There are a number of reports of what went on and what its impact is. A few are below, but if readers can shed further light please let us know and add any links in the comments below.
ACC declines to go along with ‘consequences’ – ENS/Anglican Journal Canada

‘..the council declined to endorse or take any action similar to the primates’ call in January for three years of so-called “consequences” for the Episcopal Church. The primates’ call was in response to the 78th General Convention’s decision to change canonical language that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman (Resolution A036) and authorize two new marriage rites with language allowing them to be used by same-sex or opposite-sex couples (Resolution A054).’

ACC Churns Out Resolutions – The Living Church

‘Resolution C34, proposed by delegates from South Sudan, called upon the ACC to receive the report of the January Primates’ Meeting, including consequences for the Episcopal Church detailed by the primates’ communiqué. It affirmed “the commitment of the Primates of the Anglican Communion to walk together; and commits to continue to seek appropriate ways for the provinces of the Anglican Communion to walk together with each other and with the Primates and other Instruments of Communion.” As part of the consent agenda, the resolution was received without objection and passed without amendment.

A second resolution welcoming the full text of the primates’ communiqué was proposed by delegates from Ireland and Australia. It was initially set aside for further discussion, but was later withdrawn by the proposers. The Archbishop of Canterbury told the delegates that he was pleased with this action, saying that Resolution C34 “covers issues we need to cover,” establishing sufficient concurrence between the ACC and the Primates’ Meeting.

“The consequences [for the Episcopal Church] stand,” Archbishop Justin Welby said in a news conference Monday afternoon.’

ACC-16: Electric Boogaloo – Tom Ferguson, Crusty Old Dean

‘The ACC formally received the report from the Primates’ Meeting in a resolution proposed by Bishop Deng of Sudan. Further, declined to pass a resolution which would have received and welcomed the entire text of the Primates. Some people have been spinning the first action: by “receiving” the Report, is it acknowledging and approving of that report? Others have focused on the second action: Or, by declining to receive the entire text, is that somehow a repudiation? In the end, it did what it was supposed to do: one instrument of communion received a report from another. By failing to receive the entire report, this can clearly be seen as being reluctant to take any further steps, but Crusty is reluctant to see it as some kind of grand repudiation of the Primates, at least at this stage.’

Resolution 16.23: Walking Together

The Anglican Consultative Council

1.receives the formal report of the Archbishop of Canterbury to ACC-16 on the Primates’ Gathering and Meeting of January 2016; and
2.affirms the commitment of the Primates of the Anglican Communion to walk together; and
3.commits to continue to seek appropriate ways for the provinces of the Anglican Communion to walk together with each other and with the Primates and other Instruments of Communion.

Read them all and the draft set of resolutions together with proposers, seconders and including resolutions not passed may be seen here

Update: The statement whose authenticity has been denied posted online on the Anglican Church of Kenya website briefly before being removed is available to be read below thanks to a sharp-eyed correspondent

From Anglican Ink: Fraud and Forgery Allegations Raised at ACC 16 – George Conger
Kenya’s participation in this week’s ACC meeting in Lusaka was procured by fraud, leaders of the East African church report. A statement under the signature of the Archbishop of Kenya, the Most Rev. Eliud Wabukala, appeared on the website of the Anglican Church of Kenya on 6 April 2016, announcing the church had reversed its stance on the boycott of the ACC meeting in Lusaka. However, within hours of its publication, the letter was taken down and a new statement was posted from the archbishop lamenting the interference of the Anglican Consultative Council in the Kenyan church.

The first letter was a forgery with the archbishop’s digital signature pasted on the letter. Sources in the Kenyan church tell AI the archbishop suspects the forgery was prepared under the direction of the Bishop of Nairobi, the Rt. Rev. Joel Waweru, who is leading the Kenyan delegation to Lusaka. Emails to the Nairobi bishop, who is in transit to Lusaka, have not been answered as of our going to print.

