Kendall was very quick to get out the news of Ruth Gledhill’s interview with Archbishop Peter Akinola, posting the news the evening of July 3rd. When we saw the post the following morning, we added the update indicating that there was more info available on Ruth Gledhill’s blog.

We never, however, mentioned that there were several video portions of Ruth’s interview with Archbishop Akinola available. So, for those who might have missed them, or might not have had time to watch them yet and would appreciate a reminder, here are the links:

The videos
Archbishop Akinola talks about Lambeth 2008 (6 minutes)
Dr Peter Akinola, Primate of Nigeria (4 minutes, he talks about his call to ministry)
Archbishop Peter Akinola and a threat of ritual sacrifice (2 minutes)

The articles
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article2026348.ece
http://timescolumns.typepad.com/gledhill/2007/07/peter-akinola-w.html

[thanks to Scott at Magic Statistics for the nice roundup post which reminded us about the videos]

Over at Stand Firm, Matt Kennedy has now posted two entries in a series of essays on the Articles of Religion.

On the First Article of Religion

Who is the Son?: Essays on the Articles of Religion part 2

It has become apparent recently through reading responses to the proposed Covenant Draft, that many reappraisers within TEC reject the truth and authority of the Articles of Religion. This elf is thinking especially of SE Florida’s response which stated:

The statement “led by the Holy Spirit, it [i.e. each member Church, and the Communion] has borne witness to Christian truth in its historic formularies, the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion and the 1662 Book of Common Prayer, and the Ordering of Bishops, Priests and Deacons,” is factually untrue and inappropriate for a Communion-wide Covenant. […] Moreover, the “truthfulness” of several of the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion is debatable (e.g. Articles VII, XIII, XVII, XVIII, XX, XXIX, and XXXIII). The validity of several of the Articles has been a subject of debate and doubt in The Episcopal Church since its inception.

Obviously the question of a Covenant raises the question of the Formularies. Thus this elf really welcomes and appreciates Matt’s effort to help us examine the Articles afresh. Go read his essays!

The Church of England General Synod begins tomorrow. One of the central items on the agenda is the proposed draft of the Anglican Covenant. Below is a roundup of links to various background papers and Covenant responses we’ve seen on various blogs and websites (from various sides of the spectrum) in recent days. We very much welcome input from our CoE readers with additions, corrections, clarifications. Thanks!
I. Simon Sarmiento’s Thinking Anglicans blog (reappraising side of the aisle) has been posting quite a number of background papers and responses from different leaders, groups and organizations within the CoE in recent days. You can keep up with Thinking Anglicans CoE General Synod coverage here.

In addition to posting the Fulcrum paper we posted here earlier this week, Simon has also recently posted two entries with statements from Affirming Catholicism here and here.

The first entry from Affirming Catholicism reveals that they are backtracking on support for the Covenant:

Alarm raised over draft Covenant

In the week before the General Synod of the Church of England will be asked to endorse the process to create an Anglican Covenant, Affirming Catholicism has sounded alarm over the current proposed draft. In a commentary on the Covenant design group’s proposal to give the final say on Anglican doctrine to the meeting of the leaders of national churches, the Primates, The Rev’d Dr Mark Chapman, editor of a forthcoming Affirming Catholicism publication on the Anglican Covenant, and Vice-Principal of the Ripon College, Cuddesdon, said:

The emphasis given in the current proposals to the Primates’ Meeting (composed of 38 men and one woman) downplays the importance of synods. There is something disingenuous about giving power to determine membership of the Communion and to decide what constitutes the ”˜common mind’ of the Churches to a group who at the moment refuse even to share Eucharistic communion with each other.

=========================

II. Also in the lead up to General Synod, Andrew Goddard has published various materials on Fulcrum’s site:

In The Anglican Covenant: A Briefing Paper for the Evangelical Group on General Synod, Goddard reaches this conclusion:

There are no solid reasons – either in principle or pragmatically in the current political context – for evangelicals or anyone else to object to Synod making a commitment to positive participation in the covenant process. There are many reasons – theological and political – why evangelicals and others who share our commitments to world mission, to learning from Anglicans around the globe, to safeguarding biblical faith and to facilitating harmony among Anglicans should wish the Church of England wholeheartedly to support the covenant process. Indeed, in terms of our life together as a Communion, the covenant process is – like the Windsor Report in which it originated – now ‘the only poker game in town’. If the Communion is to have a future together then the form of this will be discerned in and through this covenant process. For the Church of England to abandon that process through non-participation, or destructive participation, would therefore be for the eye to say to the hand ‘I don’t need you’ and for us as a province to embrace a vision of Anglicanism in which every one does what is right in their own eyes.

Also at Fulcrum is Goddard’s The Anglican Covenant: Background and Resources

Anglican Mainstream has also been tracking various responses to the Anglican Covenant. Last week they published a link to the Modern Churchpeople’s Union’s (MCU) rejection of the covenant draft.

All the MCU materials related to the Anglican Covenant are here. Their 2 page summary of their longer response paper is here.

