Europe is returning to its religious roots—Roman Catholicism. This year saw both the Anglican and Eastern Orthodox churches make strides toward union with the Vatican. The Traditional Anglican Communion issued a petition to the Vatican this fall requesting that approximately 400,000 Anglicans be admitted into the Catholic Church. The number of Catholics in Britain that attend weekly mass now surpasses the number of Anglicans that go to church each Sunday. The Times of London reported in February that leaders in both the Anglican and Catholic churches have agreed to seek ways to bring the Anglicans back under the leadership of the pope.
Even as the Anglican Church moves back into the Catholic fold, Pope Benedict xvi is working toward Catholic reconciliation with the Eastern Orthodox churches. In a Catholic-Orthodox reconciliation meeting on October 13, a joint statement was signed by Catholic and Eastern Orthodox leaders (except for the Moscow representatives) recognizing the pope’s primacy over the Eastern Orthodox patriarchs, including those of Constantinople, Alexandria, Antioch and Jerusalem.
Herbert W. Armstrong explained for years that the Bible predicted that Anglican, Orthodox and Protestant churches would seek communion with Rome. These developments are increasing the power of the Catholic Church over Europe.
On February 19, Italian Prime Minister Romano Prodi met with some of the pope’s senior advisers in a closed-door session. Pope Benedict severely criticized Prodi for trying to push through legislation in Italy that would recognize civil unions between homosexuals. Prodi resigned within two days. Two days later, Prodi had repented of his political error and retained the Italian premiership.
The event proved that Prodi has bowed to Rome. Soon all Europe will do the same.
Monday, December 31, 2007
Archbishop of Canterbury's New Year message - God 'doesn't do waste'
Posted On : December 31, 2007 8:10 PM Posted By : Webmaster Related Categories: Lambeth ACNS:4358
By this stage of the holiday season, I imagine you might be looking with dismay at your overflowing rubbish bin, or the mountain of debris piling up outside your back door. Food, drink, presents - they all come with more and more packaging. Even the most eco-conscious of us is likely to have a bit of a bad conscience after Christmas.
Despite constant talk about recycling and thinking "green" - we're still a society that produces fantastic quantities of waste. From the big issues around toxic industrial and nuclear waste to the domestic questions of managing day-to-day waste and the build-up of stuff around us that can't be recycled, it's not something we can ignore. Look at the number of plastic bags flapping around by the roadside, in town and country alike - and you see what I mean.
What I wonder is - how much this influences attitudes in other parts of our lives?
In a society where we think of so many things as disposable; where we expect to be constantly discarding last year's gadget and replacing it with this year's model - do we end up tempted to think of people and relationships as disposable? Are we so fixated on keeping up with change that we lose any sense of our need for stability?
One of the buzzwords of recent years has been 'sustainability' - and, like all buzzwords, it tends to be used annoyingly all over the place, often for things it doesn't really fit. But what the word points to is the sense of obligation that most of us share at some deep level - the obligation to hand on to our children and grandchildren a legacy that helps them live and flourish. Building to last is something we all understand.
And if we live in a context where we construct everything from computers to buildings to relationships on the assumption that they'll need to be replaced before long - what have we lost?
Christians, like Jews and many other religious people too, talk a lot about God as 'faithful'. God is involved in 'building to last', in creating a sustainable world and sustainable relationships with us human beings. He doesn't give up on the material of human lives. He doesn't throw it all away and start again. And he asks us to approach one another and our physical world with the same commitment. The life of Jesus, the life in which God identifies completely with our flesh and blood is the supreme sign of that commitment.
God doesn't do waste.
He doesn't regard anyone as a 'waste of space', as not worth his time - from the very beginnings of life to its end, whether they are successful, articulate, productive or not. And so a life that communicates a bit of what God is like, is a life that doesn't give up - that doesn't settle down with a culture of waste and disposability - whether with people, or with things.
Perhaps a good resolution for the New Year would be to keep asking what world we want to pass on to the next generation - indeed, to ask whether we have a real and vivid sense of that next generation.
A lot of the time, we just don't let ourselves think about the future with realism. A culture of vast material waste and emotional short-termism is a culture that is a lot more fragile than it knows. How much investment are we going to put in towards a safer and more balanced future?
A big question. But too big to avoid.
And if we feel a bit paralysed by just how big it is - well, we can at least start by a visit this week to the nearest recycling bins.
God bless you all in this New Year; may you have patience for the long view - confident that God takes the long view of you and isn't going to give up.
Happy New Year.
ENDS
Notes for editors:
The message will be seen on BBC 2 at 2030 on New Year's eve and again on BBC 1 at midday on New Year's Day. It will become the first New Year Message to be subsequently available on Youtube, being posted on Wednesday morning. A link will be circulated and also posted on the Archbishop's website.
++++++++++
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London, is distributed to more than 8,000 journalists and other readers around the world.
By this stage of the holiday season, I imagine you might be looking with dismay at your overflowing rubbish bin, or the mountain of debris piling up outside your back door. Food, drink, presents - they all come with more and more packaging. Even the most eco-conscious of us is likely to have a bit of a bad conscience after Christmas.
Despite constant talk about recycling and thinking "green" - we're still a society that produces fantastic quantities of waste. From the big issues around toxic industrial and nuclear waste to the domestic questions of managing day-to-day waste and the build-up of stuff around us that can't be recycled, it's not something we can ignore. Look at the number of plastic bags flapping around by the roadside, in town and country alike - and you see what I mean.
What I wonder is - how much this influences attitudes in other parts of our lives?
In a society where we think of so many things as disposable; where we expect to be constantly discarding last year's gadget and replacing it with this year's model - do we end up tempted to think of people and relationships as disposable? Are we so fixated on keeping up with change that we lose any sense of our need for stability?
One of the buzzwords of recent years has been 'sustainability' - and, like all buzzwords, it tends to be used annoyingly all over the place, often for things it doesn't really fit. But what the word points to is the sense of obligation that most of us share at some deep level - the obligation to hand on to our children and grandchildren a legacy that helps them live and flourish. Building to last is something we all understand.
And if we live in a context where we construct everything from computers to buildings to relationships on the assumption that they'll need to be replaced before long - what have we lost?
Christians, like Jews and many other religious people too, talk a lot about God as 'faithful'. God is involved in 'building to last', in creating a sustainable world and sustainable relationships with us human beings. He doesn't give up on the material of human lives. He doesn't throw it all away and start again. And he asks us to approach one another and our physical world with the same commitment. The life of Jesus, the life in which God identifies completely with our flesh and blood is the supreme sign of that commitment.
God doesn't do waste.
He doesn't regard anyone as a 'waste of space', as not worth his time - from the very beginnings of life to its end, whether they are successful, articulate, productive or not. And so a life that communicates a bit of what God is like, is a life that doesn't give up - that doesn't settle down with a culture of waste and disposability - whether with people, or with things.
Perhaps a good resolution for the New Year would be to keep asking what world we want to pass on to the next generation - indeed, to ask whether we have a real and vivid sense of that next generation.
A lot of the time, we just don't let ourselves think about the future with realism. A culture of vast material waste and emotional short-termism is a culture that is a lot more fragile than it knows. How much investment are we going to put in towards a safer and more balanced future?
A big question. But too big to avoid.
And if we feel a bit paralysed by just how big it is - well, we can at least start by a visit this week to the nearest recycling bins.
God bless you all in this New Year; may you have patience for the long view - confident that God takes the long view of you and isn't going to give up.
Happy New Year.
ENDS
Notes for editors:
The message will be seen on BBC 2 at 2030 on New Year's eve and again on BBC 1 at midday on New Year's Day. It will become the first New Year Message to be subsequently available on Youtube, being posted on Wednesday morning. A link will be circulated and also posted on the Archbishop's website.
++++++++++
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London, is distributed to more than 8,000 journalists and other readers around the world.
Wednesday, December 26, 2007
The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON), June 15-22, 2008, The Holy Land
Issued by the Global Anglican Future Conference, June 15-22, 2008, The Holy Land
Press Release
December 26, 2007
GLOBAL ANGLICAN FUTURE CONFERENCE IN HOLY LAND
ANNOUNCED BY ORTHODOX PRIMATES
Orthodox Primates with other leading bishops from across the globe are to invite fellow Bishops, senior clergy and laity from every province of the Anglican Communion to a unique eight-day event, to be known as the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) 2008.
The event, which was agreed at a meeting of Primates in Nairobi last week, will be in the form of a pilgrimage back to the roots of the Church’s faith. The Holy Land is the planned venue. From 15-22 June 2008, Anglicans from both the Evangelical and Anglo-catholic wings of the church will make pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven, sent his Holy Spirit, and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out, to strengthen them for what they believe will be difficult days ahead.
At the meeting were Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Peter Jensen (Sydney), Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria); Bishop Don Harvey (Canada), Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) representing Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone) , Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America ), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England) and Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England). Bishops Michael Nazir-Ali (Rochester, England), Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted by telephone. These leaders represent over 30 million of the 55 million active Anglicans in the world.
Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”
The gathering set in motion a Global Anglican Future Conference: A Gospel of Power and Transformation. The vision, according to Archbishop Nzimbi is to inform and inspire invited leaders “to seek transformation in our own lives and help impact communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ”. Bishops and their wives, clergy and laity, including the next generation of young leaders will attend GAFCON. The GAFCON website is http://www.gafcon.org.
Canon Chris Sugden added: “While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land .”
Ends.
For further details:
Paul Eddy (UK Press Officer) 44-(0) 7958 905716; Bishop Lawrence Dena (Kenya) 254-721-99-0236 and 254-202-714755; Russell Powell (Australia) 61-(0) 411-692499, 612 9265 1507; Ven. AkinTunde Popoola (Nigeria) 234-802-3420161; Peter Frank (USA) 1-412-281-6131 ext 134; Canon Dr Chris Sugden (UK) 44 (0) 1865 883388.
Editor’s Notes:
Frequently asked Questions
1. Who is sponsoring the Conference?
The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) is being called by those who took part in the Nairobi Consultation:
Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Archbishop Peter Jensen (Sydney) Archbishop Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria). Bishop Don Harvey (Canada) and Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) who also represented Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone). Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network and Common Cause USA.), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England), Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England)
Bishop Michael Nazir Ali (Rochester, England) and Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted and also form part of the Leadership Team.
These bishops and their colleagues represent over 30 million Anglicans out of the 55 million active Anglicans. ( Nigeria 18m , Uganda 8m Kenya 2.5m Rwanda 1 m Tanzania 1.3 m plus Southern Cone, US, Sydney, England). The notional total of the Communion is 77m. The active membership is nearer 55 m, since of the 26m notional members in CofE 3.7m attend at Christmas Services)
2. Whom do you expect to come?
We will be inviting bishops and their wives, senior clergy, church planters, and lay people including the next generation of young leaders. We aim to make it a Global Anglican Conference with its eye on the future and future leadership.
3. Is this a Global South Initiative?
Not quite. Many of the Primates at the Nairobi Consultation are in the Global South, but it also included Anglican leaders from parts of the world beyond the geographic Global South.
4. Why a pilgrimage?
We are looking to the future of the Global Anglican Communion, which is itself a pilgrimage.
Those who want to hold on to the Biblical and Historical faith need to come together to renew their faith and develop a fresh vision for our common mission. The way we have chosen to do this is to undertake a pilgrimage to a land whose heritage we all share, the land where Jesus Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven and sent his Holy Spirit, and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out. We believe this will strengthen us for the difficult days ahead.
The conference will outline the mission imperatives for the next 25 years for orthodox Anglicans. It is important therefore to reconnect with our roots in the biblical story.
5. Is not Israel/Palestine a controversial venue?
Israel/Palestine has been a place of conflict for decades. That should not keep us from making pilgrimage to a land that is our common heritage. We want to bring fellowship and bear testimony to the Christian communities in Israel/Palestine. Those of us from Africa are no strangers to the pressure that Christian communities are put under from other religious groups and communities.
6. Why call it in June?
The pilgrimage is to strengthen bishops at a crucial time in the life of the Anglican Communion. Many bishops will not be able to accept the invitation to the Lambeth Conference as their consciences will not allow it. Some will attend both gatherings. The purpose of the consultation is to strengthen them all spiritually.
7. Is it not really an alternative to the Lambeth Conference?
No.
It is not at the same time or in the same region as the Lambeth Conference. So there will be some who will attend both conferences and thus be able to consult with the Archbishop of Canterbury and others there.
As Archbishop Gregory Venables has said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”
GAFCON is a call to vision and action for mission based firmly on the “faith once delivered to the saints” and revealed in Scripture, to reform the church and transform persons, communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. African Bishops had this focus at their Lagos 2004 conference. The Episcopal church’s agenda has recently overshadowed it. We now need to develop this gospel agenda for all like-minded in the communion.
It is to outline the mission imperatives for the next 25 years and how to begin to respond to them.
It is a pilgrimage to the places of the Biblical story to renew our faith and commitment. It is to envision the Global Anglican Future.
The Lambeth Conference has a different agenda.
8. Is this all over a gay bishop?
No.
GAFCON is about churches being grouped by what they have in common. We’re for growth, we’re for being passionate about the truth. We want to look to the future. That’s what the conference is about - Global Anglican Future.
9. Aren’t you splitting the church?
No. Communion depends on having something in common. Churches in the Global South are growing. They’re passionate about the truth and their faith. We are building on this strength.
As the Anglican Communion develops, some of the old bonds are loosening, and some new bonds are being formed. That’s a good thing. These bonds involve churches which are growing, and which have something distinctive to say to the world. GAFCON is enthusiastic about mission. Its focus is the future.
Press Release
December 26, 2007
GLOBAL ANGLICAN FUTURE CONFERENCE IN HOLY LAND
ANNOUNCED BY ORTHODOX PRIMATES
Orthodox Primates with other leading bishops from across the globe are to invite fellow Bishops, senior clergy and laity from every province of the Anglican Communion to a unique eight-day event, to be known as the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) 2008.
The event, which was agreed at a meeting of Primates in Nairobi last week, will be in the form of a pilgrimage back to the roots of the Church’s faith. The Holy Land is the planned venue. From 15-22 June 2008, Anglicans from both the Evangelical and Anglo-catholic wings of the church will make pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven, sent his Holy Spirit, and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out, to strengthen them for what they believe will be difficult days ahead.
At the meeting were Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Peter Jensen (Sydney), Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria); Bishop Don Harvey (Canada), Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) representing Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone) , Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America ), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England) and Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England). Bishops Michael Nazir-Ali (Rochester, England), Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted by telephone. These leaders represent over 30 million of the 55 million active Anglicans in the world.
Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”
The gathering set in motion a Global Anglican Future Conference: A Gospel of Power and Transformation. The vision, according to Archbishop Nzimbi is to inform and inspire invited leaders “to seek transformation in our own lives and help impact communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ”. Bishops and their wives, clergy and laity, including the next generation of young leaders will attend GAFCON. The GAFCON website is http://www.gafcon.org.
Canon Chris Sugden added: “While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land .”
Ends.
For further details:
Paul Eddy (UK Press Officer) 44-(0) 7958 905716; Bishop Lawrence Dena (Kenya) 254-721-99-0236 and 254-202-714755; Russell Powell (Australia) 61-(0) 411-692499, 612 9265 1507; Ven. AkinTunde Popoola (Nigeria) 234-802-3420161; Peter Frank (USA) 1-412-281-6131 ext 134; Canon Dr Chris Sugden (UK) 44 (0) 1865 883388.
Editor’s Notes:
Frequently asked Questions
1. Who is sponsoring the Conference?
The Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) is being called by those who took part in the Nairobi Consultation:
Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Archbishop Peter Jensen (Sydney) Archbishop Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria). Bishop Don Harvey (Canada) and Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) who also represented Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone). Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network and Common Cause USA.), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England), Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England)
Bishop Michael Nazir Ali (Rochester, England) and Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted and also form part of the Leadership Team.
These bishops and their colleagues represent over 30 million Anglicans out of the 55 million active Anglicans. ( Nigeria 18m , Uganda 8m Kenya 2.5m Rwanda 1 m Tanzania 1.3 m plus Southern Cone, US, Sydney, England). The notional total of the Communion is 77m. The active membership is nearer 55 m, since of the 26m notional members in CofE 3.7m attend at Christmas Services)
2. Whom do you expect to come?
We will be inviting bishops and their wives, senior clergy, church planters, and lay people including the next generation of young leaders. We aim to make it a Global Anglican Conference with its eye on the future and future leadership.
3. Is this a Global South Initiative?
Not quite. Many of the Primates at the Nairobi Consultation are in the Global South, but it also included Anglican leaders from parts of the world beyond the geographic Global South.
4. Why a pilgrimage?
We are looking to the future of the Global Anglican Communion, which is itself a pilgrimage.
Those who want to hold on to the Biblical and Historical faith need to come together to renew their faith and develop a fresh vision for our common mission. The way we have chosen to do this is to undertake a pilgrimage to a land whose heritage we all share, the land where Jesus Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven and sent his Holy Spirit, and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out. We believe this will strengthen us for the difficult days ahead.
The conference will outline the mission imperatives for the next 25 years for orthodox Anglicans. It is important therefore to reconnect with our roots in the biblical story.
5. Is not Israel/Palestine a controversial venue?
Israel/Palestine has been a place of conflict for decades. That should not keep us from making pilgrimage to a land that is our common heritage. We want to bring fellowship and bear testimony to the Christian communities in Israel/Palestine. Those of us from Africa are no strangers to the pressure that Christian communities are put under from other religious groups and communities.
6. Why call it in June?
The pilgrimage is to strengthen bishops at a crucial time in the life of the Anglican Communion. Many bishops will not be able to accept the invitation to the Lambeth Conference as their consciences will not allow it. Some will attend both gatherings. The purpose of the consultation is to strengthen them all spiritually.
