Monday, February 19, 2007

Anglican Mainstream's Review

Communique Released
Monday February 19th 2007, 10:28 pm

Communique key points

The Archbishop of Canterbury said at the press conference that ‘the meat of our recommendations is para 17′. This reads “At the heart of our tensions is the belief that The Episcopal Church has departed from the standard of teaching on human sexuality accepted by the Communion in the 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 by consenting to the episcopal election of a candidate living in a committed same-sex relationship, and by permitting Rites of Blessing for same-sex unions. The episcopal ministry of a person living in a same-sex relationship is not acceptable to the majority of the Communion.”

The report of the sub-group has effectively been over-ridden. Para 23 reads “Further, some of us believe that Resolution B033 of the 75th General Convention does not in fact give the assurances requested in the Windsor Report.” And Para 24 says, “The response of The Episcopal Church to the requests made at Dromantine has not persuaded this meeting that we are yet in a position to recognise that The Episcopal Church has mended its broken relationships.”

Deadlines

The Primates request through the presiding bishop that the house of Bishops of TEC:

1. make an unequivocal common covenant that the Bishops will not authorise any rite of blessing for same-sex unions in their dioceses or through general Convention (see Windsor 143, 144) and,
2. confirm that the passing of resolution B033 of the seventy-fifth general convention - means that a candidate for Episcopal orders living in a same-sex union shall not receive the necessary consent (see Windsor 134);
unless some new consensus on these matters emerges across the communion (see Windsor para 134).

The Deadline for the answer is September 30th 2007.

“If the reassurances requested of the House of Bishops cannot in good conscience be given, the relationship between The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion as a whole remains damaged at best, and this has consequences for the full participation of the Church in the life of the Communion.”

On AMia and CANA
“Although there are particular difficulties associated with AMiA and CANA, the Pastoral Council should negotiate with them and the Primates currently ministering to them to find a place for them within these provisions. We believe that with goodwill this may be possible.”

Property
The Primates urge TEC and those congregations in property disputes with it to suspend all actions in law arising in this situation. Bishop Martin Minns of CANA has said “I am pleased that the Anglican Communion leadership has recognised the serious break in the Episcopal Church and that CANA and AMiA are valid expressions of Anglican life and need to be part of the solution. The Primates are saying that all legal action should stop. I hope so. The Presiding Bishop initiated the legal actions and she has signed on to a document that says she will.”

The Communique is unanimous.

8 comments:

Doug said...

Two thoughts:
1) TEC will never back away from its positions regarding homosexuality. Ever.
2) Churches that left the Epsicopal Church left not just because they wanted a different bishop or presiding bishop. They left because the Epsicopal Church itself was apostate. To remain within the Episcopal Church - even with a "Primacial Vicar" - is STILL WITHIN the Episcopal Church and therefore unthinkable.

Anonymous said...

This can be read so many different ways that it's not even funny. How about congregations stop “alienating property from TEC”. The end of the lawsuits is temporary, at best, if it even happens.

Kevin said...

BB,

I've read your analysis on Stand Firm and I must confess, I'm more scared. The first anon's point #1 is true, but a retreat to regroup is throughly possible. She get's to choose a Primary Victor much like her September plan, I guess any Camp Allen bishop would do (+Wolf? I don't think she'd do that but choose the least offensive to her), the HoB squeak it through, all the while the +Chane gang keeps making noise and thumping around, just like B033 spectacle. If the she does this quickly & HoB acts quickly, then by this document CANA & AMiA would suddenly be outside the Communique and should go under a PV which she has some oversight.

As you pointed out, that's not how TEC operates, the General Convention is the body (note not till '09, one year after Lambeth). It's like Congress passing a law they know will be struck down by the Supreme Court. What you wrote on SF actually scares me. She has a very easy way to regain control of the ball, all she needs to do is go along. In fact it would put CANA in a very odd place if she played right along for this seems to allow a place UNTIL a PV is installed, then she'd read game over.

I don't think +KSJ could care about Christ the Redeemer (CANA) or Church of the Resurrection (AMiA), but TFC & Truro, I bet she'd love a backdoor back in.

I think this Communique reads GREAT, but I see a garage size door that a shrewd strategist could use. That Camp Allen "within" language maybe haunting us.

It's ultimately in the LORD's hands, there I should rest.


Peace,
Kevin

BabyBlue said...

The Windsor Bishops pick the Primatial Vicar, not the PB. She has to agree though. Her initial proposal was she picked, but the Primates only gave her consent, not choice. You can see all ready that this is a massive change from how TEC operates. She will have to obey the primates - andastonishing development. They probably put her on the Standing Committee so they can keep an eye on her.

It would mean a colossal shift for The Episcopal Church to go forward. How much do they want to stay in the Anglican Communion?

bb

TWilson said...

BB - Any sense of what happens to the recently-departed CANA and AMIA parishes and clergy?

BabyBlue said...

Well, the good news is that they are recognized by the primates. It will be a little harder for the TEC leaders to call CANA and AMIA parishes and people names anymore - in fact, the Communique basically tells them to stop doing that. CANA and AMIA are identified as Anglican in the Communique and are to be inside the process, not outside of it. I think that's a tremendous step forward. It's basically now up to TEC to decide if they want to stay in the Communion or not. There is no discipline for the primates who have reached out to Episcopalians through CANA and AMIA - but there is a deadline set for compliance for TEC in Sept. 2007. Will TEC abandon its "spirit is doing a new thing" thing and get right with the Communion? I guess we'll see ...

bb

Kevin said...

BB,

What happens to AMiA & CANA clergy if TEC plays ball and PV is chosen and adopted? It seems that TEC has loaded this with many trap doors. Okay, there's a PV, that seems to meet the demands of the Communique, do Rwandan & Nigerian bishops "return" to nation of origin, because now there a PV that satisfies this requirement, thus pastoral needs are meet from within therefore intervention no longer required (#33 & 35)?

I see a whole lot of celebration, but I'm sorry, I smell a rat. Oddly if she plays ball & gets HoB to play with her, she may have a way to turn this very much around to her advantage. Clergy would either be under the PV else they'd be "undermine or subvert" TEC. In an odd way, I can see this being turned around against Bolivia (is not specifically mentioned), Nigeria & Rwanda, that Lambeth 08 could be we complied with WR but you still are in non-compliance.

"We played ball, now you must also, you signed just like we did."

I think the property one isn't that good. What the property belongs to TEC and they'd lease it back? I know that's not the official view of TFC or Truro, but the by the property clause, they'd meet that requirement and thus saying it belonged to locally could be read as alienate property. That one sucks, it reads they retain less alienated but gives easement to congregations.

I can't believe TEC's friends who signed on to this document don't have their strategy worked out.


I forgot the third "R" but I remember "Repentance" and "Roll Back" was the demand for GC06. This does not demand either, it puts a moratorium on SSB. Then B033 sort of/kind-of did that (thus probably GLBT lobby will "localize" exploration of the topic).

It all seems to address TEC but not much on Canada.

It's a HUGE victory over the sub-committee report. Long term, I'm afraid 815 could use this to their advantage. I smell fudge!

In some ways I hope some finds this so objectionable he's able to submarine it, thus problem solved.

Peace,
Kevin

Kevin said...

After a nights sleep, I definitely need to write a follow-up. I'm reading this document through AMiA & CANA eyes, not ACN inside TEC eyes. If you are in Quincy, IL, than this is a *VERY* good document!