Here are some of MCU’s justifications for rejecting the Draft Covenant:

Communal and theological consequences
The MCU anticipates that the centralisation and authoritarian character of the proposed polity will have a deleterious effect on the life of the Communion. In particular it is likely, over time, to discard much of the richness of the Anglican inheritance, to narrow theological and spiritual life, and to reduce both the diversity of the Communion and the positive valuation of difference. As power moves from synods to Primates it is also likely to diminish further the role of the laity.

We also anticipate that the desire for an ever more centralised and uniform Church is likely to result in greater structural inflexibility and thus to generate more division and schism.

Justification
No innovative change of this magnitude should be embarked upon unless it is clear that the proposals are both in accord with the inheritance of faith and will also (to the best of prayerful judgement) positively serve to build up all aspects of the body of the Church. The Draft does not address how its proposed changes will lead to these wider benefits.

Alternatives
The MCU recognises that there are strong reasons for looking again at the future of Anglicanism. However we believe that there is much in the storehouse of classical Anglicanism with which to build hope for a new and vibrant future. We value the existing polity of the Anglican Communion characterised by dispersed authority, responsibility and wisdom. In the absence of adequate reasons for change we would wish to continue to work within and to build on this framework.

We look towards a Communion characterised by diversity and mutual respect, accountability and hospitality. We would value and include all members of the church in decision making. We would refuse the use of power to limit the faithful life of the Church.

For all these reasons the MCU believes that the proposed Draft Anglican Covenant is not appropriate as a foundation for the future of the Anglican Church. The MCU urges its rejection.

——-

Chris Sugden of Anglican Mainstream’s personal response on the Covenant is online here. Sugden concludes:

So we must have our eyes open when discussing this matter.

The issue is not about agreement and disagreement, but conformity to the standard of teaching of the faith, expressed in a text ”“ the Covenant – that is accepted by the Communion as a family of churches rather than by individuals.

The issue is about the clarity of what the Communion is committed to which is public and accessible

It is also about what the Communion is committed to being accessible to all, not kept unwritten, vague and therefore only to be interpreted by those in power.

=================================

IV. Finally in terms of sites to follow what is happening at the CoE Synod, the Church Society (an Evangelical group) has an excellent and helpful Synod page:

July 2007 Synod Issues

Here is their issue page on the Anglican Covenant. Here’s how the Church Society frames the issue of the Anglican Covenant:

On Sunday 8 July the General Synod will be asked to endorse the following resolution.

18. ”˜That this Synod:
(a) affirm its willingness to engage positively with the unanimous recommendation of the Primates in February 2007 for a process designed to produce a covenant for the Anglican Communion;
(b) note that such a process will only be concluded when any definitive text has been duly considered through the synodical processes of the provinces of the Communion; and
(c) invite the Presidents, having consulted the House of Bishops and the Archbishops’ Council, to agree the terms of a considered response to the draft from the Covenant Design Group for submission to the Anglican Communion Office by the end of the year.’

The last item refers to the draft covenant drawn up by the Covenant Design Group and circulated to members of the General Synod.

There are three main areas of concern with this motion.

* First, the text of the draft covenant.
* Second, whether the Presidents (Archbishops) and Bishops are capable of addressing the real issues.
* Third, whether the concept of the Covenant, which originally surfaced in the Windsor Report, will really solve the problems in the Anglican Communion, or potentially make them worse.

The full agenda of the CoE Synod is published here.

While Synod is sitting, the Church Society will be posting news here.

===================================

Whew. That’s a lot of material to try and cover. This elf confesses to feeling in over our head in trying to follow this. We would very much welcome comments, clarification and links from our British readers. Thanks in advance!

============

UPDATE

The Inclusive Church blog has a commentary posted today linking the Covenant Process to the situation with extra-provincial bishops in North America. We may post this as a top level entry. But in the meantime, here’s the beginning of the blog entry:

The growing number of bishops created by African provinces for “pastoral oversight” in North America (and potentially in other provinces), the attempts to create a Covenant that defines Anglican doctrine and ethics, and the apparent intention to organise an alternative to the Lambeth Conference in London next year all point towards one thing. The strategy to destabilise the Anglican Communion is moving into another phase.

I think Kendall may have previously posted an Inclusive Church Covenant response. We’ll check and may update this with more links later.

Andy at All Too Common blog has an entry with links to a 5 part presentation by Bp. Keith Ackerman of Quincy on Anglicanism, given at St. David of Wales in Denton, Texas.

Here’s Andy’s blog entry where you can find all 5 links.

Yikes! Even though he calls them the “Gang of 13” and a “Rogues gallery of the invading army of bishops,” Mark Harris’ post with pictures of all the US Bishops for overseas’ provinces (AMia/Rwanda, CANA/Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda) is worth a look.

Harris has also started reflecting and speculating on what might occur at the September Common Cause Council of Bishops meeting.

The Get Religion post by Terry Mattingly immediately below this entry asserts that many journalists, religious leaders and others too quickly try to dismiss the differences between various faiths and claim all religions are alike. Obviously readers who follow this blog are aware of the story of the Rev. Ann Holmes Redding who claims she can be both an Episcopal priest and a Muslim. We’ve seen the desire to try and minimize the differences between religions firsthand recently.