7. Is it not really an alternative to the Lambeth Conference?
No.
It is not at the same time or in the same region as the Lambeth Conference. So there will be some who will attend both conferences and thus be able to consult with the Archbishop of Canterbury and others there.
As Archbishop Gregory Venables has said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”
GAFCON is a call to vision and action for mission based firmly on the “faith once delivered to the saints” and revealed in Scripture, to reform the church and transform persons, communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ. African Bishops had this focus at their Lagos 2004 conference. The Episcopal church’s agenda has recently overshadowed it. We now need to develop this gospel agenda for all like-minded in the communion.
It is to outline the mission imperatives for the next 25 years and how to begin to respond to them.
It is a pilgrimage to the places of the Biblical story to renew our faith and commitment. It is to envision the Global Anglican Future.
The Lambeth Conference has a different agenda.
8. Is this all over a gay bishop?
No.
GAFCON is about churches being grouped by what they have in common. We’re for growth, we’re for being passionate about the truth. We want to look to the future. That’s what the conference is about - Global Anglican Future.
9. Aren’t you splitting the church?
No. Communion depends on having something in common. Churches in the Global South are growing. They’re passionate about the truth and their faith. We are building on this strength.
As the Anglican Communion develops, some of the old bonds are loosening, and some new bonds are being formed. That’s a good thing. These bonds involve churches which are growing, and which have something distinctive to say to the world. GAFCON is enthusiastic about mission. Its focus is the future.
Orthodox Anglican primates announce Holy Land conference
December 26, 2007
http://prayersthatmatter.blogspot.com/2007/12/orthodox-anglican-primates-announce.html
Orthodox Primates with other leading bishops from across the globe are to invite fellow Bishops, senior clergy and laity from every province of the Anglican Communion to a unique eight-day event, to be known as the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) 2008.
The event, which was agreed at a meeting of Primates in Nairobi last week, will be in the form of a pilgrimage back to the roots of the Church's faith. The Holy Land is the planned venue. From 15-22 June 2008, Anglicans from both the Evangelical and Anglo-catholic wings of the church will make pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven, sent his Holy Spirit,and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out, to strengthen them for what they believe will be difficult days ahead.
At the meeting were Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Peter Jensen (Sydney), Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria); Bishop Don Harvey (Canada), Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) representing Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone) , Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network ), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America ), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England) and Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England). Bishops Michael Nazir-Ali (Rochester, England), Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted by telephone. These leaders represent over 30 million of the 55 million active Anglicans in the world.
Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said "While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God's call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission."
The gathering set in motion a Global Anglican Future Conference: A Gospel of Power and Transformation. The vision, according to Archbishop Nzimbi is to inform and inspire invited leaders "to seek transformation in our own lives and help impact communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ". Bishops and their wives, clergy and laity, including the next generation of young leaders will attend GAFCON. The GAFCON website is www.gafcon.org.
Canon Chris Sugden added: "While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land ."
http://prayersthatmatter.blogspot.com/2007/12/orthodox-anglican-primates-announce.html
Orthodox Primates with other leading bishops from across the globe are to invite fellow Bishops, senior clergy and laity from every province of the Anglican Communion to a unique eight-day event, to be known as the Global Anglican Future Conference (GAFCON) 2008.
The event, which was agreed at a meeting of Primates in Nairobi last week, will be in the form of a pilgrimage back to the roots of the Church's faith. The Holy Land is the planned venue. From 15-22 June 2008, Anglicans from both the Evangelical and Anglo-catholic wings of the church will make pilgrimage to the Holy Land, where Christ was born, ministered, died, rose again, ascended into heaven, sent his Holy Spirit,and where the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out, to strengthen them for what they believe will be difficult days ahead.
At the meeting were Archbishops Peter Akinola (Nigeria), Henry Orombi (Uganda), Emmanuel Kolini (Rwanda), Benjamin Nzimbi (Kenya), Donald Mtetemela (Tanzania), Peter Jensen (Sydney), Nicholas Okoh (Nigeria); Bishop Don Harvey (Canada), Bishop Bill Atwood (Kenya) representing Archbishop Greg Venables (Southern Cone) , Bishop Bob Duncan (Anglican Communion Network ), Bishop Martyn Minns (Convocation of Anglicans in North America ), Canon Dr Vinay Samuel (India and England) and Canon Dr Chris Sugden (England). Bishops Michael Nazir-Ali (Rochester, England), Bishop Wallace Benn (Lewes, England) were consulted by telephone. These leaders represent over 30 million of the 55 million active Anglicans in the world.
Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said "While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, GAFCON will seek to clarify God's call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission."
The gathering set in motion a Global Anglican Future Conference: A Gospel of Power and Transformation. The vision, according to Archbishop Nzimbi is to inform and inspire invited leaders "to seek transformation in our own lives and help impact communities and societies through the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ". Bishops and their wives, clergy and laity, including the next generation of young leaders will attend GAFCON. The GAFCON website is www.gafcon.org.
Canon Chris Sugden added: "While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land ."
Rival Lambeth Conference announced
Wednesday, 26th December 2007. 9:14am
By: Nick Mackenzie.
A RIVAL to the Anglican Communion’s 10-yearly Lambeth Conference has finally been announced.
The ‘Global Anglican Future Conference’, as it is to be known, will take place in June (15-22) just weeks before the official gathering of all the world’s Anglican bishops takes place in Canterbury. It will bring together bishops and primates from the ‘orthodox’ wings of the church, both evangelical and Anglo-Catholic.
Today’s announcement is certain to put more pressure on the Archbishop of Canterbury who is struggling to keep the warring sides together in a worldwide Communion of self-governing Churches who are split over the consecration of an openly gay man as Bishop in the USA.
But perhaps symbolically the ‘orthodox’ leaders are making a pointed statement about the leadership of Archbishop Rowan Williams, by saying the conference will be held in the Holy Land. Last year one of those ‘orthodox’ bishops, the Most Rev Peter Akinola of Nigeria, warned that ‘it was not necessary to go through Lambeth to meet God.’ By meeting in the Holy Land, the message they are sending out is that the position of Archbishop of Canterbury is of little importance.
The potential for the rival conference to hasten a split in the Anglican Communion is gathering momentum, but if the organisers present it as a complementary conference to Lambeth, rather than a rival, it could ease some of the tensions.
Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, this conference will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”
Canon Chris Sugden, one of the organizers, added: "While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land.”
europedesk@religiousintelligence.com
By: Nick Mackenzie.
A RIVAL to the Anglican Communion’s 10-yearly Lambeth Conference has finally been announced.
The ‘Global Anglican Future Conference’, as it is to be known, will take place in June (15-22) just weeks before the official gathering of all the world’s Anglican bishops takes place in Canterbury. It will bring together bishops and primates from the ‘orthodox’ wings of the church, both evangelical and Anglo-Catholic.
Today’s announcement is certain to put more pressure on the Archbishop of Canterbury who is struggling to keep the warring sides together in a worldwide Communion of self-governing Churches who are split over the consecration of an openly gay man as Bishop in the USA.
But perhaps symbolically the ‘orthodox’ leaders are making a pointed statement about the leadership of Archbishop Rowan Williams, by saying the conference will be held in the Holy Land. Last year one of those ‘orthodox’ bishops, the Most Rev Peter Akinola of Nigeria, warned that ‘it was not necessary to go through Lambeth to meet God.’ By meeting in the Holy Land, the message they are sending out is that the position of Archbishop of Canterbury is of little importance.
The potential for the rival conference to hasten a split in the Anglican Communion is gathering momentum, but if the organisers present it as a complementary conference to Lambeth, rather than a rival, it could ease some of the tensions.
Southern Cone Primate Gregory Venables said: “While there are many calls for shared mission, it clearly must rise from common shared faith. Our pastoral responsibility to the people that we lead is now to provide the opportunity to come together around the central and unchanging tenets of the central and unchanging historic Anglican faith. Rather than being subject to the continued chaos and compromise that have dramatically impeded Anglican mission, this conference will seek to clarify God’s call at this time and build a network of cooperation for Global mission.”
Canon Chris Sugden, one of the organizers, added: "While this conference is not a specific challenge to the Lambeth Conference, it will provide opportunities for fellowship and care for those who have decided not to attend Lambeth. There was no other place to meet at this critical time for the future of the Church than in the Holy Land.”
europedesk@religiousintelligence.com
Tuesday, December 25, 2007
Benedict XVI's Christmas Message
"Neither Individuals Nor Nations Should Be Afraid to Recognize and Welcome Him"
VATICAN CITY, DEC. 25, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a Vatican translation of Benedict XVI's Christmas message, which he delivered from the main balcony of St. Peter's Basilica today at noon.* * *
"A holy day has dawned upon us.
Come you nations and adore the Lord.
Today a great light has come upon the earth."
(Day Mass of Christmas, Gospel Acclamation)
Dear Brothers and Sisters! "A holy day has dawned upon us." A day of great hope: today the Saviour of mankind is born. The birth of a child normally brings a light of hope to those who are waiting anxiously. When Jesus was born in the stable at Bethlehem, a "great light" appeared on earth; a great hope entered the hearts of those who awaited him: in the words of today's Christmas liturgy, "lux magna". Admittedly it was not "great" in the manner of this world, because the first to see it were only Mary, Joseph and some shepherds, then the Magi, the old man Simeon, the prophetess Anna: those whom God had chosen. Yet, in the shadows and silence of that holy night, a great and inextinguishable light shone forth for every man; the great hope that brings happiness entered into the world: "the Word was made flesh and we saw his glory" (Jn 1:14).
"God is light", says Saint John, "and in him is no darkness at all" (1 Jn 1:5). In the Book of Genesis we read that when the universe was created, "the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep." "God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light." (Gen 1:2-3). The creative Word of God is Light, the source of life. All things were made through the Logos, not one thing had its being but through him (cf. Jn 1:3). That is why all creatures are fundamentally good and bear within themselves the stamp of God, a spark of his light. Nevertheless, when Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, the Light himself came into the world: in the words of the Creed, "God from God, Light from Light". In Jesus, God assumed what he was not, while remaining what he was: "omnipotence entered an infant's body and did not cease to govern the universe" (cf. Saint Augustine, Sermo 184, No. 1 on Christmas). The Creator of man became man in order to bring peace to the world. For this reason, during Christmas night, the hosts of angels sing: "Glory to God in the highest, and peace on earth to those whom he loves" (Lk 2:14).
"Today a great light has come upon the earth". The Light of Christ is the bearer of peace. At Midnight Mass, the Eucharistic liturgy begins with this very chant: "Today true peace has come down to us from heaven" (Entrance Antiphon). Indeed, it is only the "great" light manifested in Christ that can give "true" peace to men: that is why every generation is called to welcome it, to welcome the God who in Bethlehem became one of us.
This is Christmas - the historical event and the mystery of love, which for more than two thousand years has spoken to men and women of every era and every place. It is the holy day on which the "great light" of Christ shines forth, bearing peace! Certainly, if we are to recognize it, if we are to receive it, faith is needed and humility is needed. The humility of Mary, who believed in the word of the Lord and, bending low over the manger, was the first to adore the fruit of her womb; the humility of Joseph, the just man, who had the courage of faith and preferred to obey God rather than to protect his own reputation; the humility of the shepherds, the poor and anonymous shepherds, who received the proclamation of the heavenly messenger and hastened towards the stable, where they found the new-born child and worshipped him, full of astonishment, praising God (cf. Lk 2:15-20). The little ones, the poor in spirit: they are the key figures of Christmas, in the past and in the present; they have always been the key figures of God's history, the indefatigable builders of his Kingdom of justice, love and peace.
In the silence of that night in Bethlehem, Jesus was born and lovingly welcomed. And now, on this Christmas Day, when the joyful news of his saving birth continues to resound, who is ready to open the doors of his heart to the holy child? Men and women of this modern age, Christ comes also to us bringing his light, he comes also to us granting peace! But who is watching, in the night of doubt and uncertainty, with a vigilant, praying heart? Who is waiting for the dawn of the new day, keeping alight the flame of faith? Who has time to listen to his word and to become enfolded and entranced by his love? Yes! His message of peace is for everyone; he comes to offer himself to all people as sure hope for salvation.
Finally, may the light of Christ, which comes to enlighten every human being, shine forth and bring consolation to those who live in the darkness of poverty, injustice and war; to those who are still denied their legitimate aspirations for a more secure existence, for health, education, stable employment, for fuller participation in civil and political responsibilities, free from oppression and protected from conditions that offend against human dignity. It is the most vulnerable members of society - women, children, the elderly - who are so often the victims of brutal armed conflicts, terrorism and violence of every kind, which inflict such terrible sufferings on entire populations. At the same time, ethnic, religious and political tensions, instability, rivalry, disagreements, and all forms of injustice and discrimination are destroying the internal fabric of many countries and embittering international relations. Throughout the world the number of migrants, refugees and evacuees is also increasing because of frequent natural disasters, often caused by alarming environmental upheavals.
On this day of peace, my thoughts turn especially to those places where the grim sound of arms continues to reverberate; to the tortured regions of Darfur, Somalia, the north of the Democratic Republic of Congo, the border between Eritrea and Ethiopia; to the whole of the Middle East - especially Iraq, Lebanon and the Holy Land; to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, to the Balkans and to many other crisis situations that unfortunately are frequently forgotten. May the Child Jesus bring relief to those who are suffering and may he bestow upon political leaders the wisdom and courage to seek and find humane, just and lasting solutions. To the thirst for meaning and value so characteristic of today's world, to the search for prosperity and peace that marks the lives of all mankind, to the hopes of the poor: Christ - true God and true Man - responds with his Nativity. Neither individuals nor nations should be afraid to recognize and welcome him: with Him "a shining light" brightens the horizon of humanity; in him "a holy day" dawns that knows no sunset. May this Christmas truly be for all people a day of joy, hope and peace!
"Come you nations and adore the Lord." With Mary, Joseph and the shepherds, with the Magi and the countless host of humble worshippers of the new-born Child, who down the centuries have welcomed the mystery of Christmas, let us too, brothers and sisters from every continent, allow the light of this day to spread everywhere: may it enter our hearts, may it brighten and warm our homes, may it bring serenity and hope to our cities, and may it give peace to the world. This is my earnest wish for you who are listening. A wish that grows into a humble and trustful prayer to the Child Jesus, that his light will dispel all darkness from your lives and fill you with love and peace. May the Lord, who has made his merciful face to shine in Christ, fill you with his happiness and make you messengers of his goodness. Happy Christmas!
[Original text: Italian]
[After the traditional blessing "urbi et orbi" (to the city of Rome and the world), the Pope gave Christmas greetings in 63 languages. In English, he said:]
May the birth of the Prince of Peace remind the world where its true happiness lies; and may your hearts be filled with hope and joy, for the Saviour has been born for us.
© Copyright 2007 -- Libreria Editrice Vaticana
VATICAN CITY, DEC. 25, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a Vatican translation of Benedict XVI's Christmas message, which he delivered from the main balcony of St. Peter's Basilica today at noon.* * *
"A holy day has dawned upon us.
Come you nations and adore the Lord.
Today a great light has come upon the earth."
(Day Mass of Christmas, Gospel Acclamation)
Dear Brothers and Sisters! "A holy day has dawned upon us." A day of great hope: today the Saviour of mankind is born. The birth of a child normally brings a light of hope to those who are waiting anxiously. When Jesus was born in the stable at Bethlehem, a "great light" appeared on earth; a great hope entered the hearts of those who awaited him: in the words of today's Christmas liturgy, "lux magna". Admittedly it was not "great" in the manner of this world, because the first to see it were only Mary, Joseph and some shepherds, then the Magi, the old man Simeon, the prophetess Anna: those whom God had chosen. Yet, in the shadows and silence of that holy night, a great and inextinguishable light shone forth for every man; the great hope that brings happiness entered into the world: "the Word was made flesh and we saw his glory" (Jn 1:14).
"God is light", says Saint John, "and in him is no darkness at all" (1 Jn 1:5). In the Book of Genesis we read that when the universe was created, "the earth was without form and void, and darkness was upon the face of the deep." "God said, 'Let there be light'; and there was light." (Gen 1:2-3). The creative Word of God is Light, the source of life. All things were made through the Logos, not one thing had its being but through him (cf. Jn 1:3). That is why all creatures are fundamentally good and bear within themselves the stamp of God, a spark of his light. Nevertheless, when Jesus was born of the Virgin Mary, the Light himself came into the world: in the words of the Creed, "God from God, Light from Light". In Jesus, God assumed what he was not, while remaining what he was: "omnipotence entered an infant's body and did not cease to govern the universe" (cf. Saint Augustine, Sermo 184, No. 1 on Christmas). The Creator of man became man in order to bring peace to the world. For this reason, during Christmas night, the hosts of angels sing: "Glory to God in the highest, and peace on earth to those whom he loves" (Lk 2:14).
"Today a great light has come upon the earth". The Light of Christ is the bearer of peace. At Midnight Mass, the Eucharistic liturgy begins with this very chant: "Today true peace has come down to us from heaven" (Entrance Antiphon). Indeed, it is only the "great" light manifested in Christ that can give "true" peace to men: that is why every generation is called to welcome it, to welcome the God who in Bethlehem became one of us.
This is Christmas - the historical event and the mystery of love, which for more than two thousand years has spoken to men and women of every era and every place. It is the holy day on which the "great light" of Christ shines forth, bearing peace! Certainly, if we are to recognize it, if we are to receive it, faith is needed and humility is needed. The humility of Mary, who believed in the word of the Lord and, bending low over the manger, was the first to adore the fruit of her womb; the humility of Joseph, the just man, who had the courage of faith and preferred to obey God rather than to protect his own reputation; the humility of the shepherds, the poor and anonymous shepherds, who received the proclamation of the heavenly messenger and hastened towards the stable, where they found the new-born child and worshipped him, full of astonishment, praising God (cf. Lk 2:15-20). The little ones, the poor in spirit: they are the key figures of Christmas, in the past and in the present; they have always been the key figures of God's history, the indefatigable builders of his Kingdom of justice, love and peace.