The Kenyan clergy and lay delegates to Lusaka, Lay Canon Peter Gachuhi, Diocesan Chancellor of All Saints Cathedral Diocese and the Ven Canon Philip Obwogi, Vicar General of the Diocese of Nakuru, are understood to have been informed by Bishop Waweru that Archbishop Wabukala had changed his mind, and agreed to go to Lusaka under these circumstances. “They are known as good men and I do not believe they would knowingly defy the Primate,” a source in the ACK said. It is not known if they will now stay for the meeting after learning of the forgery.

A frequent participant in the Canadian-sponsored Anglican Bishops in Dialogue program, Bishop Waweru has defied his primate in the past over his collaboration with the Episcopal Church and Anglican Church of Canada in defiance to the Kenyan bishops’ ban on relations with the North American provinces.

The situation is further complicated by Bishop Waweru’s bid to replace Archbishop Wabukala as primate of the ACK at the provincial elections on 20 May 2016. Civil and ecclesiastical elections in Kenya are often marked by appeals to tribal loyalty. A source who asked not to be named as he was not authorized to speak on behalf of his fellow bishops said he doubted any immediate disciplinary action would be taken as it would inflame tensions in the run up to the election of a new archbishop.

In 2013 elections for primate of the Anglican Church of Tanzania were marked by bribery allegations, with supporters of ousted Archbishop Valentino Mokiwa claiming the Episcopal Church of the USA purchased the votes of some delegates to ensure the election of a candidate favorable to the US church. The Tanzanian church’s general secretary denied the allegations, but other church leaders confirmed to AI the veracity of the claims.

Read it all

Statement on the ACC 16 Lusaka by The Elves

The following letter from Bishop Anis is released with his permission–KSH. [pdf]

My dear brother archbishops,

Greetings in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. I am writing to let you know that I have decided not to attend the ACC-16 in Lusaka. My decision has come after a long period of prayer and conversations. As many of you know, it is not easy for me to withdraw from meetings, but this time I felt that if I were to attend, I would be betraying my conscience, my people, and the Primates who worked hard last January to reach a temporary solution in order to keep walking together until such time as we can reach a permanent solution.

I thought that the decision of the Primates’ Meeting in January would be followed through and TEC would not be represented in the Standing Committee of the Anglican Communion but sadly this is not the case.
I don’t mind the participation of TEC in the General Meeting of the ACC, but the decision of the Primates was very clear that they should not be nominated or elected in internal standing committees.

Although I was disturbed by the statements made by the chairman of the ACC while he was in the USA, I had still intended to attend the meeting. However, as it became clear that the decision of the Primates’ Meeting about the participation of TEC in the Standing Committee would be disregarded, it was then that I decided not to attend.

I see that there is a lot of confusion about the role of the Primates’ Meeting and the ACC. Neither have jurisdiction within provinces, but both have roles in regulating the relationship between provinces. The Primates’ Meeting has “enhanced responsibility in offering guidance on doctrinal, moral and pastoral matters” (Lambeth 1988) and to make “intervention in cases of exceptional emergency which are incapable of internal resolution within provinces, and giving guidelines on the limits of Anglican diversity” (Lambeth 1998). Some think that because the ACC is the most representative of the instruments (including bishops, clergy, and laity), it is more authoritative. This is not true. It’s very name, “consultative”, reminds us that it is not an “Anglican Synod” but merely an advisory group. The Instruments of Unity, in order to have good relationships, need to support each others’ decisions in those areas of responsibility given to them by Lambeth Councils.

I will be praying for the members of the ACC-16 so that they may affirm and respect the decisions of the Primates’ Meeting. If this happens, it will bring hope back and we will be able to think of the future together.