However, rather than just wring our hands in despair at this tendency, let’s compile some resources we can use to strengthen our skills in apologetics. What resources are out there: books, websites, etc. that you have found helpful in inter-faith dialogue and witnessing to those of different faiths, or, in answering those who wonder whether there really any differences among religions?

Enquiring Elves want to know…!

For instance, if you had the chance to sit down one-on-one with Ann Holmes Redding, what might you say to her? Or what will you say (or have you said) to friends who ask you about this story during coffee hour at church? With a growing trend towards multiculturalism and pluralism, this elf is convinced we need to be better equipped to share the distinctive truths of Christianity and answer specific objections and questions raised by adherents of other faiths as to how on earth we could be so “judgmental” and “exclusive” to believe that Christianity makes absolute truth claims.

We hope our readers know that Reformed Pastor is the best blog to keep up with what’s happening among reasserting Presbyterians (if we can use Kendall’s Anglican-coined term in such a way). [Of course, this statement is merely this sometimes not-so-humble elf’s opinion! I’m trying not to presume to speak for Kendall. But you know, while the cat’s away….!]

Here’s David Fischler’s most recent Presbyterian news post. Interesting that as in ECUSA it’s some of the most-historic parishes that are leaving.

And David often provides excellent commentary on things Anglican. For instance, he’s picked up the news we posted this morning about Ed Bacon’s sermon about Vice President Cheney at All Saints Pasadena. And his comments are open. So, should you have been eager to comment on that story, now you can.

One of the things this elf has found a very encouraging development in the orthodox Anglican blogosphere is the increase of blogs and websites designed to help encourage and mobilize reasserting Episcopalians and Anglicans at a local level. Montana Anglicans is one such local-level blog. One of their contributors, Kathrine, has just posted her reflections on what it has meant for her family to join Christ Church Anglican in Butte, which is under the oversight of the Province of Uganda.

Most of this year I have looked back as well as looked forward. As July of 2006 has progressed into July 2007, I’ve caught myself thinking, “Oh, yes, last year this time we went to Spokane, or were reading Matt Kennedy’s account of the 2006 Convention on-line, or I met with 3 other members of my church over coffee at Denny’s, or had a last meeting at my old parish.” So, when I saw the announcement by our Spirit Life Committee that this Sunday we would celebrate our first meeting that really began the movement for Christ Church Anglican – Butte, it was a moment for long reflection. What has my family lost and gained this past year? Where are we going? I ponder all these things as I think about meeting with my church community this Sunday at the Costin’s.

What have we lost this past year :

When thinking of what has been lost, the first things that come to mind are the material ones. For my family, the loss of our place of worship was a sadness. My husband and I were confirmed there, our children were baptized and had first communion at our old parish. There were the endless winding stairs and the silence of the sanctuary. There was the silence of the chapel during Easter Vigil and the Parish Hall decorated for Vacation Bible School. It was an old building ”“ with great Butte history ”“ since I love history, I loved the historic nature of the place. However, with all of that, I cannot say I’ve missed it that much ”“ the building, was only a building, easily replaced and not that important to a community of Faith. No, while it was beautiful and full of memory, I do not see it with a sense of longing one might expect. So, as a real ”˜loss’ I cannot count it as such.

Yet I do miss the people of my old parish that chose to stay. I miss the community we had as believers ”“ not always agreeing but always family. The National Church, with its resolve to break the bonds of the Communion has destroyed many things, including the fellowship of our wider Anglican family here in Butte. When we Anglicans had to part in August, some resolved to stay with The Episcopal Church (TEC) and others with the wider Anglican Communion. This parting was hard on all of us. We love each other still ”“ but no longer worship together ”“ and that makes me very sad. This is the greatest loss I would count to in my Christian community this past year.

The full entry is here.

In addition to commenting on Katharine’s article, we’d like to use this post to work towards compiling a list of the various blogs and websites designed to facilitate local-networking among reasserting Anglicans. Here are a few we know of. Please chime in with others in the comments.

Albany Intercessor (Dio. Albany prayer blog)
Anglican District of Virginia (website, not a blog)
Anglican Watchman (Diocese of Newark)
Connecticut 6 (covers much more than CT, but it has all the CT news as well.)
Drell’s Descants (although Brad covers much more than local news, his is a key blog for news of and networking in Western Louisiana.)
Montana Anglicans
Northern Plains Anglicans
Northwest Anglicans Blog
South Carolina – ACN
Surrounded (Diocese of San Joaquin)
Windsor Coalition of Western Louisiana

What sites are we missing?

Yesterday we posted the news that Fr. Al Kimel, aka “The Pontificator,” has decided to give up blogging. That decision, while understandable, was made harder by the seeming loss of the more than 3 years of archives at the old Pontifications site.

Great news however. The Old Pontifications is back online!
Here’s the link to the CaNNet-hosted blog Fr. Al ran from March 2004 – May 2007: http://catholica.pontifications.net/

Pontifications was such a helpful resource to so many of us. (This elf personally is a huge fan of his citations category.) It is wonderful to know this material is all still available. Phew!! And thanks to whatever wonderful tech elves worked to make this possible!