In the silence of that night in Bethlehem, Jesus was born and lovingly welcomed. And now, on this Christmas Day, when the joyful news of his saving birth continues to resound, who is ready to open the doors of his heart to the holy child? Men and women of this modern age, Christ comes also to us bringing his light, he comes also to us granting peace! But who is watching, in the night of doubt and uncertainty, with a vigilant, praying heart? Who is waiting for the dawn of the new day, keeping alight the flame of faith? Who has time to listen to his word and to become enfolded and entranced by his love? Yes! His message of peace is for everyone; he comes to offer himself to all people as sure hope for salvation.
Finally, may the light of Christ, which comes to enlighten every human being, shine forth and bring consolation to those who live in the darkness of poverty, injustice and war; to those who are still denied their legitimate aspirations for a more secure existence, for health, education, stable employment, for fuller participation in civil and political responsibilities, free from oppression and protected from conditions that offend against human dignity. It is the most vulnerable members of society - women, children, the elderly - who are so often the victims of brutal armed conflicts, terrorism and violence of every kind, which inflict such terrible sufferings on entire populations. At the same time, ethnic, religious and political tensions, instability, rivalry, disagreements, and all forms of injustice and discrimination are destroying the internal fabric of many countries and embittering international relations. Throughout the world the number of migrants, refugees and evacuees is also increasing because of frequent natural disasters, often caused by alarming environmental upheavals.
On this day of peace, my thoughts turn especially to those places where the grim sound of arms continues to reverberate; to the tortured regions of Darfur, Somalia, the north of the Democratic Republic of Congo, the border between Eritrea and Ethiopia; to the whole of the Middle East - especially Iraq, Lebanon and the Holy Land; to Afghanistan, Pakistan and Sri Lanka, to the Balkans and to many other crisis situations that unfortunately are frequently forgotten. May the Child Jesus bring relief to those who are suffering and may he bestow upon political leaders the wisdom and courage to seek and find humane, just and lasting solutions. To the thirst for meaning and value so characteristic of today's world, to the search for prosperity and peace that marks the lives of all mankind, to the hopes of the poor: Christ - true God and true Man - responds with his Nativity. Neither individuals nor nations should be afraid to recognize and welcome him: with Him "a shining light" brightens the horizon of humanity; in him "a holy day" dawns that knows no sunset. May this Christmas truly be for all people a day of joy, hope and peace!
"Come you nations and adore the Lord." With Mary, Joseph and the shepherds, with the Magi and the countless host of humble worshippers of the new-born Child, who down the centuries have welcomed the mystery of Christmas, let us too, brothers and sisters from every continent, allow the light of this day to spread everywhere: may it enter our hearts, may it brighten and warm our homes, may it bring serenity and hope to our cities, and may it give peace to the world. This is my earnest wish for you who are listening. A wish that grows into a humble and trustful prayer to the Child Jesus, that his light will dispel all darkness from your lives and fill you with love and peace. May the Lord, who has made his merciful face to shine in Christ, fill you with his happiness and make you messengers of his goodness. Happy Christmas!
[Original text: Italian]
[After the traditional blessing "urbi et orbi" (to the city of Rome and the world), the Pope gave Christmas greetings in 63 languages. In English, he said:]
May the birth of the Prince of Peace remind the world where its true happiness lies; and may your hearts be filled with hope and joy, for the Saviour has been born for us.
© Copyright 2007 -- Libreria Editrice Vaticana
The Nativity of Our Lord
In those days a decree went out from Caesar Augustus that all the world should be enrolled. This was the first enrollment, when Quirin'i-us was governor of Syria. And all went to be enrolled, each to his own city. And Joseph also went up from Galilee, from the city of Nazareth, to Judea, to the city of David, which is called Bethlehem, because he was of the house and lineage of David, to be enrolled with Mary, his betrothed, who was with child. And while they were there, the time came for her to be delivered. And she gave birth to her first-born son and wrapped him in swaddling cloths, and laid him in a manger, because there was no place for them in the inn.
And in that region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with fear. And the angel said to them, "Be not afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy which will come to all the people; for to you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will find a babe wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger." And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying,
"Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!"
When the angels went away from them into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, "Let us go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has made known to us." And they went with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger. And when they saw it they made known the saying which had been told them concerning this child; and all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them. But Mary kept all these things, pondering them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.
Luke 2:1-20
And in that region there were shepherds out in the field, keeping watch over their flock by night. And an angel of the Lord appeared to them, and the glory of the Lord shone around them, and they were filled with fear. And the angel said to them, "Be not afraid; for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy which will come to all the people; for to you is born this day in the city of David a Savior, who is Christ the Lord. And this will be a sign for you: you will find a babe wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger." And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying,
"Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among men with whom he is pleased!"
When the angels went away from them into heaven, the shepherds said to one another, "Let us go over to Bethlehem and see this thing that has happened, which the Lord has made known to us." And they went with haste, and found Mary and Joseph, and the babe lying in a manger. And when they saw it they made known the saying which had been told them concerning this child; and all who heard it wondered at what the shepherds told them. But Mary kept all these things, pondering them in her heart. And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God for all they had heard and seen, as it had been told them.
Luke 2:1-20
Monday, December 24, 2007
Benedict XVI's Midnight Mass Homily
"God Finds a Space, Even If It Means Entering Through the Stable"
VATICAN CITY, DEC. 24, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a Vatican translation of Benedict XVI's homily today at Christmas Midnight Mass in St. Peter's Basilica.* * *
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
"The time came for Mary to be delivered. And she gave birth to her first-born son and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn" (Lk 2:6f.). These words touch our hearts every time we hear them. This was the moment that the angel had foretold at Nazareth: "you will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High" (Lk 1:31). This was the moment that Israel had been awaiting for centuries, through many dark hours - the moment that all mankind was somehow awaiting, in terms as yet ill-defined: when God would take care of us, when he would step outside his concealment, when the world would be saved and God would renew all things. We can imagine the kind of interior preparation, the kind of love with which Mary approached that hour. The brief phrase: "She wrapped him in swaddling clothes" allows us to glimpse something of the holy joy and the silent zeal of that preparation. The swaddling clothes were ready, so that the child could be given a fitting welcome. Yet there is no room at the inn. In some way, mankind is awaiting God, waiting for him to draw near. But when the moment comes, there is no room for him. Man is so preoccupied with himself, he has such urgent need of all the space and all the time for his own things, that nothing remains for others - for his neighbour, for the poor, for God. And the richer men become, the more they fill up all the space by themselves. And the less room there is for others.
Saint John, in his Gospel, went to the heart of the matter, giving added depth to Saint Luke's brief account of the situation in Bethlehem: "He came to his own home, and his own people received him not" (Jn 1:11). This refers first and foremost to Bethlehem: the Son of David comes to his own city, but has to be born in a stable, because there is no room for him at the inn. Then it refers to Israel: the one who is sent comes among his own, but they do not want him. And truly, it refers to all mankind: he through whom the world was made, the primordial Creator-Word, enters into the world, but he is not listened to, he is not received.
These words refer ultimately to us, to each individual and to society as a whole. Do we have time for our neighbour who is in need of a word from us, from me, or in need of my affection? For the sufferer who is in need of help? For the fugitive or the refugee who is seeking asylum? Do we have time and space for God? Can he enter into our lives? Does he find room in us, or have we occupied all the available space in our thoughts, our actions, our lives for ourselves?
Thank God, this negative detail is not the only one, nor the last one that we find in the Gospel. Just as in Luke we encounter the maternal love of Mary and the fidelity of Saint Joseph, the vigilance of the shepherds and their great joy, just as in Matthew we encounter the visit of the wise men, come from afar, so too John says to us: "To all who received him, he gave power to become children of God" (Jn 1:12). There are those who receive him, and thus, beginning with the stable, with the outside, there grows silently the new house, the new city, the new world. The message of Christmas makes us recognize the darkness of a closed world, and thereby no doubt illustrates a reality that we see daily. Yet it also tells us that God does not allow himself to be shut out. He finds a space, even if it means entering through the stable; there are people who see his light and pass it on. Through the word of the Gospel, the angel also speaks to us, and in the sacred liturgy the light of the Redeemer enters our lives. Whether we are shepherds or "wise men" - the light and its message call us to set out, to leave the narrow circle of our desires and interests, to go out to meet the Lord and worship him. We worship him by opening the world to truth, to good, to Christ, to the service of those who are marginalized and in whom he awaits us.
In some Christmas scenes from the late Middle Ages and the early modern period, the stable is depicted as a crumbling palace. It is still possible to recognize its former splendour, but now it has become a ruin, the walls are falling down - in fact, it has become a stable. Although it lacks any historical basis, this metaphorical interpretation nevertheless expresses something of the truth that is hidden in the mystery of Christmas. David's throne, which had been promised to last for ever, stands empty. Others rule over the Holy Land. Joseph, the descendant of David, is a simple artisan; the palace, in fact, has become a hovel. David himself had begun life as a shepherd. When Samuel sought him out in order to anoint him, it seemed impossible and absurd that a shepherd-boy such as he could become the bearer of the promise of Israel. In the stable of Bethlehem, the very town where it had all begun, the Davidic kingship started again in a new way - in that child wrapped in swaddling clothes and laid in a manger. The new throne from which this David will draw the world to himself is the Cross. The new throne - the Cross - corresponds to the new beginning in the stable. Yet this is exactly how the true Davidic palace, the true kingship is being built. This new palace is so different from what people imagine a palace and royal power ought to be like. It is the community of those who allow themselves to be drawn by Christ's love and so become one body with him, a new humanity. The power that comes from the Cross, the power of self-giving goodness - this is the true kingship. The stable becomes a palace - and setting out from this starting-point, Jesus builds the great new community, whose key-word the angels sing at the hour of his birth: "Glory to God in the highest, and peace on earth to those whom he loves" - those who place their will in his, in this way becoming men of God, new men, a new world.
Gregory of Nyssa, in his Christmas homilies, developed the same vision setting out from the Christmas message in the Gospel of John: "He pitched his tent among us" (Jn 1:14). Gregory applies this passage about the tent to the tent of our body, which has become worn out and weak, exposed everywhere to pain and suffering. And he applies it to the whole universe, torn and disfigured by sin. What would he say if he could see the state of the world today, through the abuse of energy and its selfish and reckless exploitation? Anselm of Canterbury, in an almost prophetic way, once described a vision of what we witness today in a polluted world whose future is at risk: "Everything was as if dead, and had lost its dignity, having been made for the service of those who praise God. The elements of the world were oppressed, they had lost their splendour because of the abuse of those who enslaved them for their idols, for whom they had not been created" (PL 158, 955f.). Thus, according to Gregory's vision, the stable in the Christmas message represents the ill-treated world. What Christ rebuilds is no ordinary palace. He came to restore beauty and dignity to creation, to the universe: this is what began at Christmas and makes the angels rejoice. The Earth is restored to good order by virtue of the fact that it is opened up to God, it obtains its true light anew, and in the harmony between human will and divine will, in the unification of height and depth, it regains its beauty and dignity. Thus Christmas is a feast of restored creation. It is in this context that the Fathers interpret the song of the angels on that holy night: it is an expression of joy over the fact that the height and the depth, Heaven and Earth, are once more united; that man is again united to God. According to the Fathers, part of the angels' Christmas song is the fact that now angels and men can sing together and in this way the beauty of the universe is expressed in the beauty of the song of praise. Liturgical song - still according to the Fathers - possesses its own peculiar dignity through the fact that it is sung together with the celestial choirs. It is the encounter with Jesus Christ that makes us capable of hearing the song of the angels, thus creating the real music that fades away when we lose this singing-with and hearing-with.
In the stable at Bethlehem, Heaven and Earth meet. Heaven has come down to Earth. For this reason, a light shines from the stable for all times; for this reason joy is enkindled there; for this reason song is born there. At the end of our Christmas meditation I should like to quote a remarkable passage from Saint Augustine. Interpreting the invocation in the Lord's Prayer: "Our Father who art in Heaven", he asks: what is this - Heaven? And where is Heaven? Then comes a surprising response: "... who art in Heaven - that means: in the saints and in the just. Yes, the heavens are the highest bodies in the universe, but they are still bodies, which cannot exist except in a given location. Yet if we believe that God is located in the heavens, meaning in the highest parts of the world, then the birds would be more fortunate than we, since they would live closer to God. Yet it is not written: 'The Lord is close to those who dwell on the heights or on the mountains', but rather: 'the Lord is close to the brokenhearted' (Ps 34:18[33:19]), an expression which refers to humility. Just as the sinner is called 'Earth', so by contrast the just man can be called 'Heaven'" (Sermo in monte II 5, 17). Heaven does not belong to the geography of space, but to the geography of the heart. And the heart of God, during the Holy Night, stooped down to the stable: the humility of God is Heaven. And if we approach this humility, then we touch Heaven. Then the Earth too is made new. With the humility of the shepherds, let us set out, during this Holy Night, towards the Child in the stable! Let us touch God's humility, God's heart! Then his joy will touch us and will make the world more radiant. Amen.
[Original text: Italian]
© Copyright 2007 -- Libreria Editrice Vaticana
VATICAN CITY, DEC. 24, 2007 (Zenit.org).- Here is a Vatican translation of Benedict XVI's homily today at Christmas Midnight Mass in St. Peter's Basilica.* * *
Dear Brothers and Sisters,
"The time came for Mary to be delivered. And she gave birth to her first-born son and wrapped him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a manger, because there was no room for them in the inn" (Lk 2:6f.). These words touch our hearts every time we hear them. This was the moment that the angel had foretold at Nazareth: "you will bear a son, and you shall call his name Jesus. He will be great, and will be called the Son of the Most High" (Lk 1:31). This was the moment that Israel had been awaiting for centuries, through many dark hours - the moment that all mankind was somehow awaiting, in terms as yet ill-defined: when God would take care of us, when he would step outside his concealment, when the world would be saved and God would renew all things. We can imagine the kind of interior preparation, the kind of love with which Mary approached that hour. The brief phrase: "She wrapped him in swaddling clothes" allows us to glimpse something of the holy joy and the silent zeal of that preparation. The swaddling clothes were ready, so that the child could be given a fitting welcome. Yet there is no room at the inn. In some way, mankind is awaiting God, waiting for him to draw near. But when the moment comes, there is no room for him. Man is so preoccupied with himself, he has such urgent need of all the space and all the time for his own things, that nothing remains for others - for his neighbour, for the poor, for God. And the richer men become, the more they fill up all the space by themselves. And the less room there is for others.
Saint John, in his Gospel, went to the heart of the matter, giving added depth to Saint Luke's brief account of the situation in Bethlehem: "He came to his own home, and his own people received him not" (Jn 1:11). This refers first and foremost to Bethlehem: the Son of David comes to his own city, but has to be born in a stable, because there is no room for him at the inn. Then it refers to Israel: the one who is sent comes among his own, but they do not want him. And truly, it refers to all mankind: he through whom the world was made, the primordial Creator-Word, enters into the world, but he is not listened to, he is not received.
These words refer ultimately to us, to each individual and to society as a whole. Do we have time for our neighbour who is in need of a word from us, from me, or in need of my affection? For the sufferer who is in need of help? For the fugitive or the refugee who is seeking asylum? Do we have time and space for God? Can he enter into our lives? Does he find room in us, or have we occupied all the available space in our thoughts, our actions, our lives for ourselves?
Thank God, this negative detail is not the only one, nor the last one that we find in the Gospel. Just as in Luke we encounter the maternal love of Mary and the fidelity of Saint Joseph, the vigilance of the shepherds and their great joy, just as in Matthew we encounter the visit of the wise men, come from afar, so too John says to us: "To all who received him, he gave power to become children of God" (Jn 1:12). There are those who receive him, and thus, beginning with the stable, with the outside, there grows silently the new house, the new city, the new world. The message of Christmas makes us recognize the darkness of a closed world, and thereby no doubt illustrates a reality that we see daily. Yet it also tells us that God does not allow himself to be shut out. He finds a space, even if it means entering through the stable; there are people who see his light and pass it on. Through the word of the Gospel, the angel also speaks to us, and in the sacred liturgy the light of the Redeemer enters our lives. Whether we are shepherds or "wise men" - the light and its message call us to set out, to leave the narrow circle of our desires and interests, to go out to meet the Lord and worship him. We worship him by opening the world to truth, to good, to Christ, to the service of those who are marginalized and in whom he awaits us.
In some Christmas scenes from the late Middle Ages and the early modern period, the stable is depicted as a crumbling palace. It is still possible to recognize its former splendour, but now it has become a ruin, the walls are falling down - in fact, it has become a stable. Although it lacks any historical basis, this metaphorical interpretation nevertheless expresses something of the truth that is hidden in the mystery of Christmas. David's throne, which had been promised to last for ever, stands empty. Others rule over the Holy Land. Joseph, the descendant of David, is a simple artisan; the palace, in fact, has become a hovel. David himself had begun life as a shepherd. When Samuel sought him out in order to anoint him, it seemed impossible and absurd that a shepherd-boy such as he could become the bearer of the promise of Israel. In the stable of Bethlehem, the very town where it had all begun, the Davidic kingship started again in a new way - in that child wrapped in swaddling clothes and laid in a manger. The new throne from which this David will draw the world to himself is the Cross. The new throne - the Cross - corresponds to the new beginning in the stable. Yet this is exactly how the true Davidic palace, the true kingship is being built. This new palace is so different from what people imagine a palace and royal power ought to be like. It is the community of those who allow themselves to be drawn by Christ's love and so become one body with him, a new humanity. The power that comes from the Cross, the power of self-giving goodness - this is the true kingship. The stable becomes a palace - and setting out from this starting-point, Jesus builds the great new community, whose key-word the angels sing at the hour of his birth: "Glory to God in the highest, and peace on earth to those whom he loves" - those who place their will in his, in this way becoming men of God, new men, a new world.