(signed)

The Most Rev. Dr. Mouneer Hanna Anis
Archbishop of Episcopal / Anglican Diocese of Egypt with North Africa and the Horn of Africa

Read it all [pdf]

ACC-16 Decision on Letterhead.pdf by The Elves

Despite past history the GAFCON Primates decided to attend the January meeting. They demonstrated a love for the unity of the Communion but on a basis of common faith. They have not yet given up on the Communion. But ACC’s actions so far confirm their suspicions that they are being misled and manipulated and even an orthodox Archbishop of Canterbury cannot stop it.

How can ACC not accept the Primates’ decision? Why is it arrogating such roles to itself? Nigeria, Kenya and Uganda are right in drawing a firm line on the sand. Their approach is principled, not managerial or political.

Politically, TEC holds powerful cards ”“ money, power, access, communication, control of the media and leverage. But did TEC accept the Primates decision in January in the light of what they look on as a replay in Lusaka?

Read it all.

..Are autonomy and interdependence, alone and apart from a common standard of faith in Scripture, reasons for us to walk together? The Archbishop of Canterbury pleads for this elsewhere in the letter “within the acceptable limits of diversity.” But of course this merely begs the question. If TEC and the Chair of ACC-16 can disregard Scripture and the collegial mind of the Communion with impunity, what meaning can there possibly be to Canterbury’s plea for the primates to work together within “the acceptable limits of diversity.”?

The Primates of Nigeria, Uganda and Kenya rightly discern that the Welby’s notion of “the limits of Anglican diversity” is merely a moving target. His failure to challenge publicly the repudiation of Primates as principal bishops entrusted with the faith and order of the Church speaks volumes on the eve of ACC-16.

And so, as Primates of GAFCON and the majority Global South reflect on the rapid unraveling of their January 11-16 gathering, their voice and vote, their decisions and a new plea from the ABC on the eve of ACC-16, one has to wonder if that famous dictum has crossed their minds:

“Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me”

Read it all

Posted on Anglican Ink [pdf]

“an important test of our faithfulness to the Scriptural standard must therefore be upholding historic Anglican doctrine and teaching on marriage and sexuality as affirmed by the whole of the Lambeth 1998 Resolution I.10, including ”˜rejecting homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture’ and the Conference’s rejection of the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions and the ordination of those involved in such unions.

TEC, the Anglican Church of Canada, and a number of other provinces which are following their example, have rejected these standards yet we are expected to walk together with them. If they can disregard Scripture and the collegial mind of the Communion with impunity, I wonder what meaning there can be to what you refer to as ”˜the acceptable limits of diversity’?

In these circumstances, some of us have been forced to the conclusion that the best way to make our voices heard is by absence rather than presence. We have no wish to interfere in the juridical authority of other provinces, but we do have a responsibility to ensure that our recognition of one another in the Anglican family is based on a common submission to the authority of God’s Word, not simply a shared history.”
Full text follows below and see also statements of non attendance by the Church of Nigeria, the Church of Uganda, the Church of Rwanda and Archbishop Mouneer Anis

——————————————————————————-
The Most Reverend and Right Honourable Justin Welby
Archbishop of Canterbury
Lambeth Palace
London SE1 7JU

18th March 2016

Your Grace,

Greetings in the precious name of our Lord Jesus!

Thank you for your letter of 16th March and your good wishes. We do indeed rejoice in the Saviour who by his death has overcome death and it is my prayer that we may all count ourselves dead to sin and alive to God in the Risen Christ.

I note the urgency of your appeal for representation at the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) in Lusaka next month and, as one of those Primates who have decided that I cannot authorise attendance, I feel I must respond.

It was my hope that our decision taken in Canterbury to limit the participation of the Episcopal Church of the United States (TEC) would be the first step in recovering godly order and that ”˜enhanced responsibility’ of the Primates Meeting, as affirmed in Lambeth 1998 Resolution III.6, to which you refer.

But now there has been a strong rejection of our moral authority by the Chairman of the ACC, Bishop Tengatenga, who has said that the ”˜primates think they are more important than anyone else’ and has affirmed in clear terms that TEC will participate fully and without restriction.