Update: Jun 21, 05:00 EDT — Stand Firm’s newest entry on this is MUST reading, and puts the story in its larger context. Don’t miss it: Under the Radar…and Over the Cliff

The news from Seattle about the Rev. Ann Redding, an ECUSA priest in the diocese of Olympia who claims to be both a Christian and a Muslim, is generating a ton of interest around the blogosphere. (We’ll post some of those links here in a little while.)

It’s also generating a lot of comments. As of now, there are 128 comments on the Seattle Times’ story thread, meaning it’s in a tie for first-place among all T19 comment threads on the new blog.

Also of particular interest, we think, is that the story is generating NEGATIVE attention among some of our reappraising friends and bloggers. The AAC blog, for instance, is reporting that Jim Naughton, the communications director for the Diocese of Washington, and an influential reappraising blogger, is trying to encourage all other Episcopal “Communicators” (i.e. diocesan communications directors) to ignore and not publicize the story. Mind boggling.

We’ll pull together a round-up of links to this story from around the blogosphere shortly and add it to this post as an update.

UPDATE: Roundup of links we’ve seen (only a partial list, I’m sure) is below.
Original Story from Diocese of Olympia’s “Episcopal Voice”

Original Titusonenine comment thread on the Diocese of Olympia article

Original Stand Firm comment thread on Dio Olympia article

Albert Mohler’s blog: Clueless in Seattle — Can You Be Both a Christian and a Muslim?

Seattle Times: Q&A (Redding answers reader questions)

Seattle Times: Reader Feedback on Story

WorldNet Daily

Get Religion: She’s a dessert topping and a floor wax

Magpie Girl: Early Adaptor

Gospel Prism: Jesus Is the Only Way, but Allah Can Come Along Too

OK Preacher: Thumbs Down: Rev Ann Holmes Redding

David Fischler’s 3 part series at Reformed Pastor: Apostasy in the Great Northwest

Apostasy in the Great Northwest

Apostasy in the Great Northwest, Part 2

Apostasy in the Great Northwest, Part 3

From the Answering Muslims blog: Can a person be both a Christian and a Muslim?

From Ad Orientum: Apostasy… Not an Issue

Three entries from Chris Johnson at MCJ:
http://themcj.com/3186
http://themcj.com/3182
http://mcj.bloghorn.com/3164

Whitehall: “I am both Christian and Muslim”

IRD June 20 Press Release: Inclusion Run Amok: A Muslim/Episcopal Priest

Bishop Epting: Christian “and” Muslim?

Anglican Centrist (Fr Jones.com): Another One of those Crazy Episcopalians

Tobias Haller: Of Doubts and Discipline

Stand To Reason: Religion as Ice Cream

The Point (Breakpoint’s blog): The Priest Said to the Imam

Rod Dreher (Cruncy Cons): What Would we Do without TEC

The Corner (Mark Steyn): Interfaith Outreach (and Steyn was linked by Instapundit)

On the Verge: Episcopal Priest Defies Logic! (was posted at Stand Firm here)

Mark Shea (Catholic & Enjoying It): This Being Seattle…

Riddleblog: Worse than Caricature

The Reformed Evangelist: Koran-quoting “Christians”

Update 2:
A technorati search will bring up at least a dozen (or two… or three dozen) more references. Here are one or two that looked particularly noteworthy:

Christianity and Islam Merge in a Postmodern World

Pursuing Truth: “Muslim & Christian” Reverend: Jesus Is Not God

Spiritual Confusion

Balaam’s Ass: Both Christian & Muslim

Anyway, all of the links above suggest that Jim Naughton’s plan to hide the story isn’t going to work. It really is ALL over the blogosphere.

Scott at Magic Statistics blog has a good listing of links for those wanting to follow the Canadian General Synod as coverage by various orthodox bloggers.

Oh, and Scott, here’s another link for your roundup. We category-loving elves have created a Canadian General Synod category for all the Canadian Synod news here on T19.

From Magic Statistics blog:

The big event is almost here. On Tuesday morning, a week of festivities kicks off as General Synod 2007 convenes in downtown Winnipeg. Lots of important stuff will be discussed and voted upon. A new primate will be chosen on Friday 22 June, with formal installation scheduled for the following Monday.

You can follow the action via the internets. Here are a few suggested sources.

Anglican Essentials Canada is running a blog where they will endeavour to post the latest news as it happens. The blogmeister is Peter (I don’t know if he’s ever mentioned his last name online), proprietor of the fine blog The Age To Come. He’s from an orthodox Anglican parish on the south side of Calgary. AEC also has a page of general information about General Synod 2007 and another on the AEC 24/7 prayer vigil.

The mighty, mighty webelf Binky oversees the CaNN General Synod 2007 blog. At last report, Binky has been laid low by the hot humid weather out east, combined with other health problems. Prayers, please.

Also in attendance will be my friend The Rev Joseph Walker, of St Timothy’s, Edmonton. Joe’s been making fun of certain Anglican leaders and talking about going on pub crawls with Winnipeg Anglican priest Preston Parsons, so I don’t know if Joe will be a reliable news source. On the other hand, he may be able to report dirt information that no one else can, so stay tuned to his blog felix hominum.