Gregory of Nyssa, in his Christmas homilies, developed the same vision setting out from the Christmas message in the Gospel of John: "He pitched his tent among us" (Jn 1:14). Gregory applies this passage about the tent to the tent of our body, which has become worn out and weak, exposed everywhere to pain and suffering. And he applies it to the whole universe, torn and disfigured by sin. What would he say if he could see the state of the world today, through the abuse of energy and its selfish and reckless exploitation? Anselm of Canterbury, in an almost prophetic way, once described a vision of what we witness today in a polluted world whose future is at risk: "Everything was as if dead, and had lost its dignity, having been made for the service of those who praise God. The elements of the world were oppressed, they had lost their splendour because of the abuse of those who enslaved them for their idols, for whom they had not been created" (PL 158, 955f.). Thus, according to Gregory's vision, the stable in the Christmas message represents the ill-treated world. What Christ rebuilds is no ordinary palace. He came to restore beauty and dignity to creation, to the universe: this is what began at Christmas and makes the angels rejoice. The Earth is restored to good order by virtue of the fact that it is opened up to God, it obtains its true light anew, and in the harmony between human will and divine will, in the unification of height and depth, it regains its beauty and dignity. Thus Christmas is a feast of restored creation. It is in this context that the Fathers interpret the song of the angels on that holy night: it is an expression of joy over the fact that the height and the depth, Heaven and Earth, are once more united; that man is again united to God. According to the Fathers, part of the angels' Christmas song is the fact that now angels and men can sing together and in this way the beauty of the universe is expressed in the beauty of the song of praise. Liturgical song - still according to the Fathers - possesses its own peculiar dignity through the fact that it is sung together with the celestial choirs. It is the encounter with Jesus Christ that makes us capable of hearing the song of the angels, thus creating the real music that fades away when we lose this singing-with and hearing-with.
In the stable at Bethlehem, Heaven and Earth meet. Heaven has come down to Earth. For this reason, a light shines from the stable for all times; for this reason joy is enkindled there; for this reason song is born there. At the end of our Christmas meditation I should like to quote a remarkable passage from Saint Augustine. Interpreting the invocation in the Lord's Prayer: "Our Father who art in Heaven", he asks: what is this - Heaven? And where is Heaven? Then comes a surprising response: "... who art in Heaven - that means: in the saints and in the just. Yes, the heavens are the highest bodies in the universe, but they are still bodies, which cannot exist except in a given location. Yet if we believe that God is located in the heavens, meaning in the highest parts of the world, then the birds would be more fortunate than we, since they would live closer to God. Yet it is not written: 'The Lord is close to those who dwell on the heights or on the mountains', but rather: 'the Lord is close to the brokenhearted' (Ps 34:18[33:19]), an expression which refers to humility. Just as the sinner is called 'Earth', so by contrast the just man can be called 'Heaven'" (Sermo in monte II 5, 17). Heaven does not belong to the geography of space, but to the geography of the heart. And the heart of God, during the Holy Night, stooped down to the stable: the humility of God is Heaven. And if we approach this humility, then we touch Heaven. Then the Earth too is made new. With the humility of the shepherds, let us set out, during this Holy Night, towards the Child in the stable! Let us touch God's humility, God's heart! Then his joy will touch us and will make the world more radiant. Amen.
[Original text: Italian]
© Copyright 2007 -- Libreria Editrice Vaticana
More Catholics than Anglicans in Britain
Jonathan Wynne-Jones in London
December 24, 2007
CATHOLICS have overtaken Anglicans as Britain's most dominant religious group, reflecting great waves of migration from Catholic countries.
More people are now attending Mass every Sunday than are worshipping with the Church of England, confirming that the established church has lost its spot as the most popular Christian denomination after more than four centuries of unrivalled influence following the Reformation.
Leading figures warned on Saturday that the Church of England faced becoming a minority faith and that the findings should act as a wake-up call.
The figures show that attendance at the Church of England's Sunday services has dropped by 20 per cent since 2000. A survey of 37,000 churches to be published in the new year shows that the average number of people going to Mass each Sunday last year stood at 861,000 compared with 852,000 Anglicans worshipping.
The rise of Catholicism has been bolstered by an influx of immigrants from Eastern Europe and Africa, who have packed the pews of parishes that had previously been dwindling.
It is part of the changing face of churchgoing across Britain that has also seen a boom in the growth of Pentecostal churches, which have surpassed the Methodist Church as the third-largest Christian denomination.
To combat the declining interest in traditional religion, the Anglican Church has introduced radical forms of evangelism that include nightclub chaplains, a floating church on a barge and even internet congregations.
The Reverend Alister McGrath, a professor of historical theology at Oxford University, said that the church attendance findings from the organisation Christian Research should act as a wake-up call to the Church of England.
"While it can rightly point to the weight of history, the importance of cultural memory, the largest number of church buildings and nominal church members in defence of its continued status as the established church, there is clearly a problem emerging," said Professor McGrath, one of Anglicanism's most respected figures. "What happens if the established church becomes a minority church?"
The Catholic Church also suffered falling congregations, but the expansion of the European Union in 2004 has led to a surge in its numbers with the arrival of hundreds of thousands of Poles and Lithuanians.
The Catholic Bishop of Portsmouth, Crispian Hollis, said the Roman church had been increasingly active in trying to attract lapsed worshippers but conceded that mass immigration had been a significant factor in swelling its numbers.
"We don't want to be seen to be scoring points over the Anglican Church as we are in no way jealous of its position as the national church, but of course these figures are encouraging. It shows that the church is no longer seen as on the fringes of society, but in fact is now at the heart of British life."
Danny Sriskandarajah, from the Institute for Public Policy Research, said research showed the packed pews would not stay that way for long.
"We're already seeing numbers from Eastern Europe dropping and many of them have already returned home. It is an important phenomenon, but it is likely to be temporary. I doubt we'll be seeing this level of attendance in another 10 years."
Churchgoing in Anglican and Catholic parishes had stood at about 1 million each for the past 10 years, although this has been surprising considering there are 25 million people who regard themselves as Anglicans, with only 4.2 million Catholics.
"It isn't a competition. I'm delighted to see all Christian denominations flourishing," said the Right Reverend Graham Cray, the chairman of the Church of England's report on evangelism.
"Large numbers of Eastern Europeans have come in to the country, which has certainly strengthened them as has happened with non-whites in central London churches.
"We can't carry on as usual and complain that no one is coming so we are committed to ensuring that the church responds to the changes in society."
Telegraph, London
This story was found at: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/12/23/1198344884603.html
December 24, 2007
CATHOLICS have overtaken Anglicans as Britain's most dominant religious group, reflecting great waves of migration from Catholic countries.
More people are now attending Mass every Sunday than are worshipping with the Church of England, confirming that the established church has lost its spot as the most popular Christian denomination after more than four centuries of unrivalled influence following the Reformation.
Leading figures warned on Saturday that the Church of England faced becoming a minority faith and that the findings should act as a wake-up call.
The figures show that attendance at the Church of England's Sunday services has dropped by 20 per cent since 2000. A survey of 37,000 churches to be published in the new year shows that the average number of people going to Mass each Sunday last year stood at 861,000 compared with 852,000 Anglicans worshipping.
The rise of Catholicism has been bolstered by an influx of immigrants from Eastern Europe and Africa, who have packed the pews of parishes that had previously been dwindling.
It is part of the changing face of churchgoing across Britain that has also seen a boom in the growth of Pentecostal churches, which have surpassed the Methodist Church as the third-largest Christian denomination.
To combat the declining interest in traditional religion, the Anglican Church has introduced radical forms of evangelism that include nightclub chaplains, a floating church on a barge and even internet congregations.
The Reverend Alister McGrath, a professor of historical theology at Oxford University, said that the church attendance findings from the organisation Christian Research should act as a wake-up call to the Church of England.
"While it can rightly point to the weight of history, the importance of cultural memory, the largest number of church buildings and nominal church members in defence of its continued status as the established church, there is clearly a problem emerging," said Professor McGrath, one of Anglicanism's most respected figures. "What happens if the established church becomes a minority church?"
The Catholic Church also suffered falling congregations, but the expansion of the European Union in 2004 has led to a surge in its numbers with the arrival of hundreds of thousands of Poles and Lithuanians.
The Catholic Bishop of Portsmouth, Crispian Hollis, said the Roman church had been increasingly active in trying to attract lapsed worshippers but conceded that mass immigration had been a significant factor in swelling its numbers.
"We don't want to be seen to be scoring points over the Anglican Church as we are in no way jealous of its position as the national church, but of course these figures are encouraging. It shows that the church is no longer seen as on the fringes of society, but in fact is now at the heart of British life."
Danny Sriskandarajah, from the Institute for Public Policy Research, said research showed the packed pews would not stay that way for long.
"We're already seeing numbers from Eastern Europe dropping and many of them have already returned home. It is an important phenomenon, but it is likely to be temporary. I doubt we'll be seeing this level of attendance in another 10 years."
Churchgoing in Anglican and Catholic parishes had stood at about 1 million each for the past 10 years, although this has been surprising considering there are 25 million people who regard themselves as Anglicans, with only 4.2 million Catholics.
"It isn't a competition. I'm delighted to see all Christian denominations flourishing," said the Right Reverend Graham Cray, the chairman of the Church of England's report on evangelism.
"Large numbers of Eastern Europeans have come in to the country, which has certainly strengthened them as has happened with non-whites in central London churches.
"We can't carry on as usual and complain that no one is coming so we are committed to ensuring that the church responds to the changes in society."
Telegraph, London
This story was found at: http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2007/12/23/1198344884603.html
Saturday, December 22, 2007
CANA: Anglican District of Virginia Churches Remain Confident
CANA: Anglican District of Virginia Churches Remain Confident
ADV Files Brief in Case to Prevent Church Property Seizure
FAIRFAX, Va. (December 21, 2007) - The 11 Anglican District of Virginia (ADV) churches filed a brief in the Fairfax County Circuit Court regarding the Multi-Circuit Property Litigation. The brief explains the validity of the Virginia Division Statute (Va. Code § 57-9) in determining that the Virginia congregations are entitled to keep their church property due to the division within The Episcopal Church, the Diocese of Virginia, and the Anglican Communion. (Case No. CL-2007-0248724)
"As our brief today explains, the evidence at the trial strongly demonstrated that our congregations have satisfied each of the core requirements of this law. There has been a 'division' in The Episcopal Church, the Diocese of Virginia ("Diocese"), and the worldwide Anglican Communion, and our congregations have joined a 'branch' of the divided body created as a result of that division," said Jim Oakes, Vice-Chairman of the Anglican District of Virginia.
"This division occurred as a result of The Episcopal Church and the Diocese separating themselves from the historic Christian faith by deciding to reinterpret Scripture on a number of different issues. Although the reasons for the division involve important issues of biblical truth, the existence and effects of the division are plain and evident for all to see, without regard to religion.
"The evidence also showed that this law was applied no less than 29 times to recognize the legal rights of congregations to keep their property. Over the years, the Virginia General Assembly has made various amendments to the Virginia Code as it relates to religious organizations, but it has not seen fit to narrow or repeal the Division Statute. The General Assembly continues to believe that when congregations separate from a denomination, the neutral and objective principle of majority rule should govern ownership of property. In addition, The Episcopal Church admitted in its complaint that it does not hold title to any of these eleven churches, and that the churches' own trustees hold title for the benefit of the congregations.
"As the Global South Primates said in 2004, The Episcopal Church has 'willfully torn the fabric of the communion at its deepest level and as a consequence openly cut themselves adrift.' We are sorry that The Episcopal Church has moved away from the historic teachings of the church, but we should not be forced to go with them," said Oakes.
The Anglican District of Virginia (www.anglicandistrictofvirginia.org) is an association of Anglican congregations in Virginia. Its members are in full communion with constituent members of the Anglican Communion through its affiliation with the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), a missionary branch of the Church of Nigeria and other Anglican Archbishops. ADV members are a part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, a community of 77 million people. ADV is dedicated to fulfilling Christ's Great Commission to make disciples while actively serving in three main capacities: International Ministries, Evangelism, and Strengthening Families and Community. ADV is currently comprised of 21 member congregations.
ADV Files Brief in Case to Prevent Church Property Seizure
FAIRFAX, Va. (December 21, 2007) - The 11 Anglican District of Virginia (ADV) churches filed a brief in the Fairfax County Circuit Court regarding the Multi-Circuit Property Litigation. The brief explains the validity of the Virginia Division Statute (Va. Code § 57-9) in determining that the Virginia congregations are entitled to keep their church property due to the division within The Episcopal Church, the Diocese of Virginia, and the Anglican Communion. (Case No. CL-2007-0248724)
"As our brief today explains, the evidence at the trial strongly demonstrated that our congregations have satisfied each of the core requirements of this law. There has been a 'division' in The Episcopal Church, the Diocese of Virginia ("Diocese"), and the worldwide Anglican Communion, and our congregations have joined a 'branch' of the divided body created as a result of that division," said Jim Oakes, Vice-Chairman of the Anglican District of Virginia.
"This division occurred as a result of The Episcopal Church and the Diocese separating themselves from the historic Christian faith by deciding to reinterpret Scripture on a number of different issues. Although the reasons for the division involve important issues of biblical truth, the existence and effects of the division are plain and evident for all to see, without regard to religion.
"The evidence also showed that this law was applied no less than 29 times to recognize the legal rights of congregations to keep their property. Over the years, the Virginia General Assembly has made various amendments to the Virginia Code as it relates to religious organizations, but it has not seen fit to narrow or repeal the Division Statute. The General Assembly continues to believe that when congregations separate from a denomination, the neutral and objective principle of majority rule should govern ownership of property. In addition, The Episcopal Church admitted in its complaint that it does not hold title to any of these eleven churches, and that the churches' own trustees hold title for the benefit of the congregations.
"As the Global South Primates said in 2004, The Episcopal Church has 'willfully torn the fabric of the communion at its deepest level and as a consequence openly cut themselves adrift.' We are sorry that The Episcopal Church has moved away from the historic teachings of the church, but we should not be forced to go with them," said Oakes.
The Anglican District of Virginia (www.anglicandistrictofvirginia.org) is an association of Anglican congregations in Virginia. Its members are in full communion with constituent members of the Anglican Communion through its affiliation with the Convocation of Anglicans in North America (CANA), a missionary branch of the Church of Nigeria and other Anglican Archbishops. ADV members are a part of the worldwide Anglican Communion, a community of 77 million people. ADV is dedicated to fulfilling Christ's Great Commission to make disciples while actively serving in three main capacities: International Ministries, Evangelism, and Strengthening Families and Community. ADV is currently comprised of 21 member congregations.
Friday, December 21, 2007
THE DIOCESE of San Joaquin has welcomed the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Advent letter to the Primates
Friday, 21st December 2007. 11:59am
By: George Conger.
THE DIOCESE of San Joaquin has welcomed the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Advent letter to the Primates, seeing it as a validation of its secession from The Episcopal Church to the Church of the Province of the Southern Cone.
“I find it difficult to imagine any other reading of Canterbury’s Advent letter than the intent to recognize — or maybe I should say, to allow San Joaquin to be recognized as a legitimate member of the Anglican Communion,” Diocesan spokesman the Rev Van McCalister (pictured) told The Church of England Newspaper. In his Dec 14 Advent letter to the Primates, Dr Williams distinguished between the various responses made by North American traditionalists to the disputes over doctrine and discipline.
He objected to the creation of new extra-territorial ecclesial entities, but supported dioceses engaged in a ‘radical’ response to the dispute with the national churches. While not naming CANA, the Anglican Mission in America, or the Ugandan or Kenyan jurisdictions in the US, Dr Williams said they created a ‘seriously anomalous position.’
“It does not appeal to a clear or universal principle by which it may be decided that a local church’s ministry is completely defective. On the ground, it creates rivalry and confusion. It opens the door to complex and unedifying legal wrangles in civil courts. It creates a situation in which pastoral care and oversight have to be exercised at a great distance,” he said.
The Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone, Gregory Venables, told us the Advent statement was in line with his September conversation with Dr Williams on San Joaquin’s planned secession. The ‘gist’ of the September conversation, Bishop Venables said, was encapsulated in this new letter.
Americadesk@religiousintelligence.com
By: George Conger.
THE DIOCESE of San Joaquin has welcomed the Archbishop of Canterbury’s Advent letter to the Primates, seeing it as a validation of its secession from The Episcopal Church to the Church of the Province of the Southern Cone.
“I find it difficult to imagine any other reading of Canterbury’s Advent letter than the intent to recognize — or maybe I should say, to allow San Joaquin to be recognized as a legitimate member of the Anglican Communion,” Diocesan spokesman the Rev Van McCalister (pictured) told The Church of England Newspaper. In his Dec 14 Advent letter to the Primates, Dr Williams distinguished between the various responses made by North American traditionalists to the disputes over doctrine and discipline.
He objected to the creation of new extra-territorial ecclesial entities, but supported dioceses engaged in a ‘radical’ response to the dispute with the national churches. While not naming CANA, the Anglican Mission in America, or the Ugandan or Kenyan jurisdictions in the US, Dr Williams said they created a ‘seriously anomalous position.’
“It does not appeal to a clear or universal principle by which it may be decided that a local church’s ministry is completely defective. On the ground, it creates rivalry and confusion. It opens the door to complex and unedifying legal wrangles in civil courts. It creates a situation in which pastoral care and oversight have to be exercised at a great distance,” he said.