This is a symptom of the problem set out so clearly by Archbishop Okoh in his statement of 15th March explaining why Nigeria also would not be participating in the Lusaka meeting. The Communion ”˜Instruments’ are not being used so much as instruments of unity but as instruments to cajole orthodox Global South provinces of the Communion into acquiescence with the secular sexual culture which has made such inroads into the Anglican Churches of the West.

You rightly refer to the need for repentance and confession, which was such a feature of the East African Revival, but there does not seem to be any recognition that homosexual activity is a matter for repentance by those speaking on behalf of the London based Anglican Communion authorities. Instead there are only calls to repent of ”˜homophobia’, a term which is seriously compromised by the way homosexual activists have used it to include any opposition to their agenda.

This inability to recognise that the acceptance of homosexual practice calls for repentance is now entrenched by the ”˜Continuing Indaba’ programme being promoted by the Anglican Communion Office. Because it is based on the assumption that the Bible’s teaching on homosexuality and marriage is not clear, despite two thousand years of Christian teaching and tradition that it is, it becomes impossible to talk about repentance.

Instead we have to focus on processes which respect different interpretations and cultural sensibilities. I can only assume it is for this reason that you were so anxious to speak of our resolution agreed in Canterbury in terms of consequences rather than discipline or sanction.
If we are truly to walk together, we must walk in the light of God’s Word. May I urge that we return to the clear standard of Scripture as affirmed by Lambeth 1998 Resolution III.5 which ”˜in agreement with the Lambeth Quadrilateral, and in solidarity with the Lambeth Conference of 1888’ affirmed that the ”˜Holy Scriptures contain ‘all things necessary to salvation’ and are for us the ‘rule and ultimate standard’ of faith and practice’.

In a time of widespread confusion on issues of sexuality and gender, an important test of our faithfulness to the Scriptural standard must therefore be upholding historic Anglican doctrine and teaching on marriage and sexuality as affirmed by the whole of the Lambeth 1998 Resolution I.10, including ”˜rejecting homosexual practice as incompatible with Scripture’ and the Conference’s rejection of the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions and the ordination of those involved in such unions.

TEC, the Anglican Church of Canada, and a number of other provinces which are following their example, have rejected these standards yet we are expected to walk together with them. If they can disregard Scripture and the collegial mind of the Communion with impunity, I wonder what meaning there can be to what you refer to as ”˜the acceptable limits of diversity’?

In these circumstances, some of us have been forced to the conclusion that the best way to make our voices heard is by absence rather than presence. We have no wish to interfere in the juridical authority of other provinces, but we do have a responsibility to ensure that our recognition of one another in the Anglican family is based on a common submission to the authority of God’s Word, not simply a shared history.

I am grieved to be writing to you in such terms, but this letter comes with my best wishes for a blessed Holy Week and Easter and let me assure you of my continued prayers and affection, believing that as we are steadfast in the work of the Risen Lord, our labour will not be in vain.

+Eliud Wabukala

The Most Reverend Dr Eliud Wabukala,
Archbishop of Kenya and Bishop, All Saints Cathedral Diocese, Nairobi.

CC The Primates of the Anglican Communion

Read it all

Posted on Anglican Ink [pdf]
16 March 2016

Your Graces, dear brothers in Christ

As we enter Passiontide, with less than two weeks until Easter, I wanted to write to wish you all a celebration of Holy Week and the day of Resurrection that is all-consuming in its joy and power. Uniquely, we proclaim a saviour who has overcome death, having lived fully through every experience and temptation of life, and having himself died.

Our great enemy, who tells us that all things end in pointlessness, is defeated by the empty tomb, and with all Christians around the world, we should celebrate without limit.

On Easter day, at Canterbury Cathedral, full of the memories of our Meeting in January, I shall be praying for you and rejoicing in your fellowship in the proclamation of the good news of Jesus Christ.

