of the disagreement within the CofE and the AC over women and gay bishops. And we should all come rejoicing bringing in the sheaves?
Now of course, I could be wrong in my reading of this statement, so please, if you can, clarify for me just what the hell is going on here.
H/T to Madpriest, who has more on this announcement.
UPDATE: The article in the Guardian sheds light. It appears that Rowan may have been caught by surprise. If you play with fire, you should not be surprised if you get burned. Rowan should have known that the Vatican will not share authority with what they consider to be just another "apostate, heretical, and schismatic" church.
The archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, informed journalists that he only heard about the apostolic constitution "a couple of weeks ago" and that there was no input from or consultation with Lambeth Palace. His face reddened as he spoke and, at one point, the archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, answered questions relating to Williams's leadership and authority.
Williams said: "I do not think this constitution will be seen as in any sense a commentary on Anglican problems offered by the Vatican. It is a response to this range of requests and inquiries from a very broad variety of people, either Anglican or of Anglican heritage. In that sense it has no negative impact on the relations of the communion as a whole to the Roman Catholic church as a whole. It is not an act of aggression, it is not a statement of no confidence. It is business as usual."
His face should redden. But then he goes on to speak words of appeasement. We are still friends. When will Rowan take his place in the world of reality?
UPDATE 2: From the New York Times:
And many Anglican and Catholic leaders expressed surprise, even shock, at something they said would undermine efforts at ecumenical dialogue and capitalize on deep divisions within the Anglican Church over issues like the ordination of gay bishops and blessing same-sex unions.
....
In the United States, many traditionalists have already broken away from the Episcopal Church and formed their own conservative Anglican structures, and experts speculated that proportionally fewer would be eager to join the Catholic fold.
....
The Very Rev. Paul Richardson, the archbishop’s representative to the Vatican, said he was taken aback by the Vatican’s decision, which he said was not in line with an ongoing ecumenical dialogue between the Catholic and Anglican churches.
“It doesn’t seem to me to help the ecumenical dialogue, but perhaps it will galvanize the ecumenical dialogue,” Bishop Richardson said. “I don’t see it as an affront to the Anglican Church but I’m puzzled by what it means and by the timing of it.” He added, “I think some Anglicans will feel affronted.”
Paul Richardson seems to be a tad more reality based than his boss, but it seems ludicrous to me to suggest that this stance by the Vatican will "galvanize the ecumenical dialogue".
UPDATE 3: The post is overlong already, so I'll provide links only to the National Catholic Reporter and Andrew Brown at the Guardian.
H/T to Jim Naughton at The Lead.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)