The Presiding Bishop of the Southern Cone, Gregory Venables, told us the Advent statement was in line with his September conversation with Dr Williams on San Joaquin’s planned secession. The ‘gist’ of the September conversation, Bishop Venables said, was encapsulated in this new letter.
Americadesk@religiousintelligence.com
Wednesday, December 19, 2007
Parallel Lambeth Conference Poses Threat to Williams' Leadership and Unity
By David W. Virtue
www.virtueonline.org
12/19/2007
VirtueOnline first broke the news of a second or parallel Lambeth Conference in June of this year. Here is what I wrote then: "The concept of a parallel Lambeth Conference was first raised by the Most Rev. Peter Akinola, Archbishop and Primate of Nigeria, as well as head of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA), which represents some 40 million Anglicans across the African continent."
Now the idea has again emerged with a news report out of London, by Jonathan Petre of the Telegraph, that Conservative Anglican leaders are secretly planning a meeting next summer for the hundreds of bishops expected to defy the Archbishop of Canterbury by boycotting the Lambeth Conference.
The unprecedented event will be widely seen as an "alternative Lambeth", further damaging Dr. Rowan Williams's hopes of averting a formal schism over homosexuals, wrote Petre.
Aides of the Archbishop said that any such gathering, which is due to be held just before the official conference, would be perceived as a symbol of division and would send out a "negative" message. Indeed, it would.
What alleviates the full pain of this alternative Lambeth is that many of those who attend - will then go on to Canterbury to join up with the rest of the bishops of the Anglican Communion.
So, while it is a present threat to Dr. Rowan Williams, it is not perceived as fatal. Organizers of the summit for orthodox bishops are saying they do not intend to start a rival Anglican Church or undermine Dr Williams.
A handful of other African primates are understood to be backing the "parallel Lambeth" initiative. Many non-African bishops are likely to be present including the Bishop of Rochester, the Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali. Bishop Nazir-Ali is a staunch evangelical who has not been afraid to stand up to the Church of England establishment over the besetting issues that plague the CofE.
"Our wish is to strengthen the unity and mission of the whole Communion," said the source.
However, the Rev Giles Fraser, the vicar of Putney and founder of the liberal Inclusive Church group, said: "This is a retreat. The reason these bishops won't come is that they know their attitudes will be subjected to ridicule in this country. In places like Britain, they've lost the argument." Really. The truth is the Church of England is irrelevant to the vast majority of Brits, about one million out of 60 million even attend a church. Most Anglicans have meager knowledge of their Bibles. Their churches are being run by weak effeminate men, hence the statement by New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson that if one took out all homosexual priests in the CofE, it would collapse. Perhaps, it should. If he is right, it would certainly explain WHY the CofE is weak, feeble and spiritually vapid, compromised and lacking a theological spine. The institution is rapidly deteriorating in the face of a strident Islam movement while Britain's political correctness squads are downplaying Christmas, so as not offend Islamists and atheists.
Importantly, the Windsor Report does not support parallel provinces. It supports only delegated episcopal oversight and sets the TEC model as one to follow. That has not worked as Bishop John-David Schofield has publicly lamented - a bishop whose invitation to Lambeth next year maybe revoked by Dr. Williams because he and his diocese have voted to leave The Episcopal Church.
Earlier in July, the Standing Committee of the Evangelical Diocese of Sydney urged Archbishop Peter Jensen and his five regional bishops to make a stand protesting the Lambeth Conference guest list that denies orthodox bishops while including heretical ones. They suggested then that a parallel Lambeth be held at the same time in England, next year.
The Archbishop of Sydney, Dr. Peter Jensen; The Rt. Rev Robert Forsyth, Bishop of South Sydney; The Rt. Rev Glenn Davies, Bishop of North Sydney; The Rt. Rev Peter Tasker, Bishop of Liverpool; The Rt. Rev Ivan Lee, Bishop of Western Sydney; and The Rt. Rev Alan Stewart, Bishop of Wollongong have all received personal invitations from Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, to attend the Lambeth Conference to be held in 2008.
The House of Bishops of the Province of Rwanda have said they would not attend Lambeth because some of their bishops were not invited and because the faith was being undermined by liberal elements in the Anglican Communion. It is more than likely that Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini would attend a parallel Lambeth.
The Province of Uganda has also said it will not be present if those who consecrated V. Gene Robinson are allowed to attend while some orthodox bishops are not. Archbishop Henry Luke Orombi would undoubtedly attend an alternative Lambeth.
The Sydney Diocese's Standing Committee said an alternative Lambeth meeting would allow for "Christian fellowship and the planning of joint action within the Anglican Communion." It would also be seen as a royal snub to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who has been urging unity, prayer and conversation by the bishops.
The Standing Committee was particularly incensed that the invitations, which were sent to Archbishop Jensen and each of Sydney's five regional bishops in May, were also extended to most bishops in the Episcopal Church, including those who had agreed to or participated in the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire.
To date, American-based evangelical bishops of CANA, Uganda and Kenya have not received invitations, prompting Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria to consider boycotting Lambeth, if his bishops are not invited.
The Bishop of Recife, the Rt. Rev. Robinson Cavilcanti has also not received an invitation, nor has Bishop David L. Moyer, a former TEC priest who had hands laid on him by the Australian Bishop of The Murray for the Traditional Anglican Communion and who was fraudulently deposed by the now inhibited Charles Bennison. The Rt. Rev. William Cox, now a bishop with the Southern Cone, has also not received an invitation.
At one point, Akinola ripped the huge expense of such an event. "Our African churches are asked to divert funds from much needed work of evangelization and charity to a 3-week meeting which has no authority and which is blatantly ignored by 'autonomous' member churches. In some cases, poorer provinces are 'assisted' by donors from the West who have a deliberate agenda of buying silence from these churches."
The specter of a wholesale revolt by a wide swathe of orthodox Anglican provinces and dioceses, which has now provoked an alternative Lambeth, might well indicate the beginning of the end for the Anglican Communion, as we know it.
Certainly, all the indicators are that Dr. Williams has lost control of the orthodox majority and homosexual fringes of the communion. The question is: can he hold the center and hope that that will carry the day? Unlikely, say sources, but then visible unity in the hands of the Archbishop of Canterbury is a powerful psychological and ecclesiastical sword to wield, and Rowan Williams has shown himself particularly adroit to date in wielding it. However, between now and July 2008, anything can happen.
www.virtueonline.org
12/19/2007
VirtueOnline first broke the news of a second or parallel Lambeth Conference in June of this year. Here is what I wrote then: "The concept of a parallel Lambeth Conference was first raised by the Most Rev. Peter Akinola, Archbishop and Primate of Nigeria, as well as head of the Council of Anglican Provinces of Africa (CAPA), which represents some 40 million Anglicans across the African continent."
Now the idea has again emerged with a news report out of London, by Jonathan Petre of the Telegraph, that Conservative Anglican leaders are secretly planning a meeting next summer for the hundreds of bishops expected to defy the Archbishop of Canterbury by boycotting the Lambeth Conference.
The unprecedented event will be widely seen as an "alternative Lambeth", further damaging Dr. Rowan Williams's hopes of averting a formal schism over homosexuals, wrote Petre.
Aides of the Archbishop said that any such gathering, which is due to be held just before the official conference, would be perceived as a symbol of division and would send out a "negative" message. Indeed, it would.
What alleviates the full pain of this alternative Lambeth is that many of those who attend - will then go on to Canterbury to join up with the rest of the bishops of the Anglican Communion.
So, while it is a present threat to Dr. Rowan Williams, it is not perceived as fatal. Organizers of the summit for orthodox bishops are saying they do not intend to start a rival Anglican Church or undermine Dr Williams.
A handful of other African primates are understood to be backing the "parallel Lambeth" initiative. Many non-African bishops are likely to be present including the Bishop of Rochester, the Rt. Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali. Bishop Nazir-Ali is a staunch evangelical who has not been afraid to stand up to the Church of England establishment over the besetting issues that plague the CofE.
"Our wish is to strengthen the unity and mission of the whole Communion," said the source.
However, the Rev Giles Fraser, the vicar of Putney and founder of the liberal Inclusive Church group, said: "This is a retreat. The reason these bishops won't come is that they know their attitudes will be subjected to ridicule in this country. In places like Britain, they've lost the argument." Really. The truth is the Church of England is irrelevant to the vast majority of Brits, about one million out of 60 million even attend a church. Most Anglicans have meager knowledge of their Bibles. Their churches are being run by weak effeminate men, hence the statement by New Hampshire Bishop Gene Robinson that if one took out all homosexual priests in the CofE, it would collapse. Perhaps, it should. If he is right, it would certainly explain WHY the CofE is weak, feeble and spiritually vapid, compromised and lacking a theological spine. The institution is rapidly deteriorating in the face of a strident Islam movement while Britain's political correctness squads are downplaying Christmas, so as not offend Islamists and atheists.
Importantly, the Windsor Report does not support parallel provinces. It supports only delegated episcopal oversight and sets the TEC model as one to follow. That has not worked as Bishop John-David Schofield has publicly lamented - a bishop whose invitation to Lambeth next year maybe revoked by Dr. Williams because he and his diocese have voted to leave The Episcopal Church.
Earlier in July, the Standing Committee of the Evangelical Diocese of Sydney urged Archbishop Peter Jensen and his five regional bishops to make a stand protesting the Lambeth Conference guest list that denies orthodox bishops while including heretical ones. They suggested then that a parallel Lambeth be held at the same time in England, next year.
The Archbishop of Sydney, Dr. Peter Jensen; The Rt. Rev Robert Forsyth, Bishop of South Sydney; The Rt. Rev Glenn Davies, Bishop of North Sydney; The Rt. Rev Peter Tasker, Bishop of Liverpool; The Rt. Rev Ivan Lee, Bishop of Western Sydney; and The Rt. Rev Alan Stewart, Bishop of Wollongong have all received personal invitations from Dr Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, to attend the Lambeth Conference to be held in 2008.
The House of Bishops of the Province of Rwanda have said they would not attend Lambeth because some of their bishops were not invited and because the faith was being undermined by liberal elements in the Anglican Communion. It is more than likely that Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini would attend a parallel Lambeth.
The Province of Uganda has also said it will not be present if those who consecrated V. Gene Robinson are allowed to attend while some orthodox bishops are not. Archbishop Henry Luke Orombi would undoubtedly attend an alternative Lambeth.
The Sydney Diocese's Standing Committee said an alternative Lambeth meeting would allow for "Christian fellowship and the planning of joint action within the Anglican Communion." It would also be seen as a royal snub to the Archbishop of Canterbury, who has been urging unity, prayer and conversation by the bishops.
The Standing Committee was particularly incensed that the invitations, which were sent to Archbishop Jensen and each of Sydney's five regional bishops in May, were also extended to most bishops in the Episcopal Church, including those who had agreed to or participated in the consecration of the Bishop of New Hampshire.
To date, American-based evangelical bishops of CANA, Uganda and Kenya have not received invitations, prompting Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria to consider boycotting Lambeth, if his bishops are not invited.
The Bishop of Recife, the Rt. Rev. Robinson Cavilcanti has also not received an invitation, nor has Bishop David L. Moyer, a former TEC priest who had hands laid on him by the Australian Bishop of The Murray for the Traditional Anglican Communion and who was fraudulently deposed by the now inhibited Charles Bennison. The Rt. Rev. William Cox, now a bishop with the Southern Cone, has also not received an invitation.
At one point, Akinola ripped the huge expense of such an event. "Our African churches are asked to divert funds from much needed work of evangelization and charity to a 3-week meeting which has no authority and which is blatantly ignored by 'autonomous' member churches. In some cases, poorer provinces are 'assisted' by donors from the West who have a deliberate agenda of buying silence from these churches."
The specter of a wholesale revolt by a wide swathe of orthodox Anglican provinces and dioceses, which has now provoked an alternative Lambeth, might well indicate the beginning of the end for the Anglican Communion, as we know it.
Certainly, all the indicators are that Dr. Williams has lost control of the orthodox majority and homosexual fringes of the communion. The question is: can he hold the center and hope that that will carry the day? Unlikely, say sources, but then visible unity in the hands of the Archbishop of Canterbury is a powerful psychological and ecclesiastical sword to wield, and Rowan Williams has shown himself particularly adroit to date in wielding it. However, between now and July 2008, anything can happen.
Monday, December 17, 2007
The Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Ecumenical Relations
Posted On : December 17, 2007 4:22 PM | Posted By : Webmaster Related Categories: ACO - Ecumenical
ACNS:4355
The Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Ecumenical Relations (IASCER) met in Cairo, Egypt, from Wednesday, 5th to Monday, 10th December 2007, under the chairmanship of the Most Revd Drexel Gomez, Primate of the Church in the Province of the West Indies. The Commission is charged with reviewing current international ecumenical dialogues involving Anglicans, and provincial and regional initiatives towards unity with other Christians. IASCER consists of representatives from each international dialogue involving Anglicans, including the multilateral dialogue of Faith and Order, and of certain other commissions and networks, and consultants who bring particular regional or theological expertise.
Reports were received of all current bilateral theological dialogues of the Anglican Communion, as well as of developments from particular regions of the globe. In the course of reflections on the current life of the Anglican Communion, the commission also responded further to the proposals for an Anglican Covenant following the publication of the initial work of the Covenant Design Group, which presented a first draft for a covenant to the Primates' Meeting in February 2007. The Commission gave consideration to issues relating to the practice of admitting the non-baptised to Holy Communion, to issues raised by the recent Responses on the Doctrine of the Church issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the Roman Catholic Church, and received information on the ecumenical dimensions of the forthcoming Lambeth Conference.
The Commission is extremely grateful for the welcome given to them by the Most Revd Dr Mouneer Anis, Bishop of Egypt and President Bishop of the Province of Jerusalem and the Middle East. Bishop Mouneer welcomed the commission at a Reception at Diocesan Church House, Zamalek, in the course of which Archbishop Drexel Gomez presented The Cross of Saint Augustine to Canon Professor Robert Wright, one of the Commission's members, on behalf of the Archbishop of Canterbury in recognition of his scholarly ecumenical work on behalf of the Communion. The commission worshipped at All Saints' Cathedral, Zamalek, on the Sunday morning, where they were welcomed by the Rt Revd Derek Eaton, an Assistant Bishop in the Diocese of Egypt. The Commission was also honoured to be received by His Holiness Pope Shenouda, Pope of Alexandria and Patriarch of the See of Saint Mark, His Beatitude Patriarch Antonious of the Coptic Catholic Church, and to meet with His Eminence Metropolitan Bishoy of Damiette, Co-Chair of the Anglican - Oriental Orthodox International Commission, together with its Co-Secretary Bishop Nareg Alemezian. The Commission warmly welcomed the appointment of one of its members, the Revd Canon Dr John Gibaut, as the new Director of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches.
Present at the meeting in Cairo were: the Revd Prebendary Dr Paul Avis, the Revd Canon Dr Alyson Barnett-Cowan, the Revd Canon Dr Gregory K Cameron (Secretary), the Revd Dr William Crockett, the Rt Revd Christopher Epting, the Revd Canon Dr John Gibaut, the Rt Revd Dr John Gladstone, the Most Revd Drexel W Gomez (Chair), the Revd Canon Jonathan Goodall, the Rt Revd John Hind, the Venerable Jane Namugenyi, the Revd Professor Renta Nishihara, the Revd Canon Luke Pato, the Rt Revd Dr Geoffrey Rowell (Vice-Chair), the Revd Sarah Rowland Jones, the Rt Revd James Tengatenga and the Revd Canon Professor J Robert Wright. The Revd Terrie Robinson and Mrs Gill Harris-Hogarth of the Anglican Communion Office provided administrative and logistical assistance for the meeting.
The last meeting of IASCER before it completes its mandate is scheduled for December 2008.
For further information contact
The Revd Canon Gregory K Cameron
Anglican Communion Office, London
Email: gregory.cameron@anglicancommunion.org
Tel: +44 (0)20 7313 3900
Fax: +44 (0)20 7313 3999
++++++++++
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London, is distributed to more than 8,000 journalists and other readers around the world.
ACNS:4355
The Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Ecumenical Relations (IASCER) met in Cairo, Egypt, from Wednesday, 5th to Monday, 10th December 2007, under the chairmanship of the Most Revd Drexel Gomez, Primate of the Church in the Province of the West Indies. The Commission is charged with reviewing current international ecumenical dialogues involving Anglicans, and provincial and regional initiatives towards unity with other Christians. IASCER consists of representatives from each international dialogue involving Anglicans, including the multilateral dialogue of Faith and Order, and of certain other commissions and networks, and consultants who bring particular regional or theological expertise.
Reports were received of all current bilateral theological dialogues of the Anglican Communion, as well as of developments from particular regions of the globe. In the course of reflections on the current life of the Anglican Communion, the commission also responded further to the proposals for an Anglican Covenant following the publication of the initial work of the Covenant Design Group, which presented a first draft for a covenant to the Primates' Meeting in February 2007. The Commission gave consideration to issues relating to the practice of admitting the non-baptised to Holy Communion, to issues raised by the recent Responses on the Doctrine of the Church issued by the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith of the Roman Catholic Church, and received information on the ecumenical dimensions of the forthcoming Lambeth Conference.