Since that Meeting, there have been numerous developments. First, we should be aware of the great rejoicing and thankfulness that the outcome of the Meeting gave to many Christians around the world. We have all received numerous comments of thankfulness that the Anglican Communion, deeply divided in many areas, managed in the part of its leadership which is the Primates’ Meeting, to vote unanimously, amongst those present, to walk together. As you will remember, at that crucial moment, we undertook to seek personally to ensure that what we voted, was put into practise.

Since that time, as I undertook to you, I have followed through by changing the representation of those bodies where I have the ability to make a decision, so as to put into effect the agreement we reached amongst ourselves.

We must, of course, remember that as in the early Church, as we read in the Acts of the Apostles, there is never an end to these issues. So long as the Church is made up of human beings, it will be made up of sinners. In consequence, we will take decisions and say things that are inappropriate or wrong. The strength of the East African revival was not that it produced sinless people but that it taught sinners to walk in the light. That meant that they were to confess their sins, repent and acknowledge them.

The issues which have divided us over so many years still exist, and will resurface again at the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) in Lusaka. We are called as Primates to work closely with the ACC, as they are called to work with us. For example, Resolution 52 of the Lambeth Conference 1988 said: “This Conference requests the Primates’ Meeting and the Anglican Consultative Council to give urgent attention to implementing the hope expressed at Lambeth 1978 (and as confirmed by recent provincial responses) that both bodies would work in the very closest contact.”

At Lambeth 1998, Resolution III point 6, as well as affirming “the enhanced responsibility here in offering guidance on doctrinal, moral and pastoral matters” of the Primates’ Meeting, also said that the responsibility of the Primates’ Meeting “should be exercised in sensitive consultation with the relevant provinces and with the ACC or in cases of emergency the Executive of the ACC, and that while not interfering with the juridical authority of the provinces, the exercise of these responsibilities by the Primates’ Meeting should carry moral authority calling for ready acceptance through the Communion”.

There are numerous other examples indicating that we should work closely together.

In all cases, back as far as 1857, it is well recognised that there is no single body within the Anglican Communion that has juridical authority over individual provinces. We are autonomous but interdependent.

For these reasons, I hope and pray that every province that is able will be present in Lusaka. The decisions we took in January can only have effect if they gain general ownership amongst the Communion, taking in laity, priests and bishops. Even if a province is not able to be present, I urge you to pray fervently for the outcome of the ACC. We will need to elect a new Chairman, and such a position should be someone, who, speaking the truth in love, seeks to unite the Communion in truth-filled service to Jesus Christ, and not to uphold any particular group at the expense of the Common Good, so long as we are within acceptable limits of diversity.

The ACC is the only body in which laity and clergy, other than bishops, are represented, and is thus of a special importance. It will discuss many matters, including those that we raised in January at Canterbury. These will include our evangelism and witness, the impact of climate change, our response to the great global refugee crisis, our support for those caught in conflict, and above all persecution.

Only those who are present will be able to make their voice heard and their votes effective. I therefore urge you to make every effort to join us in Lusaka, so that, in the presence of the risen Christ, we may continue our often painful, but ever hopeful journey in his service.

This brings my love, respect and commitment to service in the name of Christ our peace, Christ our saviour and Christ our truth.

+ Justin Cantaur

The Most Reverend and Right Honourable Justin Welby
Archbishop of Canterbury

Read it all

The Episcopal Church “cannot be kicked out of the Anglican Communion and will never be kicked out of the Anglican Communion,” the chairman of the Anglican Consultative Council told a seminary audience last week.

In a public conversation with the dean of the School of Theology of the University of the South held on 11 Feb 2016, the Rt. Rev. James Tengatenga said the legal and ecclesial structures of the Anglican Communion did not permit the primates, or any other “instrument of communion”, to discipline a member church.