For those who want the official line, the Anglican Church of Canada says it will provide webcast and other coverage here.

Much prayer is needed for the bloggers, for their jobs demand stamina, quick thinking, and nimble fingers. Pray also for the clergy and lay delegates, for they will need our Lord’s wisdom and guidance.

In the run-up to GS 2007, Anglican prayer blog Lent & Beyond has posted a series of prayers for Canada. This one was posted today:

O Lord,
The Anglican Church of Canada is fragmented and in need of rebuilding. Turn the hearts of its leaders to fear and obey You that they may become like a signet ring, carrying the authority of Jesus, teaching Your people to obey everything He has commanded, and making disciples of all nations.

Lord, it is our hearts’ desire that the Anglican Church of Canada be rebuilt upon the foundation of the apostles and the prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the cornerstone. All authority is given to Jesus in heaven and in earth. Rebuild this church on Jesus, dear Lord. Amen.

Haggai, Matthew 28:18-20, Ephesians 2:20

You can read Scott’s full post, including links to previous background on General Synod here.

The link is here.

We’ve added a handful of new Anglican links added to sidebar. We’ll add non-Anglican links in a few days. Feel free to keep recommendations coming. A list of the new links added follows below.

We’ve added the following links to the Anglican Blog section of the sidebar. Note that we’ve made a separate section for international Anglican bloggers and that at least for now, we are not categorizing those bloggers as reasserters or reappraisers.

US: Reasserters

Adiaphora
http://adiaphora.curzons.cc/

All Too Common:
http://all2common.classicalanglican.net/

Northwest Anglican
http://northwestanglican.blogspot.com/

Quo Vadis
http://adamantius.net/

US: Reappraisers

Fr. Gawain (“John Wilkins”)
http://stbartswp.dioceseny.org/saltyvicar

And to the list of overseas Anglican blogs:

Anglicans All, from New Zealand:
http://www.duomo.ac.nz/acnz/

Anselmic’s place (a T19 reader and Anglican vicar in the Philippines)
http://anselmic.wordpress.com/

David Ould (didn’t realize he still had a blog. Glad he wrote us)
http://www.davidould.net/

Dave Walker (Cartoon Church)

Hello and welcome

Do let us know of Anglican blogs we’ve missed. Kendall makes the final call on these and there are some blogs he is choosing not to promote. But we’d love to know about blogs we may have overlooked. So, if there is a blog you read which you don’t see, please let us know.

We’ve just added a huge slew of links (nearly 70) to Anglican / Episcopal blogs on “both sides of the aisle” or debate. We’ve used Kendall’s “labels” reasserters & reappraisers as easy shorthand since that is understood by most regulars on the blogs. Of course there are nuances. (We could make a separate category for poor Fr. Greg Jones, the Anglican Centrist, perhaps?! 😉 )

These are by no means all the blogs on either side, but they are those which we’ve linked to with some regularity, and / or which provide good sources of news or commentary and thoughtful discussion. (We also tried to focus on those which are updated frequently, although there are a few exceptions to that on the list.)

Feel free to let us know what we’ve missed, and also if you find any broken links.

You can view the entire list of links on the sidebar here in a larger format that may be easier to read and use.

We’ll be working to add links to excellent non-Anglican sites and resources in the coming days. Stay tuned.

Given this situation, we would make the following points and raise the following questions:

1. ACI has defended not only a collaborative understanding of the Instruments of Unity, but their integrity as well. The failure of the ABC publicly to state that the Dar es Salaam Communiqué is alive and well has been injurious to our common life. It has also been intimated in certain quarters that the adjudication of the Communiqué will be undertaken by a Joint Steering Committee of the Primates and the ACC. We trust that this rumor is mistaken. The Primates have worked hard and declared their intention, and their recommendations and requests are fully within their remit as an Instrument with enhanced responsibility, whose present character was requested by other Instruments of Communion. Lacking any clear understanding of the precise fate of the Communiqué has left the field open for manipulation and the multiplication of other initiatives, borne of fear, concern, power balancing and so on.

2. ACI has sought to work with the Windsor Report, the Covenant, and within the US, the Windsor Bishops. One can watch with curiosity and concern the proliferating of various groups within the conservative ranks, most recently, a Common Cause College of Bishops (as proposed), CANA, and others. The Anglican Communion Network would appear to have split into those bishops now headed toward the Common Cause College, and those who wish to continue on the Windsor path. But to the degree that the Windsor Bishops have no clarity about the future of the Primates’ Tanzanian Communiqué, and hence a comprehensive, ordered response to their Communion life in troubled times, they will collapse altogether. Indeed, one wonders what role they might be expected to exercise in the light of such unclarity.

3. It is our understanding that the recent issuing of Lambeth invitations was done in the light of organizational concerns and the timing of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s leave. The ways in which the Archbishop has reserved to himself all manner of options, discernment, and counsel regarding the ultimate character of invitations–which is his right to do–means that speculation about the character of the conference is bound to be only that. Still, it is speculation capable of generating unease and reaction that is not always constructive.