The Commission is extremely grateful for the welcome given to them by the Most Revd Dr Mouneer Anis, Bishop of Egypt and President Bishop of the Province of Jerusalem and the Middle East. Bishop Mouneer welcomed the commission at a Reception at Diocesan Church House, Zamalek, in the course of which Archbishop Drexel Gomez presented The Cross of Saint Augustine to Canon Professor Robert Wright, one of the Commission's members, on behalf of the Archbishop of Canterbury in recognition of his scholarly ecumenical work on behalf of the Communion. The commission worshipped at All Saints' Cathedral, Zamalek, on the Sunday morning, where they were welcomed by the Rt Revd Derek Eaton, an Assistant Bishop in the Diocese of Egypt. The Commission was also honoured to be received by His Holiness Pope Shenouda, Pope of Alexandria and Patriarch of the See of Saint Mark, His Beatitude Patriarch Antonious of the Coptic Catholic Church, and to meet with His Eminence Metropolitan Bishoy of Damiette, Co-Chair of the Anglican - Oriental Orthodox International Commission, together with its Co-Secretary Bishop Nareg Alemezian. The Commission warmly welcomed the appointment of one of its members, the Revd Canon Dr John Gibaut, as the new Director of the Faith and Order Commission of the World Council of Churches.
Present at the meeting in Cairo were: the Revd Prebendary Dr Paul Avis, the Revd Canon Dr Alyson Barnett-Cowan, the Revd Canon Dr Gregory K Cameron (Secretary), the Revd Dr William Crockett, the Rt Revd Christopher Epting, the Revd Canon Dr John Gibaut, the Rt Revd Dr John Gladstone, the Most Revd Drexel W Gomez (Chair), the Revd Canon Jonathan Goodall, the Rt Revd John Hind, the Venerable Jane Namugenyi, the Revd Professor Renta Nishihara, the Revd Canon Luke Pato, the Rt Revd Dr Geoffrey Rowell (Vice-Chair), the Revd Sarah Rowland Jones, the Rt Revd James Tengatenga and the Revd Canon Professor J Robert Wright. The Revd Terrie Robinson and Mrs Gill Harris-Hogarth of the Anglican Communion Office provided administrative and logistical assistance for the meeting.
The last meeting of IASCER before it completes its mandate is scheduled for December 2008.
For further information contact
The Revd Canon Gregory K Cameron
Anglican Communion Office, London
Email: gregory.cameron@anglicancommunion.org
Tel: +44 (0)20 7313 3900
Fax: +44 (0)20 7313 3999
++++++++++
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London, is distributed to more than 8,000 journalists and other readers around the world.
Sunday, December 16, 2007
Southern Cone Primate welcomes San Joaquin Diocese back into full fellowship in the Anglican Communion
Letter read in all churches in Diocese of San Joaquin Sunday December 16th
Greetings in the name of Jesus Christ, our one and only Lord and Savior.
By an overwhelming majority of nearly 90% (173 to 22), our Annual Convention voted Saturday, December 8th, to uphold the authority of Holy Scripture and thereby preserve our place in the worldwide Anglican Communion and with the See of Canterbury by realigning our Anglican identity through the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone of the Americas under the Most Rev. Gregory Venables, Archbishop and Primate.
This historic and momentous decision by our Annual Convention was the culmination of The Episcopal Church's failure to heed the repeated calls for repentance issued by the Primates of the Anglican Communion and for the cessation of false teaching and sacramental actions explicitly contrary to Scripture.
However, we are no longer operating under the looming shadow of this institutional apostasy because our Annual Convention wisely and prayerfully accepted the gracious invitation for sanctuary from the Southern Cone. Under a plan developed with their House of Bishops and ultimately discussed between Archbishop Venables and a number of other Primates and Bishops we were offered hope by the Southern Cone. I wish to emphasize that Convention's action is not a schism over secondary issues but a realignment necessitated by false teaching as well as unbiblical sacramental actions that continue to take place in The Episcopal Church.
As our new Archbishop so succinctly put it: "Christianity is specific, definable and unchanging. We are not at liberty to deconstruct or rewrite it. If Jesus was the Son of God yesterday then so He is today and will be forever." After our Annual Convention voted to accept the invitation from the Southern Cone, the first words to the Diocese of San Joaquin from our new Archbishop were these:
"Welcome Home. And welcome back into full fellowship in the Anglican Communion. "But whatever things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. But no, rather, I also count all things to be loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them to be dung, so that I may win Christ and be found in Him; not having my own righteousness, which is of the Law, but through the faith of Christ, the righteousness of God by faith, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made conformable to His death; if by any means I might attain to the resurrection of the dead. Not as though I had already attained either were already perfect, but I am pressing on, if I may lay hold of that for which I also was taken hold of by Christ Jesus. My brothers (and sisters), I do not count myself to have taken possession, but one thing I do, forgetting the things behind and reaching forward to the things before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." [Philippians 3:7-13]' Your Father in God. ++ Gregory"
The orders of all Diocesan clergy have been recognized by the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone and appropriate certificates have already been issued. A period of discernment for those who request it and agreed to by the bishop has been provided for those clergy who desire more time to consider whether or not to accept the invitation welcomed so heartily by the majority of Convention.
Likewise, all parishes will be given a similar discernment period. No one is being asked to act against his conscience.
Surely, if there is one outstanding mark of this recent decision to realign with the Southern Cone it is freedom from oppression and threat. As your Bishop, I would ask you to treat those in the minority with graciousness and love and keep them in your prayers.
It is a difficult time for all of us. We have to deal with a turn of events that no one wanted. For the majority who travel with the Diocese, however, nothing will change. The familiar ways in which you worship, your clergy, the Book of Common Prayer, Hymnal, lectionary and place of worship will all remain the same with one notable exception. In the Prayers of the People, "Gregory our Archbishop" is to appear where the Prayer Book offers intercession "For N. our Presiding Bishop".
Among those things that will remain the same is the solid teaching of the word of God free from worldly compromise, giving priority to your spiritual well being, faith, and salvation along with a future in the Anglican Communion. You may well discover, too, what it is like to witness to your faith without having to apologize for or feel embarrassed by the decisions of a Church over which you had no control.
All of this has been assured by the courage of your Annual Convention, which - in turn - could have done nothing without Archbishop Gregory Venables and his Province of the Southern Cone going before us first and by their taking the bold step of faith they did on our behalf. We shall be forever grateful to them and trust that we will prove as much a blessing to them as they have been for us.
While there may be a degree of uncertainty over the future of our material possessions, we are not to despair. We all know there are no guarantees in this life, only the next.
Time and again God has provided us with what we have needed to do His work for the advancement of His Kingdom and the building up of His Church. Why would we question whether the One who identifies Himself as "the same yesterday, today, and forever" change now?
Faithfully yours, in our Lord Jesus Christ,
---The Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield is Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin
Greetings in the name of Jesus Christ, our one and only Lord and Savior.
By an overwhelming majority of nearly 90% (173 to 22), our Annual Convention voted Saturday, December 8th, to uphold the authority of Holy Scripture and thereby preserve our place in the worldwide Anglican Communion and with the See of Canterbury by realigning our Anglican identity through the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone of the Americas under the Most Rev. Gregory Venables, Archbishop and Primate.
This historic and momentous decision by our Annual Convention was the culmination of The Episcopal Church's failure to heed the repeated calls for repentance issued by the Primates of the Anglican Communion and for the cessation of false teaching and sacramental actions explicitly contrary to Scripture.
However, we are no longer operating under the looming shadow of this institutional apostasy because our Annual Convention wisely and prayerfully accepted the gracious invitation for sanctuary from the Southern Cone. Under a plan developed with their House of Bishops and ultimately discussed between Archbishop Venables and a number of other Primates and Bishops we were offered hope by the Southern Cone. I wish to emphasize that Convention's action is not a schism over secondary issues but a realignment necessitated by false teaching as well as unbiblical sacramental actions that continue to take place in The Episcopal Church.
As our new Archbishop so succinctly put it: "Christianity is specific, definable and unchanging. We are not at liberty to deconstruct or rewrite it. If Jesus was the Son of God yesterday then so He is today and will be forever." After our Annual Convention voted to accept the invitation from the Southern Cone, the first words to the Diocese of San Joaquin from our new Archbishop were these:
"Welcome Home. And welcome back into full fellowship in the Anglican Communion. "But whatever things were gain to me, those I counted loss for Christ. But no, rather, I also count all things to be loss for the excellency of the knowledge of Christ Jesus my Lord, for whose sake I have suffered the loss of all things, and count them to be dung, so that I may win Christ and be found in Him; not having my own righteousness, which is of the Law, but through the faith of Christ, the righteousness of God by faith, that I may know Him and the power of His resurrection and the fellowship of His sufferings, being made conformable to His death; if by any means I might attain to the resurrection of the dead. Not as though I had already attained either were already perfect, but I am pressing on, if I may lay hold of that for which I also was taken hold of by Christ Jesus. My brothers (and sisters), I do not count myself to have taken possession, but one thing I do, forgetting the things behind and reaching forward to the things before, I press toward the mark for the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." [Philippians 3:7-13]' Your Father in God. ++ Gregory"
The orders of all Diocesan clergy have been recognized by the Anglican Church of the Southern Cone and appropriate certificates have already been issued. A period of discernment for those who request it and agreed to by the bishop has been provided for those clergy who desire more time to consider whether or not to accept the invitation welcomed so heartily by the majority of Convention.
Likewise, all parishes will be given a similar discernment period. No one is being asked to act against his conscience.
Surely, if there is one outstanding mark of this recent decision to realign with the Southern Cone it is freedom from oppression and threat. As your Bishop, I would ask you to treat those in the minority with graciousness and love and keep them in your prayers.
It is a difficult time for all of us. We have to deal with a turn of events that no one wanted. For the majority who travel with the Diocese, however, nothing will change. The familiar ways in which you worship, your clergy, the Book of Common Prayer, Hymnal, lectionary and place of worship will all remain the same with one notable exception. In the Prayers of the People, "Gregory our Archbishop" is to appear where the Prayer Book offers intercession "For N. our Presiding Bishop".
Among those things that will remain the same is the solid teaching of the word of God free from worldly compromise, giving priority to your spiritual well being, faith, and salvation along with a future in the Anglican Communion. You may well discover, too, what it is like to witness to your faith without having to apologize for or feel embarrassed by the decisions of a Church over which you had no control.
All of this has been assured by the courage of your Annual Convention, which - in turn - could have done nothing without Archbishop Gregory Venables and his Province of the Southern Cone going before us first and by their taking the bold step of faith they did on our behalf. We shall be forever grateful to them and trust that we will prove as much a blessing to them as they have been for us.
While there may be a degree of uncertainty over the future of our material possessions, we are not to despair. We all know there are no guarantees in this life, only the next.
Time and again God has provided us with what we have needed to do His work for the advancement of His Kingdom and the building up of His Church. Why would we question whether the One who identifies Himself as "the same yesterday, today, and forever" change now?
Faithfully yours, in our Lord Jesus Christ,
---The Rt. Rev. John-David Schofield is Bishop of the Diocese of San Joaquin
Saturday, December 15, 2007
Bishop Iker's response to the Archbishop of Canterbury's Advent Letter
The main disconnect for me in the Archbishop's letter is this: On the one hand, in reference to TEC's response to the Windsor Report and the Lambeth Resolutions, he acknowledges that "it is extremely unlikely that further meetings will produce any more substantial consensus than that which is now before us." I believe he is correct. TEC is not going to turn back from its present course. It is not going to abide by the consensus of the Anglican Communion on matters of human sexuality.
But on the other hand, he then goes on to call for "professionally facilitated conversations between the leadership of The Episcopal Church and those with whom they are most in dispute" in the hope of somehow gaining "a better level of mutual understanding." This hope is in vain. TEC does not negotiate with those with whom they are in dispute; they litigate. Numerous meetings have produced no acceptable solution for the minority to remain with integrity within TEC.
The best assistance that the Archbishop can offer to address the situation in TEC is to host a mediation that seeks a negotiated settlement for separation, without rancor or litigation.
The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth
But on the other hand, he then goes on to call for "professionally facilitated conversations between the leadership of The Episcopal Church and those with whom they are most in dispute" in the hope of somehow gaining "a better level of mutual understanding." This hope is in vain. TEC does not negotiate with those with whom they are in dispute; they litigate. Numerous meetings have produced no acceptable solution for the minority to remain with integrity within TEC.
The best assistance that the Archbishop can offer to address the situation in TEC is to host a mediation that seeks a negotiated settlement for separation, without rancor or litigation.
The Rt. Rev. Jack Leo Iker
Bishop of Fort Worth
Friday, December 14, 2007
Archbishop of Canterbury's Advent Letter
Posted On : December 14, 2007 12:05 PM | Posted By : Webmaster Related Categories:
Lambeth
ACNS4354
To: Primates of the Anglican Communion & Moderators of the United Churches
Greetings in the name of the One 'who is and was and is to come, the Almighty', as we prepare in this Advent season to celebrate once more his first coming and pray for the grace to greet him when he comes in glory.
You will by now, I hope, have received my earlier letter summarising the responses from Primates to the Joint Standing Committee's analysis of the New Orleans statement from the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church. In that letter, I promised to write with some further reflections and proposals, and this is the purpose of the present communication. Although I am writing in the first instance to my fellow-primates, I hope you will share this letter widely with your bishops and people.
As I said in that earlier letter, the responses received from primates differed in their assessment of the situation. Slightly more than half of the replies received signalled a willingness to accept the Joint Standing Committee's analysis of the New Orleans statement, but the rest regarded both the statement and the Standing Committee's comments as an inadequate response to what had been requested by the primates in Dar-es-Salaam.
So we have no consensus about the New Orleans statement. It is also the case that some of the more negative assessments from primates were clearly influenced by the reported remarks of individual bishops in The Episcopal Church who either declared their unwillingness to abide by the terms of the statement or argued that it did not imply any change in current policies. It should be noted too that some of the positive responses reflected a deep desire to put the question decisively behind us as a Communion; some of these also expressed dissatisfaction with our present channels of discussion and communication.
Where does this leave us as a Communion? Because we have no single central executive authority, the answer to this is not a simple one. However, it is important to try and state what common ground there is before we attempt to move forward; and it is historically an aspect of the role of the Archbishop of Canterbury to 'articulate the mind of the Communion' in moments of tension and controversy, as the Windsor Report puts it (para. 109). I do so out of the profound conviction that the existence of our Communion is truly a gift of God to the wholeness of Christ's Church and that all of us will be seriously wounded and diminished if our Communion fractures any further; but also out of the no less profound conviction that our identity as Anglicans is not something without boundaries. What I am writing here is an attempt to set out where some of those boundaries lie and why they matter for our witness to the world as well as for our own integrity and mutual respect.
The Communion is a voluntary association of provinces and dioceses; and so its unity depends not on a canon law that can be enforced but on the ability of each part of the family to recognise that other local churches have received the same faith from the apostles and are faithfully holding to it in loyalty to the One Lord incarnate who speaks in Scripture and bestows his grace in the sacraments. To put it in slightly different terms, local churches acknowledge the same 'constitutive elements' in one another. This means in turn that each local church receives from others and recognises in others the same good news and the same structure of ministry, and seeks to engage in mutual service for the sake of our common mission.
So a full relationship of communion will mean:
* The common acknowledgment that we stand under the authority of
Scripture as 'the rule and ultimate standard of faith', in the words of the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral; as the gift shaped by the Holy Spirit which decisively interprets God to the community of believers and the community of believers to itself and opens our hearts to the living and eternal Word that is Christ. Our obedience to the call of Christ the Word Incarnate is drawn out first and foremost by our listening to the Bible and conforming our lives to what God both offers and requires of us through the words and narratives of the Bible. We recognise each other in one fellowship when we see one another 'standing under' the word of Scripture. Because of this recognition, we are able to consult and reflect together on the interpretation of Scripture and to learn in that process. Understanding the Bible is not a private process or something to be undertaken in isolation by one part of the family. Radical change in the way we read cannot be determined by one group or tradition alone.
* The common acknowledgement of an authentic ministry of Word and
Sacrament. We remain in communion because we trust that the Lord who has called us by his Word also calls men and women in other contexts and raises up for them as for us a ministry which can be recognised as performing the same tasks - of teaching and pastoral care and admonition, of assembling God's people for worship, above all at the Holy Communion. The principle that one local church should not intervene in the life of another is simply a way of expressing this trust that the form of ministry is something we share and that God provides what is needed for each local community.
* The common acknowledgement that the first and great priority of
each local Christian community is to communicate the Good News. When we are able to recognise biblical faithfulness and authentic ministry in one another, the relation of communion pledges us to support each other's efforts to win people for Christ and to serve the world in his Name. Communion thus means the sharing of resources and skills in order to enable one another to proclaim and serve in this way.
It is in this context that we must think about the present crisis, which is in significant part a crisis about whether we can fully, honestly and gratefully recognise these gifts in each other.
The debates about sexuality, significant as they may be, are symptoms of our confusion about these basic principles of recognition. It is too easy to make the debate a standoff between those who are 'for' and those who are 'against' the welcoming of homosexual people in the Church. The Instruments of Communion have consistently and very strongly repeated that it is part of our Christian and Anglican discipleship to condemn homophobic prejudice and violence, to defend the human rights and civil liberties of homosexual people and to offer them the same pastoral care and loving service that we owe to all in Christ's name. But the deeper question is about what we believe we are free to do, if we seek to be recognisably faithful to Scripture and the moral tradition of the wider Church, with respect to blessing and sanctioning in the name of the Church certain personal decisions about what constitutes an acceptable Christian lifestyle. Insofar as there is currently any consensus in the Communion about this, it is not in favour of change in our discipline or our interpretation of the Bible.
This is why the episcopal ordination of a person in a same-sex union or a claim to the freedom to make liturgical declarations about the character of same-sex unions inevitably raises the question of whether a local church is still fully recognisable within the one family of practice and reflection. Where one part of the family makes a decisive move that plainly implies a new understanding of Scripture that has not been received and agreed by the wider Church, it is not surprising that others find a problem in knowing how far they are still speaking the same language. And because what one local church says is naturally taken as representative of what others might say, we have the painful situation of some communities being associated with views and actions which they deplore or which they simply have not considered.