Dr. Tengatenga said that in his view, the impression that the primates could take decisive action arose from a confusion of roles. In most provinces, bishops were tasked with preserving the doctrine and teaching of the church. When bishops gathered in mass in gatherings such as the Lambeth Conference, or when the leaders of provinces met at the primates meeting, the participants were often under the impression that their deliberations had the same standing as they would have in their home churches.

Read it all.

Bishop Curry was asked directly whether he would contest these “consequences” at the next meeting of the ACC in April. On Wednesday, he would say only: “The ACC is the only formal constitutional body of the Anglican Communion and it will decide what it will do. Our representatives from the Episcopal Church look forward to being there.”

Earlier this week, a prominent canon lawyer, Professor Norman Doe, state that the Primates’ ruling was not binding…. He described it as “completely unacceptable interference with the autonomy of each of these bodies as they transact their own business”.

The ACC is due to meet in Zambia in April. Two US members, the Bishop of Connecticut, the Rt Revd Ian Douglas, and the Revd Gay Clark Jennings, have confirmed that they will attend. Bishop Douglas is also a member of the ACC’s standing committee, and would therefore have to stand down if the ACC chooses to comply with the Primates’ wishes.

In the past, members of the ACC have criticised the Primates for overstepping their remit. In 2006, after the Primates asked the US Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada to voluntarily withdraw their representatives from the ACC, the organisation’s then chairman, the Rt Revd John Paterson, criticised the move as “at least slightly premature, if not coercive and somewhat punitive”….

Read it all.

Read it all.

The Church of Nigeria has distanced itself from the appointment of the Rt. Rev. Josiah Idowu-Fearon as general secretary of the Anglican Consultative Council. While it wishes him well in his new post, a letter endorsed by the Church’s registrar, general secretary and episcopal secretary states the former Bishop of Kaduna does not speak for the Nigerian church, nor are his views in accord with the formal teaching of the largest province of the Anglican Communion.

On 2 April 2015 ACC chairman the Rt. Rev. James Tengatenga announced Dr. Idowu-Fearon, Bishop of Kaduna in Northwestern Nigeria, had been appointed to the London-based post in succession to the Rt. Rev. Kenneth Kearon, who had been elected Bishop of Limerick.

Read it all
————————————-
Anglican Unscripted 185

Anglicans and Episcopalians from Communion provinces worldwide are being invited to share their thoughts on the ministry priorities and qualities of the next Secretary General of the Anglican Communion.

Read it all.

The chairman of the Anglican Consultative Council, the Rt. Rev. James Tengatenga has resigned as Bishop of Southern Malawi to accept a lectureship at Dartmouth College in the United States.

On 10 July the Nyasa Times reported Dr. Tengatenga, the senior bishop of the Province of Central Africa, would take up a university post in the United States and will relinquish his leadership of several Malawian civil society groups including the National AIDS Commission, Malawi Council of Churches and the Public Affairs Council (PAC).

Read it all.

The change to the fourth Mark of Mission reflects the importance of God’s mission in peace, conflict transformation and reconciliation.

ABM has responded by revising its fourth Mark of Mission to “Challenge violence, injustice and oppression, and work for peace and reconciliation”. Previously the fourth mark has been to “Challenge injustice and oppression”.

Education Missioner for ABM, Brad Chapman, explained that the Five Marks of Mission are more than just words.

“The Marks of Mission emerge from the lived experience of God’s people throughout the Anglican Communion,” Mr Chapman said. “They reflect God’s active presence in the world today”.

Read it all.

Sadly, I cannot escape the conclusion that this gathering was a missed opportunity and I endorse the report ”˜What really happened in Auckland NZ at ACC-15′ released today by the ACC representatives from Kenya and Nigeria. It is clear that those controlling the agenda were very reluctant to face the real ecclesiological and theological challenges thrown up by the undisciplined rejection of historic Anglican faith and order by certain Provinces.

In particular the continued treatment of the Episcopal Church of the United States as a Province in good standing, despite its leading role as an advocate for teaching and practice contrary to Scripture, undermines the claim to be allowing the Bible in the life of the Church to actually speak as the Word of God.