Read it all.

Read it all from Anglican Mainstream.

Take the time to give him a visit.

Readers are encouraged to read through much related material to the House of Bishops study document at this (relatively new) website–KSH.

(ENS)

Mary Frances Schjonberg

The Theology Committee of the Episcopal Church’s House of Bishops on June 1 released a study document aimed at helping the bishops respond to the requests made to them by the Primates of the Anglican Communion.

The 15-page “Communion Matters: A Study Document for the Episcopal Church” is available online. A color PDF version of the document is available here. A black-and-white PDF version is here.

Theology Committee chair and Alabama Bishop Henry Parsley told Episcopal News Service that the report is meant for bishops to use in conversation with the people of their dioceses in the three and a half months between now and the mid-September meeting of the House of Bishops in New Orleans. Rather than call for responses from individual Episcopalians, Parsley said the committee will in late August and early September gather input from bishops on the result of their conversations in their dioceses.

He said the committee hopes that Episcopalians will “read, mark, inwardly digest and then come talk” about the document with their bishop.

“Every diocese will have to do that in their own way,” he said. “We didn’t want it to be an individual thing. We wanted it to be a diocesan, corporate process overseen by the bishop.”

Parsley said the corporate nature of the conversations is important, given the nature of the requests made by the Primates at the end of their February gathering in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania via a communiqué.

“The Anglican tradition is always that bishops are in the midst of the people of God and, when thinking about important matters, need to take counsel with the deacons, priests and laypersons in order to be well-informed and to listen to the Church,” he said. “We felt that since the communiqué addresses the request to the House of Bishops in response to resolutions of General Convention, we couldn’t just act unilaterally. We needed to take counsel with the people of the Church in responding to the communiqué.”

He added that bishops need to exercise their “unique role as chief pastors and teachers … but we exercise it best when we are in conversation with — in counsel with — the Church in our dioceses.”

“Communion Matters” begins with a preface in which the committee writes that it offers the document “as a contribution to the discernment of this church as we seek the mind of Christ and endeavor to be faithful to our calling as members of the Anglican family in the world.”

It includes three chapters of information, a set of questions for reflection and resources for more background.

The preface says that the guide aims to be a summary, not an exhaustive history.

“Constraints of space and concerns about maintaining easy readability prevent us from recounting all the important details of the conversation taking place in our church and Communion,” the committee writes. “We hope that we have faithfully described the essentials.”

Parsley reiterated the preface’s hope. “We wanted this to be readable, brief and accessible to all of our people,” he said. “In that way, it’s a little simpler than some people might want, but we want it to be read and stimulate conversation.”

The chapter on “Relationships within the Anglican Communion” says that the Communion matters because “in this fellowship all give and receive many gifts,” “it enables us to be disciples in a global context,” “we have sought it for many years,” and “the maintenance of mutuality and trust with the Communion effects future mission opportunities.”

The next chapter, titled “Our Special Charism as Anglican Christians,” says that Anglicans have always valued the via media — “the middle way between polarities” — as a “faithful theological method.”

The chapter describes the via media as an approach that “acknowledges paradox and believes even apparent opposites may be reconciled or transcended.”

“Moreover, many within our church believe this is a good thing and a major charism (gift),” the chapter says. “In our own day, we especially need to preserve this special Anglican charism, not only for our own Communion but for all Christians.”

The third chapter sets the Dar es Salaam communiqué in the context of the Communion’s on-going debate about human sexuality, noting that “because the Communion has no central constitution and no form of synod or council beyond that of each province, issues of authority and conciliarity can present acute challenges for the maintenance of communion.”

The chapter references the 1998 Lambeth Conference debate and the previous objections by the Primates Meeting, traces the Windsor Report process, outlines the Episcopal Church’s response to the Report, summarizes how the Primates Meeting came to be and summarizes the pertinent parts of the communiqué and the House of Bishops’ statements about it to date.

The House of Bishops has already responded to a portion of the communiqué. In three “Mind of the House” resolutions passed during their March meeting, the bishops said, in part, that the Primates’ proposed “pastoral scheme” for dealing with disaffected Episcopal Church dioceses “would be injurious to The Episcopal Church.” The bishops urged that the Executive Council “decline to participate in it.”

The communiqué gave the bishops of the Episcopal Church until September 30 to “make an unequivocal common covenant that the bishops will not authorize any Rite of Blessing for same-sex unions in their dioceses or through General Convention” and “confirm that the passing of Resolution B033 of the 75th General Convention means that a candidate for episcopal orders living in a same-sex union shall not receive the necessary consent; unless some new consensus on these matters emerges across the Communion.”

The third chapter states that these two requests “raise significant issues about the role of the primates in the Anglican Communion, Anglican ecclesiology, and the role of the House of Bishops in the Episcopal Church,” including:

“Are such requests appropriately addressed by the bishops as chief pastors and teachers, or more representatively by the General Convention?”
“How best may theological and mission development take place in churches which are ”˜autonomous in communion’?” and
“How can the Communion appropriately consult about important matters such as these without a centralization of authority that is unknown to Anglicanism?”
The three chapters are followed by a series of eight questions for reflection with some background on each question, and then a page of online resources for more background. When viewed on a computer in its PDF form, the clickable links on the resources page send readers to electronic versions of the documents.

