Has TEC been suspended from the Anglican Communion?

Posted on by
2

Some say, “yes”:

Capture2

And some say, “no:

Capture

This is what the CofE director of communications (Arun Arora)is referring to:

So, no – the Episcopal Church has not been suspended from or by the Anglican Communion. The fact that the Primates’ approach is problematic regarding issues of human sexuality is another matter. But let us not imagine that these events make TEC “second class Anglicans,” let alone that they remove TEC members from the Communion in any way. They should have little impact on how members of TEC see themselves as part of a wider Communion, a community of Churches with a common history and with an extraordinary scope and richness.

And this is what George Conger is referring to:

An overwhelming majority of the Primates present voted that TEC should be excluded from all meetings which represent the Anglican Communion and that it should be suspended from internal decision-making bodies, initially for three years.

So is TEC suspended from the Anglican Communion or not? It depends on whether they really are disinvited from the meetings that Archbishop Eliud Wabukala is referring to above; we shall have to wait and see.

I don’t know about you, but the suspense is killing me.

Fred Hiltz on the Primates’ gathering

Posted on by
7

Fred Hiltz tells us what he thinks about the 2016 Primates’ gathering, here.

It seems that Hiltz has taken some heat for not standing “in solidarity with The Episcopal Church. Hiltz assures us that he feels empathy for Michael Curry but not quite enough empathy to accept the “consequences for our own Church”

To make up for this lack of spine, Hiltz apologises profusely to the ACoC homosexual contingent. Over and over.

In case anyone is labouring under the misapprehension that the issue at stake is one of Biblical truth or the definition and meaning of marriage, Hiltz sets us straight: it’s really all about “the very diverse political, cultural, social and missional contexts in which we live”. Or, to put it more plainly: “We are enlightened, they are not.”

The rest of the missive – which is not copied below – is about the usual temporal matters that are so dear to the heart of the Primate of Canada’s Christianity-Lite Anglicans: global warming, and so on.

Throughout the meeting of the Primates last week, I thought much about St. Paul’s teaching about the Church being the Body of Christ in the world.  It is the image at the very heart of Anglican ecclesiology.  It informs the manner of our relationships in the Church local, national and global.  In 165 countries we are 85 million people proclaiming the Gospel of Christ in more than 1000 languages.  We are a family of autonomous Churches that understand ourselves to be “Formed by Scripture, Shaped by Worship, Ordered for Communion, and Directed by God’s Mission”.  We are bound together by the long held principle of “Mutual Responsibility and Interdependence in the Body of Christ” articulated at the great Anglican Congress of 1963 in Toronto.

While for the most part this principle inspires our common work and witness, there are times when our capacity to abide by it is deeply challenging given the very diverse political, cultural, social and missional contexts in which we live. While being ordered for communion, we recognize that in the face of deep difference of theological conviction over certain matters of faith and doctrine the bonds of affection between us can be strained, sometimes sadly so, to the point of people speaking of a state of impaired communion.

This meeting of the Primates was particularly challenging with respect to the tending of our relationships in light of the developments in The Episcopal Church regarding the change in its Canon on Marriage making provision for the blessing of same sex marriages.  I, of course, was deeply mindful of a call from General Synod 2013 for the enacting of a similar change in our own Canon, the first reading of which is scheduled for our General Synod this summer.

Since returning home, I am especially mindful of the pain the LGBTQ community within our Church is feeling.  I am very sorry.  I acknowledge their frustration and that of their supporters in being made to feel like the sacrificial offering on the altar of the Church’s unity.  I recognize that many are angry and deeply disillusioned with the very Church in which they endeavour to live out their lives as disciples of Jesus.  I know that for some it is in fact very difficult to remain within its fellowship, and that it will take a great resolve of will and courage to do so.