Read it all.

8. We close with an observation from the Right Rev. Michael Nazir-Ali on the limits of biblical interpretation: “We cannot, because of a process of inculturation, produce forms of the Christian faith that are entirely opaque to Christians elsewhere.” We are grieved that the Anglican Consultative Council continues to tolerate, and even honour, The Episcopal Church USA, the Anglican Church of Canada and other provinces who continue to produce revisionist forms of the Christian faith that are unrecognizable to the majority of Anglicans worldwide, contrary to a plain reading of God’s Word and in violation of Anglican Faith and Order.

9. We call upon all Anglicans to pray that our beloved Communion will stand firm in honouring the unique and universal Lordship of Jesus Christ as the Son Of God, and the authority of God’s Word written over all contexts, and in every matter of faith and practice.

Read it all.

On the penultimate day of the Anglican Consultative Meeting in Auckland, New Zealand the members of the Council elected six members to serve on the Standing Committee. It is expected that the Standing Committee will hold its first meeting in April or May of 2013.
The council consist of 15 members including:
President: The Archbishop of Canterbury
Chair: Bishop James Tengatenga, Central Africa
Vice Chair: Canon Elizabeth Paver, England
The Rt Revd Ian T Douglas, a continuing member from The Episcopal Church
There are five Primates elected by the Primates:
The Most Revd Dr Paul Kwong (Hong Kong)
The Most Revd Sammuel Azariah (Pakistan)
The Most Revd David Chillingworth (Scotland)
The Most Revd Dr Daniel Deng Bul Yak (Sudan)
The Most Revd Dr Katharine Jefferts Schori (The Episcopal Church)

Thirteen people were nominated and the following six were elected….

Read it all.

What does it mean to witness to your Christian faith in a multi-faith world?

That was the topic of last evening’s public presentation at the ACC, the last of the three for this Auckland gathering.

Read it all.

Archbishop of Canterbury Dr Rowan Williams said today that his successor was going to have to map the Biblical vision of humanity and community onto the worst situations in society.

Speaking at the final media conference after the end of the Anglican Consultative Council in New Zealand, Archbishop Williams said the issues discussed at the meeting–including environmental change and ending domestic violence–were “actually questions about what kind of humanity we’re seeking to promote and serve, which is a deeply Christian question.”

He said he thought that when people were probing the church on certain issues, they were actually asking how the church could help them “be really human”.

“We believe as a church we have unparalleled resources for enriching humanity that way.”

Read it all.

Read it all.

Read it all.

Admitting that the Instruments of Communion are ”˜less than they might be’ Archbishop Williams said examples of their desire to enable included such proactive projects as the Anglican Alliance, the Bible in the Life of the Church Project, Continuing Indaba, and promoting theological education. These were, he said, attempts by the Instruments to try and change a situation by being creative.

Archbishop Williams also suggested that younger Anglicans seemed more interested in one kind of authority over another.

“If you pick up and read the book by the young Anglican leaders who were present at the mission consultation in Edinburgh two years ago, you will see something of how a younger generation sees these questions,” he said. “I believe that for the authors of that book and those whom they represent, the vision of not only Anglican, but Christian structural fellowship has a great deal more to do with enabling authority than with absolute clarity about corrective authority.”

Read it all and please note the audio link to the full address at the bottom.

One of the interesting things that has been put in place by the organizers/designers of this meeting has been the addition of Regional Meetings”¦as a region (in our case, North America), we have gathered now three times to discuss topics from our somewhat common position geographically. So, we’ve been meeting with our colleagues from The Episcopal Church. The discussions have been fruitful and energetic. We have dug deeply into the topics of the agenda, yesterday, into the environmental concerns. We are keeping notes of our work, and have taken the interesting step of seeing whether we can meet as a group mid-way between the ACC meetings, to keep ourselves on track with what we say we might do to respond to these topics. I’m taking on organizing the meetings”¦many timetables to juggle, including the Presiding Bishop of TEC and the Chair of its House of Deputies. But I think it will give us more of a sense of being active members of this Council, rather than simply people who go to meetings. And when the meetings are every 3 1/2 to 4 years, it’s hard to keep a sense of continuity.