Where such a situation arises, it becomes important to clarify that the Communion as a whole is not committed to receiving the new interpretation and that there must be ways in which others can appropriately distance themselves from decisions and policies which they have not agreed. This is important in our relations with our own local contexts and equally in our ecumenical (and interfaith) encounters, to avoid confusion and deep misunderstanding.
The desire to establish this distance has led some to conclude that, since the first condition of recognisability (a common reading and understanding of Scripture) is not met, the whole structure of mission and ministry has failed in a local church that commits itself to a new reading of the Bible. Hence the willingness of some to provide supplementary ministerial care through the adoption of parishes in distant provinces or the ordination of ministers for distant provinces.
Successive Lambeth Conferences and Primates' Meetings have, however, cautioned very strongly against such provision. It creates a seriously anomalous position. It does not appeal to a clear or universal principle by which it may be decided that a local church's ministry is completely defective. On the ground, it creates rivalry and confusion. It opens the door to complex and unedifying legal wrangles in civil courts. It creates a situation in which pastoral care and oversight have to be exercised at a great distance. The view that has been expressed by all the Instruments of Communion in recent years is that interventions are not to be sanctioned. It would seem reasonable to say that this principle should only be overridden when the Communion together had in some way concluded, not only that a province was behaving anomalously, but that this was so serious as to compromise the entire ministry and mission the province was undertaking. Without such a condition, the risk is magnified of smaller and smaller groups taking to themselves the authority to decide on the adequacy of a neighbour's ministerial life or spiritual authenticity. The gospels and the epistles of Paul alike warn us against a hasty final judgement on the spiritual state of our neighbours.
While argument continues about exactly how much force is possessed by a Resolution of the Lambeth Conference such as the 1998 Lambeth Conference Resolution on sexuality, it is true, as I have repeatedly said, that the 1998 Resolution is the only point of reference clearly agreed by the overwhelming majority of the Communion. This is the point where our common reading of Scripture stands, along with the common reading of the majority within the Christian churches worldwide and through the centuries.
Thus it is not surprising if some have concluded that the official organs of The Episcopal Church, in confirming the election of Gene Robinson and in giving what many regard as implicit sanction to same-sex blessings of a public nature have put in question the degree to which it can be recognised as belonging to the same family by deciding to act against the strong, reiterated and consistent advice of the Instruments of Communion. The repeated requests for clarification to The Episcopal Church, difficult and frustrating as they have proved for that province, have been an attempt by the Communion at large to deal with the many anxieties expressed in this regard. The matter is further complicated by the fact that several within The Episcopal Church, including a significant number of bishops and some diocesan conventions, have clearly distanced themselves from the prevailing view in their province as expressed in its public policies and declarations. This includes the bishops who have committed themselves to the proposals of the Windsor Report in their Camp Allen conference, as well as others who have looked for more radical solutions. Without elaborating on the practical implications of this or the complicated and diverse politics of the situation, it is obvious that such dioceses and bishops cannot be regarded as deficient in recognisable faithfulness to the common deposit and the common language and practice of the Communion. If their faith and practice are recognised by other churches in the Communion as representing the common mind of the Anglican Church, they are clearly in fellowship with the Communion. The practical challenge then becomes to find ways of working out a fruitful, sustainable and honest relation for them both with their own province and with the wider Communion.
That challenge is not best addressed by a series of ad hoc arrangements with individual provinces elsewhere, as the Dar-es-Salaam communiqué made plain. The New Orleans statement, along with many individual statements by bishops in TEC, expresses the anger felt by many in the US
- as also in Canada - about uncontrolled intervention, and it is evident that this is not doing anything to advance or assist local solutions that will have some theological and canonical solidity.
I believe that we as a Communion must recognise two things in respect of the current position in TEC. First: most if not all of the bishops present in New Orleans were seeking in all honesty to find a way of meeting the requests of the primates and to express a sense of responsibility towards the Communion and their concern for and loyalty to it. It is of enormous importance that the Communion overall does not forget its responsibility to and for that large body of prayerful opinion in The Episcopal Church which sincerely desires to work in full harmony with others, particularly those bishops who have clearly expressed their desire to work within the framework both of the Windsor Report and the Lambeth Resolutions, and that it does not give way to the temptation to view The Episcopal Church as a monochrome body. Second: it is practically impossible to imagine any further elucidation or elaboration coming from TEC after the successive statements and resolutions from last year's General Convention onwards. A good deal of time and effort has gone into the responses they have already produced, and it is extremely unlikely that further meetings will produce any more substantial consensus than that which is now before us.
The exact interpretation of the New Orleans statements, as the responses from around the Communion indicate, is disputable. I do not see how the commitment not to confirm any election to the episcopate of a partnered gay or lesbian person can mean anything other than what it says. But the declaration on same-sex blessings is in effect a reiteration of the position taken in previous statements from TEC, and has clearly not satisfied many in the Communion any more than these earlier statements. There is obviously a significant and serious gap between what TEC understands and what others assume as to what constitutes a liturgical provision in the name of the Church at large.
A scheme has been outlined for the pastoral care of those who do not accept the majority view in TEC, but the detail of any consultation or involvement with other provinces as to how this might best work remains to be filled out and what has been proposed does not so far seem to have commanded the full confidence of those most affected. Furthermore, serious concerns remain about the risks of spiralling disputes before the secular courts, although the Dar-es-Salaam communiqué expressed profound disquiet on this matter, addressed to all parties.
A somewhat complicating factor in the New Orleans statement has been the provision that any kind of moratorium is in place until General Convention provides otherwise. Since the matters at issue are those in which the bishops have a decisive voice as a House of Bishops in General Convention, puzzlement has been expressed as to why the House should apparently bind itself to future direction from the Convention. If that is indeed what this means, it is in itself a decision of some significance. It raises a major ecclesiological issue, not about some sort of autocratic episcopal privilege but about the understanding in The Episcopal Church of the distinctive charism of bishops as an order and their responsibility for sustaining doctrinal standards. Once again, there seems to be a gap between what some in The Episcopal Church understand about the ministry of bishops and what is held elsewhere in the Communion, and this needs to be addressed.
The exchange between TEC and the wider Communion has now been continuing for some four years, and it would be unrealistic and ungrateful to expect more from TEC in terms of clarification. Whatever our individual perspectives, I think we need to honour the intentions and the hard work done by the bishops of TEC. For many of them, this has been a very costly and demanding experience, testing both heart and conscience. But now we need to determine a way forward.
The whole of this discussion is naturally affected by what people are thinking about the character and scope of the Lambeth Conference, and I need to say a word about this here. Thus far, invitations have been issued with two considerations in mind.
First: I have not felt able to invite those whose episcopal ordination was carried through against the counsel of the Instruments of Communion, and I have not seen any reason to revisit this (the reference in the New Orleans statement to the Archbishop of Canterbury's 'expressed desire' to invite the Bishop of New Hampshire misunderstands what was said earlier this year, when the question was left open as to whether the Bishop, as a non-participant, could conceivably be present as a guest at some point or at some optional event). And while (as I have said above) I understand and respect the good faith of those who have felt called to provide additional episcopal oversight in the USA, there can be no doubt that these ordinations have not been encouraged or legitimised by the Communion overall.
I acknowledge that this limitation on invitations will pose problems for some in its outworking. But I would strongly urge those whose strong commitments create such problems to ask what they are prepared to offer for the sake of a Conference that will have some general credibility in and for the Communion overall.
Second: I have underlined in my letter of invitation that acceptance of the invitation must be taken as implying willingness to work with those aspects of the Conference's agenda that relate to implementing the recommendations of Windsor, including the development of a Covenant. The Conference needs of course to be a place where diversity of opinion can be expressed, and there is no intention to foreclose the discussion
- for example - of what sort of Covenant document is needed. But I believe we need to be able to take for granted a certain level of willingness to follow through the question of how we avoid the present degree of damaging and draining tension arising again. I intend to be in direct contact with those who have expressed unease about this, so as to try and clarify how deep their difficulties go with accepting or adopting the Conference's agenda.
How then should the Lambeth Conference be viewed? It is not a canonical tribunal, but neither is it merely a general consultation. It is a meeting of the chief pastors and teachers of the Communion, seeking an authoritative common voice. It is also a meeting designed to strengthen and deepen the sense of what the episcopal vocation is.
Some reactions to my original invitation have implied that meeting for prayer, mutual spiritual enrichment and development of ministry is somehow a way of avoiding difficult issues. On the contrary: I would insist that only in such a context can we usefully address divisive issues. If, as the opening section of this letter claimed, our difficulties have their root in whether or how far we can recognise the same gospel and ministry in diverse places and policies, we need to engage more not less directly with each other. This is why I have repeatedly said that an invitation to Lambeth does not constitute a certificate of orthodoxy but simply a challenge to pray seriously together and to seek a resolution that will be as widely owned as may be.
And this is also why I have said that the refusal to meet can be a refusal of the cross - and so of the resurrection. We are being asked to see our handling of conflict and potential division as part of our maturing both as pastors and as disciples. I do not think this is either an incidental matter or an evasion of more basic questions.
This means some hard reflective work in preparation for the Conference - including pursuing conversations with each other across the current divisions. There will also be a number of documents circulating which will feed into the Conference's discussions, in particular the work of the Covenant Design Group, the resources available from the dialogues with the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches, the Report of the Doctrinal commission and the papers coming from IASCER. Also significant will be the papers on the core elements of Anglican ministerial education and formation prepared by the group advising the Primates on Theological Education in the Anglican Communion, and the paper on the theology of inter faith relations prepared by the Network for Inter Faith Concerns (NIFCON), Generous Love.
But direct contact and open exchange of convictions will be crucial. Whatever happens, we are bound to seek for fruitful ways of carrying forward liaison with provinces whose policies cause scandal or difficulty to others. Whatever happens, certain aspects of our 'relational' communion will continue independently of the debates and decisions at the level of canons and hierarchies.
Given the differences in response to The Episcopal Church revealed in the responses of the primates, we simply cannot pretend that there is now a ready-made consensus on the future of relationships between TEC and other provinces. Much work remains to be done. But - once again, I refer back to my introductory thoughts - that work is about some basic questions of fidelity to Scripture and identity in ministry and mission,
not only about the one issue of sexuality. It is about what it means
for the Anglican Communion to behave with a consistency that allows us to face, both honestly and charitably, the deeply painful question of who we can and cannot recognise as sharing the same calling and task.
Finally, what specific recommendations emerge from these thoughts?
I propose two different but related courses of action during the months ahead. I wish to pursue some professionally facilitated conversations between the leadership of The Episcopal Church and those with whom they are most in dispute, internally and externally, to see if we can generate any better level of mutual understanding. Such meetings will not seek any predetermined outcome but will attempt to ease tensions and clarify options. They may also clarify ideas about the future pattern of liaison between TEC and other parts of the Communion. I have already identified resources and people who will assist in this.
I also intend to convene a small group of primates and others, whose task will be, in close collaboration with the primates, the Joint Standing Committee, the Covenant Design Group and the Lambeth Conference Design Group, to work on the unanswered questions arising from the inconclusive evaluation of the primates to New Orleans and to take certain issues forward to Lambeth. This will feed in to the discussions at Lambeth about Anglican identity and the Covenant process; I suggest that it will also have to consider whether in the present circumstances it is possible for provinces or individual bishops at odds with the expressed mind of the Communion to participate fully in representative Communion agencies, including ecumenical bodies. Its responsibility will be to weigh current developments in the light of the clear recommendations of Windsor and of the subsequent statements from the ACC and the Primates' Meeting; it will thus also be bound to consider the exact status of bishops ordained by one province for ministry in another. At the moment, the question of 'who speaks for the Communion?' is surrounded by much unclarity and urgently needs resolution; the people of the Communion need to be sure that they are not placed in unsustainable and damaging positions by any vagueness as to what the Communion as a whole believes and endorses, and so the issue of who represents the Communion cannot be evaded. The principles set out at the beginning of this letter will, I hope, assist in clarifying what needs to be said about this. Not everyone carrying the name of Anglican can claim to speak authentically for the identity we share as a global fellowship. I continue to hope that the discussion of the Covenant before, during and beyond Lambeth will give us a positive rallying-point.
A great deal of the language that is around in the Communion at present seems to presuppose that any change from our current deadlock is impossible, that division is unavoidable and that any such division represents so radical a difference in fundamental faith that no recognition and future co-operation can be imagined. I cannot accept these assumptions, and I do not believe that as Christians we should see them as beyond challenge, least of all as we think and pray our way through Advent.
The coming of Christ in the flesh and the declaration of the good news of his saving purpose was not a matter of human planning and ingenuity, nor was it frustrated by human resistance and sin. It was a gift whose reception was made possible by the prayerful obedience of Mary and whose effect was to create a new community of God's sons and daughters. As we look forward, what is there for us to do but pray, obey and be ready for God's re-creating work through the eternal and unchanging Saviour, Jesus Christ?
'The Spirit and the bride say, "Come"... Amen. Come Lord Jesus. The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God's people. Amen' (Rev.22.17, 20-21).
++++++++++
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London, is distributed to more than 8,000 journalists and other readers around the world.
Lambeth
ACNS4354
To: Primates of the Anglican Communion & Moderators of the United Churches
Greetings in the name of the One 'who is and was and is to come, the Almighty', as we prepare in this Advent season to celebrate once more his first coming and pray for the grace to greet him when he comes in glory.
You will by now, I hope, have received my earlier letter summarising the responses from Primates to the Joint Standing Committee's analysis of the New Orleans statement from the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church. In that letter, I promised to write with some further reflections and proposals, and this is the purpose of the present communication. Although I am writing in the first instance to my fellow-primates, I hope you will share this letter widely with your bishops and people.
As I said in that earlier letter, the responses received from primates differed in their assessment of the situation. Slightly more than half of the replies received signalled a willingness to accept the Joint Standing Committee's analysis of the New Orleans statement, but the rest regarded both the statement and the Standing Committee's comments as an inadequate response to what had been requested by the primates in Dar-es-Salaam.
So we have no consensus about the New Orleans statement. It is also the case that some of the more negative assessments from primates were clearly influenced by the reported remarks of individual bishops in The Episcopal Church who either declared their unwillingness to abide by the terms of the statement or argued that it did not imply any change in current policies. It should be noted too that some of the positive responses reflected a deep desire to put the question decisively behind us as a Communion; some of these also expressed dissatisfaction with our present channels of discussion and communication.
Where does this leave us as a Communion? Because we have no single central executive authority, the answer to this is not a simple one. However, it is important to try and state what common ground there is before we attempt to move forward; and it is historically an aspect of the role of the Archbishop of Canterbury to 'articulate the mind of the Communion' in moments of tension and controversy, as the Windsor Report puts it (para. 109). I do so out of the profound conviction that the existence of our Communion is truly a gift of God to the wholeness of Christ's Church and that all of us will be seriously wounded and diminished if our Communion fractures any further; but also out of the no less profound conviction that our identity as Anglicans is not something without boundaries. What I am writing here is an attempt to set out where some of those boundaries lie and why they matter for our witness to the world as well as for our own integrity and mutual respect.
The Communion is a voluntary association of provinces and dioceses; and so its unity depends not on a canon law that can be enforced but on the ability of each part of the family to recognise that other local churches have received the same faith from the apostles and are faithfully holding to it in loyalty to the One Lord incarnate who speaks in Scripture and bestows his grace in the sacraments. To put it in slightly different terms, local churches acknowledge the same 'constitutive elements' in one another. This means in turn that each local church receives from others and recognises in others the same good news and the same structure of ministry, and seeks to engage in mutual service for the sake of our common mission.
So a full relationship of communion will mean:
* The common acknowledgment that we stand under the authority of
Scripture as 'the rule and ultimate standard of faith', in the words of the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral; as the gift shaped by the Holy Spirit which decisively interprets God to the community of believers and the community of believers to itself and opens our hearts to the living and eternal Word that is Christ. Our obedience to the call of Christ the Word Incarnate is drawn out first and foremost by our listening to the Bible and conforming our lives to what God both offers and requires of us through the words and narratives of the Bible. We recognise each other in one fellowship when we see one another 'standing under' the word of Scripture. Because of this recognition, we are able to consult and reflect together on the interpretation of Scripture and to learn in that process. Understanding the Bible is not a private process or something to be undertaken in isolation by one part of the family. Radical change in the way we read cannot be determined by one group or tradition alone.
* The common acknowledgement of an authentic ministry of Word and
Sacrament. We remain in communion because we trust that the Lord who has called us by his Word also calls men and women in other contexts and raises up for them as for us a ministry which can be recognised as performing the same tasks - of teaching and pastoral care and admonition, of assembling God's people for worship, above all at the Holy Communion. The principle that one local church should not intervene in the life of another is simply a way of expressing this trust that the form of ministry is something we share and that God provides what is needed for each local community.
* The common acknowledgement that the first and great priority of
each local Christian community is to communicate the Good News. When we are able to recognise biblical faithfulness and authentic ministry in one another, the relation of communion pledges us to support each other's efforts to win people for Christ and to serve the world in his Name. Communion thus means the sharing of resources and skills in order to enable one another to proclaim and serve in this way.
It is in this context that we must think about the present crisis, which is in significant part a crisis about whether we can fully, honestly and gratefully recognise these gifts in each other.
The debates about sexuality, significant as they may be, are symptoms of our confusion about these basic principles of recognition. It is too easy to make the debate a standoff between those who are 'for' and those who are 'against' the welcoming of homosexual people in the Church. The Instruments of Communion have consistently and very strongly repeated that it is part of our Christian and Anglican discipleship to condemn homophobic prejudice and violence, to defend the human rights and civil liberties of homosexual people and to offer them the same pastoral care and loving service that we owe to all in Christ's name. But the deeper question is about what we believe we are free to do, if we seek to be recognisably faithful to Scripture and the moral tradition of the wider Church, with respect to blessing and sanctioning in the name of the Church certain personal decisions about what constitutes an acceptable Christian lifestyle. Insofar as there is currently any consensus in the Communion about this, it is not in favour of change in our discipline or our interpretation of the Bible.