I apologize for the manner in which the Church has often regarded the LGBTQ community and condemned their lives with very harsh language. I call on our Church to re-affirm its commitment to rejecting anywhere in the world criminal sanctions against lesbian, gay, bisexual, trans, or queer or questioning people. I call on our Church to renew its resolve in listening to the voices and the stories of its LGBTQ members as we wrestle through conversations regarding the pastoral care we are called to provide for all people. I ask the prayers of the whole Church for the LGBTQ people in the midst of the hurt they are bearing and the hope to which they cling for the recognition and sacramental blessing of their relationships.

I am aware of sharp criticism over what some regard to have been a failure on my part to stand in solidarity with The Episcopal Church in openly rejecting the relational consequences it bears as a result of The Primates’ Meeting, or in accepting similar consequences for our own Church.  Allow me to comment on each of these matters.

First, in relation to The Episcopal Church, I empathize with Presiding Bishop Michael Curry as he faces a firestorm of reaction in the United States. I recognize a need for a space of time in which that Church will respond through its National Executive Council. Notwithstanding the call of a majority of the Primates for the “consequences” named in the Communiqué, I recognize that there could well be a response from the Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council.  I know The Episcopal Church to be very committed to the work and witness of the Communion as a whole, and I recognize the frustration they will feel in not serving in a representative way on our Ecumenical Dialogues for example. I recognize that if The Episcopal Church is not allowed to vote on a matter of doctrine or polity that the life of the Communion is diminished. I am grateful however, that they will still have a voice in the discussions of such matters.

I have covenanted with Bishop Curry to uphold him and The Episcopal Church in my prayers, and I would ask the same of our whole Church. I was deeply impressed by the grace with which he spoke at The Primates’ Meeting. While declaring in no uncertain terms the pain he was feeling for the Church he leads, he was absolutely convinced that in good faith the General Convention acted.  He recognized the strain that places on relationships throughout the Communion, and he declared his unwavering commitment – in spite of the said consequences – to walk together in the hope of “healing a legacy of hurt, rebuilding mutual trust, and restoring relationships”. He was a stellar example of leadership under pressure, of courage with grace.

Secondly in relation to our own Church. For me to have entertained any thought of accepting consequences for our own Church would have been an overstepping of my authority. To do so would have been a betrayal of my office as President of The General Synod. I was not and am not prepared to take any action that would pre-empt the outcome of our deliberations at General Synod in July. As the report “This Holy Estate” declares, “It is for the General Synod to decide the matter” in accord with the jurisdiction given it regarding “the definition of doctrine in harmony with the Solemn Declaration”. (The Declaration of Principles, 6. Jurisdiction of The General Synod [j]). I believe in the synodical process and by the ministry entrusted to me, I am obliged to uphold it.

In this entire matter our Church has faithfully honoured the call within the Resolution (C003) of General Synod 2013 for broad consultation across our Church, throughout the Communion and with our ecumenical partners.  Alongside all the counsel received and noted in “This Holy Estate”, including that of the Inter Anglican Standing Commission on Unity, Faith and Order (IASCUFO) one could indeed regard the outcome of The Primates’ Meeting as another piece of information.

I ask your prayers for the members of the Council of General Synod in the task mandated to them to bring forward a resolution to the General Synod to affect a change in the Marriage Canon. I ask your prayers for the General Synod Planning Committee in the care they will take in designing a process for our consideration of this matter. I ask your prayers for all the members of General Synod that they will enter into their work well prepared and with a commitment to speak and listen respectfully and in openness to the leading of the Holy Spirit.

While the meeting of the Primates was particularly challenging with respect to relationships throughout the Communion, there was about midway through a declared unanimous continue walking together and not apart. This meeting could have been marked by calls for exclusion of the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church and me. It was not. It could have been marked by walk-outs as some had anticipated. It was not. It could have been marked by ranting and raving.  It was not. Instead it was marked by perseverance to remain in dialogue that was frank but respectful. It was marked by a generosity of grace and patience, with one another. It was marked too, by renewed commitments in the consideration of matters of doctrine that could be of a controversial nature, to consult broadly in the seeking of advice and counsel.