Read it all.

“In the wake of disaster and trauma, a city has to decide what is it that binds it together ”“ above all, what are the promises that we make to one another,” the Archbishop said.

“Because a truly healthy and just city is a place where people make promises to one another. They promise to be there for one another’s safety and welfare.”

Archbishop Rowan then went to the heart of God’s promise in Ezekiel: “I will resettle your towns, the ruins will be rebuilt.”

Read it all.

I am in Auckland, NZ, at the 15th meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC15). The agenda moved into high gear today with presentations on “The Bible in the Life of the Church” (BILC), the Network for Interfaith Concerns (NIFCON) Report “Promised Land?”, an Anglican Communion resource for addressing Israeli-Palestinian relations, and the Inter-Anglican Standing Commission on Unity, Faith and Order (IASCUFO) report on The Instruments of Unity.

I believe that the discussion on BILC revealed an important major conclusion that tips the hand of the ACC’s leadership: that the process of how Anglicans interpret scripture is as important as the substance of scripture. Two conclusions will follow from this premise: (1) Context reigns supreme in how people interpret, and in the diversity of interpretations that flow from diversity of contexts NO interpretation is better than another (a point made by the preselected TEC leader of one of the small groups), and (2) There are no “limits” on faithful interpretation (point made by the preselected Church of England rep from another reflection group).

In this discussion, initial enthusiasm for the affirmation of Bible study gave way to sharp differences over the language in the proposed resolution, and then to frustration that there was not enough time to consider the resolution.

Read it all.

Jaded cynics may try to suggest that the Anglican Communion is divided over the Bible.

Well, there’s no need to buy into that notion any longer.

After three and half years of worldwide research, the Bible in the Life of the Church project has found that Anglicans around the globe ”“ and that includes Africans and Americans, conservatives and liberals ”“ share “a high common ground” over the essential place and use of the Bible in Anglican life….

Read it all.

[Australian bishop the Rt Revd Stephen Pickard]… went on to highlight the theological reflection on the Instruments in the report and said that there needed to be a proper understanding of the Instruments as a gift for the Communion that is primarily about relationships.

“The Instruments of Communion can lose their focus,” he said. “Their primary concern is the mission of God. Their horizon should be God’s work in the world. All deliberations, arguments [and] desire for corporate discernment, ought to be directed to God’s work in the world.”

Read it all.

The Archbishop of Canterbury said that he was praying for a “Pentecostal experience” at the 15th meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC), which got under way last weekend in New Zealand.

Speaking to ACC members on Saturday, at the TelstraClear Pacific Events Center, in Auckland, Dr Williams said that he hoped that “divided tongues of fire will touch us all in the days ahead; that we shall learn to listen to one another’s languages, experience, and insight with all the enthusiasm and eagerness with which we would listen to God’s own word”.

Read it all.

(ACNS) Abp [Thabo] Makgoba, who is the Chair of Anglican Communion Environmental Network, said “What might a world where Christians take their moral responsibilities seriously look like?

“Our network tries to link people from different Provinces to reflect on the environment. It is hoped that we will have representatives throughout the Communion. Even at this stage we are calling for those Provinces without an environmental network to appoint one.”

Referring to the nexus of water, food and energy, Abp Thabo asked the audience: “When you are receiving Communion, have you stopped to think about the water that we use to mix with the wine. Where has it come from? How clean is that water? Have you stopped to think about…those who do not have access to basic and of the resultant illnesses that go with poor sanitation and water? When you receive…wafers, have you spared a thought for those who do not have food?

Read it all.