This is why the episcopal ordination of a person in a same-sex union or a claim to the freedom to make liturgical declarations about the character of same-sex unions inevitably raises the question of whether a local church is still fully recognisable within the one family of practice and reflection. Where one part of the family makes a decisive move that plainly implies a new understanding of Scripture that has not been received and agreed by the wider Church, it is not surprising that others find a problem in knowing how far they are still speaking the same language. And because what one local church says is naturally taken as representative of what others might say, we have the painful situation of some communities being associated with views and actions which they deplore or which they simply have not considered.
Where such a situation arises, it becomes important to clarify that the Communion as a whole is not committed to receiving the new interpretation and that there must be ways in which others can appropriately distance themselves from decisions and policies which they have not agreed. This is important in our relations with our own local contexts and equally in our ecumenical (and interfaith) encounters, to avoid confusion and deep misunderstanding.
The desire to establish this distance has led some to conclude that, since the first condition of recognisability (a common reading and understanding of Scripture) is not met, the whole structure of mission and ministry has failed in a local church that commits itself to a new reading of the Bible. Hence the willingness of some to provide supplementary ministerial care through the adoption of parishes in distant provinces or the ordination of ministers for distant provinces.
Successive Lambeth Conferences and Primates' Meetings have, however, cautioned very strongly against such provision. It creates a seriously anomalous position. It does not appeal to a clear or universal principle by which it may be decided that a local church's ministry is completely defective. On the ground, it creates rivalry and confusion. It opens the door to complex and unedifying legal wrangles in civil courts. It creates a situation in which pastoral care and oversight have to be exercised at a great distance. The view that has been expressed by all the Instruments of Communion in recent years is that interventions are not to be sanctioned. It would seem reasonable to say that this principle should only be overridden when the Communion together had in some way concluded, not only that a province was behaving anomalously, but that this was so serious as to compromise the entire ministry and mission the province was undertaking. Without such a condition, the risk is magnified of smaller and smaller groups taking to themselves the authority to decide on the adequacy of a neighbour's ministerial life or spiritual authenticity. The gospels and the epistles of Paul alike warn us against a hasty final judgement on the spiritual state of our neighbours.
While argument continues about exactly how much force is possessed by a Resolution of the Lambeth Conference such as the 1998 Lambeth Conference Resolution on sexuality, it is true, as I have repeatedly said, that the 1998 Resolution is the only point of reference clearly agreed by the overwhelming majority of the Communion. This is the point where our common reading of Scripture stands, along with the common reading of the majority within the Christian churches worldwide and through the centuries.
Thus it is not surprising if some have concluded that the official organs of The Episcopal Church, in confirming the election of Gene Robinson and in giving what many regard as implicit sanction to same-sex blessings of a public nature have put in question the degree to which it can be recognised as belonging to the same family by deciding to act against the strong, reiterated and consistent advice of the Instruments of Communion. The repeated requests for clarification to The Episcopal Church, difficult and frustrating as they have proved for that province, have been an attempt by the Communion at large to deal with the many anxieties expressed in this regard. The matter is further complicated by the fact that several within The Episcopal Church, including a significant number of bishops and some diocesan conventions, have clearly distanced themselves from the prevailing view in their province as expressed in its public policies and declarations. This includes the bishops who have committed themselves to the proposals of the Windsor Report in their Camp Allen conference, as well as others who have looked for more radical solutions. Without elaborating on the practical implications of this or the complicated and diverse politics of the situation, it is obvious that such dioceses and bishops cannot be regarded as deficient in recognisable faithfulness to the common deposit and the common language and practice of the Communion. If their faith and practice are recognised by other churches in the Communion as representing the common mind of the Anglican Church, they are clearly in fellowship with the Communion. The practical challenge then becomes to find ways of working out a fruitful, sustainable and honest relation for them both with their own province and with the wider Communion.
That challenge is not best addressed by a series of ad hoc arrangements with individual provinces elsewhere, as the Dar-es-Salaam communiqué made plain. The New Orleans statement, along with many individual statements by bishops in TEC, expresses the anger felt by many in the US
- as also in Canada - about uncontrolled intervention, and it is evident that this is not doing anything to advance or assist local solutions that will have some theological and canonical solidity.
I believe that we as a Communion must recognise two things in respect of the current position in TEC. First: most if not all of the bishops present in New Orleans were seeking in all honesty to find a way of meeting the requests of the primates and to express a sense of responsibility towards the Communion and their concern for and loyalty to it. It is of enormous importance that the Communion overall does not forget its responsibility to and for that large body of prayerful opinion in The Episcopal Church which sincerely desires to work in full harmony with others, particularly those bishops who have clearly expressed their desire to work within the framework both of the Windsor Report and the Lambeth Resolutions, and that it does not give way to the temptation to view The Episcopal Church as a monochrome body. Second: it is practically impossible to imagine any further elucidation or elaboration coming from TEC after the successive statements and resolutions from last year's General Convention onwards. A good deal of time and effort has gone into the responses they have already produced, and it is extremely unlikely that further meetings will produce any more substantial consensus than that which is now before us.
The exact interpretation of the New Orleans statements, as the responses from around the Communion indicate, is disputable. I do not see how the commitment not to confirm any election to the episcopate of a partnered gay or lesbian person can mean anything other than what it says. But the declaration on same-sex blessings is in effect a reiteration of the position taken in previous statements from TEC, and has clearly not satisfied many in the Communion any more than these earlier statements. There is obviously a significant and serious gap between what TEC understands and what others assume as to what constitutes a liturgical provision in the name of the Church at large.
A scheme has been outlined for the pastoral care of those who do not accept the majority view in TEC, but the detail of any consultation or involvement with other provinces as to how this might best work remains to be filled out and what has been proposed does not so far seem to have commanded the full confidence of those most affected. Furthermore, serious concerns remain about the risks of spiralling disputes before the secular courts, although the Dar-es-Salaam communiqué expressed profound disquiet on this matter, addressed to all parties.
A somewhat complicating factor in the New Orleans statement has been the provision that any kind of moratorium is in place until General Convention provides otherwise. Since the matters at issue are those in which the bishops have a decisive voice as a House of Bishops in General Convention, puzzlement has been expressed as to why the House should apparently bind itself to future direction from the Convention. If that is indeed what this means, it is in itself a decision of some significance. It raises a major ecclesiological issue, not about some sort of autocratic episcopal privilege but about the understanding in The Episcopal Church of the distinctive charism of bishops as an order and their responsibility for sustaining doctrinal standards. Once again, there seems to be a gap between what some in The Episcopal Church understand about the ministry of bishops and what is held elsewhere in the Communion, and this needs to be addressed.
The exchange between TEC and the wider Communion has now been continuing for some four years, and it would be unrealistic and ungrateful to expect more from TEC in terms of clarification. Whatever our individual perspectives, I think we need to honour the intentions and the hard work done by the bishops of TEC. For many of them, this has been a very costly and demanding experience, testing both heart and conscience. But now we need to determine a way forward.
The whole of this discussion is naturally affected by what people are thinking about the character and scope of the Lambeth Conference, and I need to say a word about this here. Thus far, invitations have been issued with two considerations in mind.
First: I have not felt able to invite those whose episcopal ordination was carried through against the counsel of the Instruments of Communion, and I have not seen any reason to revisit this (the reference in the New Orleans statement to the Archbishop of Canterbury's 'expressed desire' to invite the Bishop of New Hampshire misunderstands what was said earlier this year, when the question was left open as to whether the Bishop, as a non-participant, could conceivably be present as a guest at some point or at some optional event). And while (as I have said above) I understand and respect the good faith of those who have felt called to provide additional episcopal oversight in the USA, there can be no doubt that these ordinations have not been encouraged or legitimised by the Communion overall.
I acknowledge that this limitation on invitations will pose problems for some in its outworking. But I would strongly urge those whose strong commitments create such problems to ask what they are prepared to offer for the sake of a Conference that will have some general credibility in and for the Communion overall.
Second: I have underlined in my letter of invitation that acceptance of the invitation must be taken as implying willingness to work with those aspects of the Conference's agenda that relate to implementing the recommendations of Windsor, including the development of a Covenant. The Conference needs of course to be a place where diversity of opinion can be expressed, and there is no intention to foreclose the discussion
- for example - of what sort of Covenant document is needed. But I believe we need to be able to take for granted a certain level of willingness to follow through the question of how we avoid the present degree of damaging and draining tension arising again. I intend to be in direct contact with those who have expressed unease about this, so as to try and clarify how deep their difficulties go with accepting or adopting the Conference's agenda.
How then should the Lambeth Conference be viewed? It is not a canonical tribunal, but neither is it merely a general consultation. It is a meeting of the chief pastors and teachers of the Communion, seeking an authoritative common voice. It is also a meeting designed to strengthen and deepen the sense of what the episcopal vocation is.
Some reactions to my original invitation have implied that meeting for prayer, mutual spiritual enrichment and development of ministry is somehow a way of avoiding difficult issues. On the contrary: I would insist that only in such a context can we usefully address divisive issues. If, as the opening section of this letter claimed, our difficulties have their root in whether or how far we can recognise the same gospel and ministry in diverse places and policies, we need to engage more not less directly with each other. This is why I have repeatedly said that an invitation to Lambeth does not constitute a certificate of orthodoxy but simply a challenge to pray seriously together and to seek a resolution that will be as widely owned as may be.
And this is also why I have said that the refusal to meet can be a refusal of the cross - and so of the resurrection. We are being asked to see our handling of conflict and potential division as part of our maturing both as pastors and as disciples. I do not think this is either an incidental matter or an evasion of more basic questions.
This means some hard reflective work in preparation for the Conference - including pursuing conversations with each other across the current divisions. There will also be a number of documents circulating which will feed into the Conference's discussions, in particular the work of the Covenant Design Group, the resources available from the dialogues with the Roman Catholic and Orthodox Churches, the Report of the Doctrinal commission and the papers coming from IASCER. Also significant will be the papers on the core elements of Anglican ministerial education and formation prepared by the group advising the Primates on Theological Education in the Anglican Communion, and the paper on the theology of inter faith relations prepared by the Network for Inter Faith Concerns (NIFCON), Generous Love.
But direct contact and open exchange of convictions will be crucial. Whatever happens, we are bound to seek for fruitful ways of carrying forward liaison with provinces whose policies cause scandal or difficulty to others. Whatever happens, certain aspects of our 'relational' communion will continue independently of the debates and decisions at the level of canons and hierarchies.
Given the differences in response to The Episcopal Church revealed in the responses of the primates, we simply cannot pretend that there is now a ready-made consensus on the future of relationships between TEC and other provinces. Much work remains to be done. But - once again, I refer back to my introductory thoughts - that work is about some basic questions of fidelity to Scripture and identity in ministry and mission,
not only about the one issue of sexuality. It is about what it means
for the Anglican Communion to behave with a consistency that allows us to face, both honestly and charitably, the deeply painful question of who we can and cannot recognise as sharing the same calling and task.
Finally, what specific recommendations emerge from these thoughts?
I propose two different but related courses of action during the months ahead. I wish to pursue some professionally facilitated conversations between the leadership of The Episcopal Church and those with whom they are most in dispute, internally and externally, to see if we can generate any better level of mutual understanding. Such meetings will not seek any predetermined outcome but will attempt to ease tensions and clarify options. They may also clarify ideas about the future pattern of liaison between TEC and other parts of the Communion. I have already identified resources and people who will assist in this.
I also intend to convene a small group of primates and others, whose task will be, in close collaboration with the primates, the Joint Standing Committee, the Covenant Design Group and the Lambeth Conference Design Group, to work on the unanswered questions arising from the inconclusive evaluation of the primates to New Orleans and to take certain issues forward to Lambeth. This will feed in to the discussions at Lambeth about Anglican identity and the Covenant process; I suggest that it will also have to consider whether in the present circumstances it is possible for provinces or individual bishops at odds with the expressed mind of the Communion to participate fully in representative Communion agencies, including ecumenical bodies. Its responsibility will be to weigh current developments in the light of the clear recommendations of Windsor and of the subsequent statements from the ACC and the Primates' Meeting; it will thus also be bound to consider the exact status of bishops ordained by one province for ministry in another. At the moment, the question of 'who speaks for the Communion?' is surrounded by much unclarity and urgently needs resolution; the people of the Communion need to be sure that they are not placed in unsustainable and damaging positions by any vagueness as to what the Communion as a whole believes and endorses, and so the issue of who represents the Communion cannot be evaded. The principles set out at the beginning of this letter will, I hope, assist in clarifying what needs to be said about this. Not everyone carrying the name of Anglican can claim to speak authentically for the identity we share as a global fellowship. I continue to hope that the discussion of the Covenant before, during and beyond Lambeth will give us a positive rallying-point.
A great deal of the language that is around in the Communion at present seems to presuppose that any change from our current deadlock is impossible, that division is unavoidable and that any such division represents so radical a difference in fundamental faith that no recognition and future co-operation can be imagined. I cannot accept these assumptions, and I do not believe that as Christians we should see them as beyond challenge, least of all as we think and pray our way through Advent.
The coming of Christ in the flesh and the declaration of the good news of his saving purpose was not a matter of human planning and ingenuity, nor was it frustrated by human resistance and sin. It was a gift whose reception was made possible by the prayerful obedience of Mary and whose effect was to create a new community of God's sons and daughters. As we look forward, what is there for us to do but pray, obey and be ready for God's re-creating work through the eternal and unchanging Saviour, Jesus Christ?
'The Spirit and the bride say, "Come"... Amen. Come Lord Jesus. The grace of the Lord Jesus be with God's people. Amen' (Rev.22.17, 20-21).
++++++++++
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London, is distributed to more than 8,000 journalists and other readers around the world.
Anglican leader asserts authority over gay clergy row
Dec 14, 2007
LONDON (AFP) — The Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams sought to assert his authority in the long-running row over homosexuality Friday, warning that Anglicanism would not be dictated to by one church.
In his pre-Christmas letter to heads of member churches around the world, Williams recognised that the US Episcopal Church's ordination of gay bishops and blessing of same-sex unions threatened to split the Church.
But he left no doubt that he would not allow a schism and made clear that those who went against the "mind" of the 77-million-strong Anglican communion could be excluded, because of the damage being caused to the Church.
There were clear boundaries in their faith, based on the Bible, Anglicanism's highest-ranking cleric said in the letter, which was made public by his office.
"Radical change in the way we read cannot be determined by one group or tradition alone," he added.
Williams said he wanted talks with Episcopalian leaders and their opponents to try to achieve "any better level of mutual understanding".
A separate meeting of leading clergy would also meet to discuss the "unanswered questions" from a New Orleans conference in September, at which the Episcopalians agreed to stop ordaining gay bishops and same-sex blessings.
"I suggest that it (the talks) will also have to consider whether in the present circumstances it is possible for provinces or individual bishops at odds with the expressed mind of the Communion to participate fully in representative Communion agencies, including ecumenical bodies," he said.
He added: "At the moment, the question of 'who speaks for the Communion?' is surrounded by much unclarity and urgently needs resolution."
Anglicanism has been divided since Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest, was elected as bishop of New Hampshire four years ago, outraging traditionalists, particularly in Africa.
Tensions were further heightened last year when the Episcopal Church elected Jefferts Schori, a woman, as its leader.
Worldwide Anglican leaders who met in Tanzania in February agreed that the Episcopal Church must unequivocally bar official blessings of same-sex unions and the consecration of openly gay bishops.
Conservative US clergy who disagree with the Episcopal Church approach to gays have recently been consecrated to African bishoprics to allow them to minister to traditionalists in the US church.
Hosted by Copyright © 2007 AFP. All rights reserved.
LONDON (AFP) — The Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams sought to assert his authority in the long-running row over homosexuality Friday, warning that Anglicanism would not be dictated to by one church.
In his pre-Christmas letter to heads of member churches around the world, Williams recognised that the US Episcopal Church's ordination of gay bishops and blessing of same-sex unions threatened to split the Church.
But he left no doubt that he would not allow a schism and made clear that those who went against the "mind" of the 77-million-strong Anglican communion could be excluded, because of the damage being caused to the Church.
There were clear boundaries in their faith, based on the Bible, Anglicanism's highest-ranking cleric said in the letter, which was made public by his office.
"Radical change in the way we read cannot be determined by one group or tradition alone," he added.
Williams said he wanted talks with Episcopalian leaders and their opponents to try to achieve "any better level of mutual understanding".
A separate meeting of leading clergy would also meet to discuss the "unanswered questions" from a New Orleans conference in September, at which the Episcopalians agreed to stop ordaining gay bishops and same-sex blessings.
"I suggest that it (the talks) will also have to consider whether in the present circumstances it is possible for provinces or individual bishops at odds with the expressed mind of the Communion to participate fully in representative Communion agencies, including ecumenical bodies," he said.
He added: "At the moment, the question of 'who speaks for the Communion?' is surrounded by much unclarity and urgently needs resolution."
Anglicanism has been divided since Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest, was elected as bishop of New Hampshire four years ago, outraging traditionalists, particularly in Africa.
Tensions were further heightened last year when the Episcopal Church elected Jefferts Schori, a woman, as its leader.
Worldwide Anglican leaders who met in Tanzania in February agreed that the Episcopal Church must unequivocally bar official blessings of same-sex unions and the consecration of openly gay bishops.
Conservative US clergy who disagree with the Episcopal Church approach to gays have recently been consecrated to African bishoprics to allow them to minister to traditionalists in the US church.
Hosted by Copyright © 2007 AFP. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)