We were reminded once again of the principle named by the Windsor Continuation Group that “when the Primates speak collectively, or in a united or unanimous manner, their advice – while it is no more than advice – nevertheless needs to be received with a readiness to undertake reflection and accommodation”. While there have been calls through the years for “an enhanced authority” on the part of The Primates’ Meeting, there has been – and rightly so – a resistance to the meeting becoming a Curia for the Communion. We recognize that we are but one of The Instruments of Communion which is the only body with a Constitution outlining its objects and powers, all of which are focussed in one way or another on our relationships in the service of God’s mission in the world.

More on the Archbishop of Uganda’s departure from the Primates’ gathering

Posted on by
9

Archbishop Stanley Ntagali’s statement below makes it reasonably clear whose side – no one should be under the illusion that there are no sides in this disagreement – Justin Welby is on: TEC’s and the ACoC’s. This doesn’t bode well for enforcing the sanctions that were placed against TEC, nor does it create much confidence that in three years’ time, if TEC has not repented, much will be done to further censure them. The success of the liberal technique of wearing everyone down through the passage of time and endless enervating conversation is well established and will be employed during the next three years.

The fact that, by the end of the meeting, there was any criticism of TEC at all was little short of miraculous.

To compensate for this unforeseen lapse, the first thing Welby did after the meetings were over, was apologise for the “hurt and pain” the Anglican church has inflicted on lesbian, gay and transgender people”

From here (my emphasis):

Unfortunately, neither the Archbishop of Canterbury nor any of the other structures of the Anglican Communion were able to discipline the Episcopal Church USA. That meant that the Anglican Communion had become like the time in the Book of Judges when God’s judgment was upon the people of God because it says, “Everyone did what was right in their own eyes.” Even the Anglican Church of Canada has allowed the blessing of same-sex unions in their church.

We had hoped that the meeting this past week would restore godly order to the Anglican Communion and re-establish the Bible as the authority for our faith and morals.

On the second day of the meeting, I moved a resolution to ask the Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada to voluntarily withdraw from all Anglican Communion groups. It grieves me to say that the Archbishop of Canterbury, who was chairing the meeting, did not take my resolution seriously and simply moved on to another matter without ever allowing any discussion on it.

At that point in the meeting, I realized that the process that had been set up would not allow us to accomplish the purpose for which we had come.

The Canterbury Compromise

Posted on by
5

The 2016 Primates’ gathering in Canterbury is over and few are happy about the outcome. Liberal Anglicans, particularly in the U.S., are outraged, rebellious and, doing what liberals do best, experiencing pain and reinforcing their victimhood, while conservatives, even the GAFCON primates who attended the gathering, believe the sanctions against TEC were too weak.

The Anglican Church of Canada emerged unscathed because they have not yet adopted a marriage liturgy that accommodates same-sex marriages; the vote to alter the Marriage Canon will occur in 2016 and again in 2019. The sanctioning of TEC will undoubtedly cast a pall over the ACoC 2016 general synod but it’s anyone’s guess whether the threat of similar sanctions will prevent the motion succeeding; my guess is that it won’t.

Since both conservatives and liberals are less than satisfied by the meeting’s outcome, it is reasonable to assume that a compromise has been reached. But what has been compromised?

On the second day, the Archbishop of Uganda, Stanley Ntagali, moved a resolution that asked the Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada to voluntarily withdraw from the meeting and other Anglican Communion activities until they repented. Neither Fred Hiltz nor Michael Curry received this idea with enthusiasm, the resolution failed to pass and Stanley Ntagali left the meeting. He was uncompromising.