“As bishops we are charged in ordination to guard the faith and unity of the Church. Being charged with this task does not mean it falls to us alone,” the document concludes. “This study document is written to allow us to hear and receive the response of the whole of this province so that together we might respond faithfully as a constituent member of this great Communion.”

In addition to Parsley, the members of the Theology Committee are David Alvarez of Puerto Rico; Joe Burnett of Nebraska; Robert W. Ihloff, recently retired of Maryland; Carolyn T. Irish of Utah; Paul V. Marshall of Bethlehem; Steven A. Miller of Milwaukee and Jeffrey Steenson of Rio Grande.

The Rev. Dr. Ian Douglas, an Executive Council member and professor at Episcopal Divinity School, is the committee’s consulting theologian. Douglas also worked as a liaison between the Theology Committee and a subcommittee of the Executive Council’s International Concerns Committee (INC), which released a six-page study guide to the draft version of the proposed Anglican Covenant.

The covenant guide calls for congregations and individuals to submit responses by June 4. Responses will be used in the creation of a response by the Executive Council at its October meeting in Detroit, Michigan.

Prior to that, at the Council’s June meeting in Parsippany, New Jersey, INC will propose that Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori and House of Deputies President Bonnie Anderson appoint a Covenant Review Group to follow the covenant-development process, enable comments from the wider Episcopal Church and provide comments on behalf of the church to the Communion’s Covenant Design Group.

Updated with some great links re: Canada’s upcoming General Synod (June 19-25)
The guy who taught many of us Anglican bloggers (and upstart elves) all we know about blogging is back online following the recent death of his mother, Susan Jane. Good to have you back, Binks! Check out his latest Anglican Carnival post. You may THINK you’ve seen all the Anglican news and links on other blogs, but we guarantee that Binks will have some you missed! 😉

Oh, and Binks sharpened up the commentary pen too: he’s got lots to say about recent Anglican goings-on in Canada.

UPDATE: well, when Binky’s on a roll, he’s on a roll…! All of the above, and now a big round up of all the Pre-General Synod News from Canada

The other site to go to for Canadian General Synod news (especially live during Synod) is here, the Anglican Essentials Synod Live blog site.

And rounding up the links re: Canada’s General Synod (June 19 – 25): the Lent & Beyond team have been posting daily prayers for Canada of late.

If you still have trouble registering or logging in after reading this, feel free to write the elves. Please do NOT write Kendall or Greg. Our address: T19elves@yahoo.com

UPDATE 2: Note for AOL users, Greg gives some tips especially for you all here. But we know many are still having trouble. If you write us elves we can register you.
Let’s take a look at a few things you can do to help complete your registration:
1. Remember that registration requires you to sign up, and confirm your registration with an email that is sent to you by our system.

When you sign up, be sure and double-check the email address you provide. If you provide an incorrect email address, your confirmation message will never reach you.

2. Be sure and check your “junk” mailbox, or your spam filter.

The confirmation emails our system sends out occasionally get stuck in your junk folder or your spam filter. If your confirmation message doesn’t show up within a few minutes of signing up, check these places.

3. If you forget your password, please try the system’s “Forgot password?” link first. It’s found on the login screen, and you can also click here. A message will be sent to you that will enable you to recover your password. Again, check your spam filter or junk folder if you use this option.

4. Remember that if you have a Stand Firm account, you can use it at TitusOneNine, and vice-versa. There is no need to create separate accounts.

—-
Update from the elves: We went through the “pending members” list and tried to send e-mails to about 10 folks whose names we recognized as past T19 commenters who appeared to be stuck in “limbo.” In 4 cases, it appears the e-mail address you’ve left is invalid. In two cases it may just be a typo (gmaill (two ls) instead of gmail; or mwn.com instead of msn.com) We’re doing whatever we think of to help folks register, but you MUST have a valid e-mail address. Again, if you need help of any sort re: registration or login, give us a shout: T19elves@yahoo.com

Listen to it all and make sure to note the comment of Chris Seitz below the audio link.

So what happened? How did it all fall apart? Clearly, Gene Robinson was a watershed, and with it went a lot of other matters building up and associated, often in profound and logical ways, with the seemingly radical change in sexual discipline that General Convention 2003 represented. But “doctrine” alone doesn’t explain the tidal shift in relationships.

The central problem, I believe ”“ one noted by both Windsor and Primates — is the loss of “trust”: trust among Anglican churches was broken, and by and large, the initiative for this breaking (although not wholly) has come from one direction. In sum, TEC and her leaders broke trust with the Communion, and Global South leaders and conservatives within and outside TEC lost “trust” in the American church and her leaders. This is related to TEC’s changed doctrine and discipline; but, as I said, only partly. One can navigate doctrinal difference and dispute, even of the most essential kind, if there is a trusted means of doing so. The real issue has been the sense that TEC is no longer what she was, that her word is not worth anything, that she cannot keep promises, that she is no longer trustworthy and therefore she that cannot be dealt with consistently and openly in terms of discussions and common counsel. The doctrinal and disciplinary dispute of the present is “irreconcilable” not only because the divergences at issue are vast, but because there is no commonly coherent means of resolving them. The difference between 1970’s and the 2000’s is that in 1970, for all the suspicions and even dislike and outright worries about its liberalism, ECUSA was still “trusted”; now she is not.

And why was ECUSA trusted then, and TEC is no longer trusted now? In brief, because TEC has lost her bearings within a coherent history others once recognized; because she no longer evidences a consistent character others once encountered; and because she is no longer engaged in a committed Christian discussion of critical matters in a Christian way with her Anglican sisters and brothers she once pursued. This claim is now worth unpacking.

One major debate today ”“ and it has emerged only now, but necessarily and essentially ”“ is over the identity of the Episcopal Church’s history, and thereby the church’s historical character. The debate has been attached to a new argument that has been promoted of late by, e.g. the House of Bishops, and that has also been taken up by the House’s allies and apologists. The argument is that TEC has an exceptional character vis a vis the rest of the Communion: she is a “democratic” church. And this “democratic” character means that the church is governed by a comprehensive set of representatives well-beyond the episcopal order, committed to “liberative praxis”, to breaking the shackles of colonialist imperialism, to upholding the needs and aspirations of oppressed and marginalized peoples, and to working to fulfill the inclusivist project (or “mission”) of God to bring all people, whatever their condition and social status, into a reconciled and egalitarian participation within the Church’s authoritative order. This articulated self-identity has been used to justify the direction taken by TEC’s General Convention on matters of sexual morals and discipline (not to mention other elements like “open communion”), even when this direction has gone counter to previously stated hopes, claims and promises.

Now, this newly argued Episcopalian identity may indeed be a hope for some or even for many. But it in no way represents the historical character of TEC in a purely factual or sociologically tethered fashion. The new progressive liberative identity is a constructed or invented history that is being foisted on the church by its proponents through the mechanisms of political rhetoric and strategic procedure. But it does not reflect what TEC has in fact been, or even is today (leaving aside the question of whether it is faithful to the Gospel of the Scriptures itself, which, in many crucial respects, I believe it is not).

Read it all.

From here:

Some Anglicans, especially critics of the authority of the Primates Meeting as an Instrument of Unity/Communion, have tended to see the four Instruments of Communion as competitors. There is no evidence that this view is held by the Archbishop of Canterbury, who is himself an Instrument, and who presides at the Lambeth Conference, the Primates Meeting and the Anglican Consultative Council. Clearly he views the Instruments as mutually encouraging, even as they have a specific and discrete identity and remit.

It has been the consistent position of ACI, going back to ”˜To Mend the Net,’ that the specific authority given to the Archbishop of Canterbury is that of gathering and inviting. And the place where that authority is his alone is the Lambeth Conference invitations.

But there is no evidence whatsoever that in making invitations for the 2008 Conference, +Canterbury has set aside or ignored the authority of the other Instruments.

It needs also to be underscored that the response of the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church to the requests of the most recent Primates Meeting says nothing probative in any way about the vitality and purchase of these requests. The means for providing regularization of various emergency extra-territorial ”˜missionary’ initiatives is the Pastoral Council Scheme and the Primatial Vicar. It is not the job of the Archbishop of Canterbury unilaterally to declare the regularization of these initiatives by inviting the bishops acting in such a status to the Lambeth Conference. That would be to reject the work of the Primates Meeting still alive and waiting final prosecution ”“ especially in the light of how the House of Bishops of the Episcopal Church finally responds as of 30 September 2007.

It is tempting to wish to see individual initiatives, individual bishops, and individual Instruments as more definitive than others, and this instinct is alive on both ends of the Communion spectrum. What we are in fact seeing is the unfolding of a specific Anglican Communion polity, now come of age, and its hallmark is the mutual cooperation of four Instruments of Unity. The timing is such that the recent statement of the Archbishop of Canterbury is being given a specific kind of enhancement, but that may be misleading. In no way does his action in signaling an intention about present and future invitations stand over against the work of the other Instruments of Communion, and we can be sure he and his counselors have had this foremost in their minds.

We also wish to note the language of his statement””and this has not been properly emphasized due to concerns about CANA or New Hampshire””which points to the assumption that those Bishops attending do so with a commitment to the Instruments of Communion, and the statements and actions emanating from them. So far as we are concerned, the best indication of the mind of the Instruments in this season of disarray and challenge is what the Dar communiqué called the Camp Allen Principles: because these reaffirm Lambeth 1.10, Dromantine, The Windsor Report, and the serial statements and actions of all four Instruments.

It is our view that the efficient working of the Lambeth Conference, which is the desire of the Archbishop of Canterbury, needs an assumed commitment to these principles, if the meeting is not to be distracted and politicized according to this or that discrete concern or cause. We hope that the language used by the Archbishop of Canterbury at this juncture will receive specific commentary and elaboration. We believe we hear him rightly and trust that this perspective represents what is best for the healthy working of the Anglican Communion and the mission of Jesus Christ in this part of his Body the Church.

Check it out.