The remainder of the conservative Primates stayed to attempt to win support from other undecided Primates and to present the Gospel truth regarding same-sex marriage to the entire meeting. They compromised; I think they would say that they did not compromise the Gospel message, a claim whose truth I would not dispute, but they did make a political compromise. Whether it was a wise compromise, only time will tell, but this is why I think it may not have been:

TEC has been given three years to repent of their actions. Short of a sovereign act of God on a par with parting the Red Sea, TEC will not repent. Every reaction I have seen from TEC clergy has been defiant; their presiding bishop, Michael Curry not only has no intention of repenting but thinks that TEC’s role in the Communion is to convince conservatives of the error of their ways. TEC’s Rev. Gay Jennings serves on the Anglican Consultative Council, a role which, according to the sanction, she will be denied for the next three years; she plans to show up anyway and has defied anyone to stop her. If no one does stop her – and I doubt anyone will – who will stand up to an unrepentant TEC in three years time when secular and, I suspect, mainline church values have become further hardened against an orthodox view of marriage?

Lambeth 1.10 declared that same-sex blessings are unbiblical. That seems to have been forgotten in the Primates’ gathering. The ACoC allows same-sex blessings but, since the rigour of what is permitted or not permitted has loosened, the ACoC has been let off the hook. There has been a sleight of hand a – to use a Welbyesque corporate idiom – moving of the goalposts. In three years time, who knows to what remote region of outer space the goal posts will have been transported?

Sadly, I think the GAFCON primates have been manipulated by Justin Welby. The conservative Primates seem to me to be wonderful Godly men – who are politically naive; I intend that as a compliment.

The underlying problem that did not appear to be addressed in the meeting is that there exist within Anglicanism two different religions. One is orthodox Christianity with 2000 years of history and a consistent understanding of what the Gospel is behind it and the other is, at best, a sub-Christian mish-mash of Unitarian, new-age, relativist, anti-biblical, feel-good religion whose main aim is to reinforce the idea that virtue resides in the acting out of our inner desires no matter what they may be. The two cannot co-exist and a less than definitive censure on the deviant variety may well be worse than none at all, since it makes conservatives complicit in perpetuating the illusion that they can and the illusion of progress where there is nothing but liberal stalling.

Only time will tell – and I hope I am wrong, I really do – but I believe that three years from now TEC will have strengthened their resolve, there will be more committees, more meetings, more dialogue, more listening. The only thing missing will be a resolution to the problem.

The Church of England begins the spin

Posted on by
3

Archbishop Foley Beach told us here, that he was given the opportunity to vote during the Primates’ gathering but declined:

He said, however: “I did not vote when it came to the Episcopal Church. In my conscience I didn’t feel that that was appropriate. I’m not part of the official Anglican structures yet, although I’m in communion with provinces that represent the majority of the Anglican Communion.

“They basically gave out pieces of paper when it was time to vote, and I just refused it.”

Yet, on the Primates2016 site, we are being told:

Statement on votes given to Primates at the meeting in Canterbury 17 Jan 2016
On those occasions when the discussion required Primates to privately record a preference or a decision, slips were informally distributed around the tables and then collected. Apart from when the meeting agreed the agenda at the start, it was made clear to Archbishop Foley Beach that it would not be appropriate for him to take part and he was not invited to do so. Given the spirit of the meeting at all times, it is unfortunate that this is misrepresented in recent reports.

And the Director of Communications for the Church of England is insisting:

tweet2

Someone is lying.

An interview with Archbishop Foley Beach

Posted on by
Reply

Apparently, it would help foster reconciliation if TEC stopped suing ACNA congregations. Who knew?

Another interesting point in the interview is that the Delphi method – beloved of process addicted corporate zombies – employed in the meeting was less than effective.

From here:

Dr Beach’s presence at the gathering was at the insistence of the GAFCON Primates, who had said earlier that they would not attend a meeting without him. He was widely expected to be asked to leave after the first two or three days, but instead stayed for the whole of the meeting, and was included in a number of the votes the Primates took.

He said, however: “I did not vote when it came to the Episcopal Church. In my conscience I didn’t feel that that was appropriate. I’m not part of the official Anglican structures yet, although I’m in communion with provinces that represent the majority of the Anglican Communion.

“They basically gave out pieces of paper when it was time to vote, and I just refused it.”

The Canterbury gathering was the first time that Dr Beech met the new US Presiding Bishop, the Most Revd Michael Curry. “We were very cordial with each other, but we didn’t have any deep conversations.

“But one thing I did say, and I said this in front of the other Primates, because I was asked a question: one thing that would help towards reconciliation and collaboration would be if they call off the lawsuits. Right now they’re suing numbers of our congregations for millions of dollars and property and church buildings, and on and on it goes. They could call that off in a moment. It’s going to be hard as long as we’re in court against each other.”

Dr Beach described the mood of the meeting as serious and, at times, tense. But he had been treated at all times, he said, “with respect and dignity as an Anglican Primate”. He scotched the rumours of confiscated phones and a “divide and rule” approach to preventing the conservatives getting together.

“There was a time when we were wrestling with an issue, so we all divided into groups, and came back — and it didn’t help. It just didn’t help.

“But at any time Archbishop Welby would say: ‘I think it’s time for you to gather in your own groups, or maybe you just want to go for a walk,’ and gave time for us to meet together.

“I think that’s part of why people were able to stay engaged and be a part of it, because we were able to communicate.”

The departure of the Archbishop of Uganda, the Most Revd Stanley Ntagali, was accepted as a consequence of the canons passed by his provincial synod, which prevented his sitting in a meeting with the US Episcopal Church or the Church of Canada unless they repented.

“For him to even show up was really putting him out on a limb with his people,” Dr Beach said. “And the longer he sat there — he’s such a godly man with such a tender conscience — the more he came under the conviction that he cannot offend or hurt his people. He didn’t leave out of anger. . . he just felt he was not being faithful to his duties as an Archbishop. And so we blessed him, and he blessed us. And then we continued on.”

He was optimistic about the future acceptance of ACNA. “What this meeting did was allow other folks, who had only heard rumours about us, to get to know what we are, what we’re not, what God is doing in our midst.”

The question of admitting ACNA as a full member of the Communion was raised, but referred to the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), which next meets in April. In the full communiqué released by the Primates on Friday afternoon, this was described as a matter of “polity” — i.e. something on which the Episcopal Church will not be able to vote if the ACC accepts the sanctions imposed by the Primates’ gathering.

 

Bishop Michael Bird responds to Primates’ Communiqué

Posted on by
6

What it lacks in surprises it makes up for in clichés:

Bishop Michael Bird has expressed his “profound disappointment” ‎with news arising from the recent Primates Meeting that The Episcopal Church will be suspended for a period of three years from formal leadership roles within the Anglican Communion. “We stand together with our sister and brother Anglicans in The Episcopal Church,” said the Bishop, and “give thanks for their faithful witness to the loving purposes of God.”

The Bishop is holding in his prayers all those whose dignity is impacted by the Communiqué from the Primates, especially those who identify as LGBTQ2. While we recognize the pain experienced by many as a result of the decisions taken at the Primates Meeting, Bishop Michael echoes Archbishop Curry’s words that our vocation may be to help the Communion “grow in a direction where we can realize and live the love that God has for us all.”

Bishop Michael also deeply appreciates our own Primate’s gracious leadership and his invitation to continue to pray for the primates as well as for ourselves that we might be faithful to our calling to “be the face of Jesus in this world.” The Anglican Church of Canada has issued an initial statement by our Primate and a more fulsome statement is expected on Monday.

As part of his own ongoing commitment to the Anglican Communion, Bishop Michael participates in an annual Consultation of Anglican Bishops in Dialogue. Given the developments at the Primates Meeting, Bishop Michael feels that this gathering continues to be “so important in the life of the Anglican Communion.” Since 2010, the rotating group of African and North American bishops have met annually at locales around the world. Their gatherings facilitate learning about each other’s contexts and finding pathways for healing and reconciliation. The next consultation is scheduled for May 2016 in Ghana.

Bishop Michael also reiterates his hope and expectation that all Anglicans in Niagara will prayerfully engage with recent report of the Commission on the Marriage Canon entitled “This Holy Estate” in the lead up to our General Synod this July.