The Archbishop of Canterbury will not block the creation of a third Anglican province in North America, sources familiar with Dr. Rowan Williams’ Dec 5 meeting with five traditionalist archbishops, tell The Church of England Newspaper.
However, the archbishop will not give it his endorsement either, arguing his office does not have the legal authority to make, or un-make, Anglicans.
On Dec 5, five members of the Gafcon primates council: Archbishops Benjamin Nzimbi of Kenya, Peter Akinola of Nigeria, Emmanuel Kolini of Rwanda, Gregory Venables of the Southern Cone, and Henry Orombi of Uganda met with Dr. Williams in Canterbury for approximately five hours to discuss the current state of affairs within the Communion.
In a half day meeting interspersed with prayer and lunch the archbishops had a “full and frank” discussion of the issues, sources familiar with the proceedings said. “There was no indaba-ding on Friday,” one senior Gafcon bishop told CEN, referring to the ”˜Indaba’ process of directed listening used at the 2008 Lambeth Conference. The Gafcon bishop said the conversation was a direct and forthright discussion of all of the presenting issues.
Alternative Province Blessings (APBs) would have been nice. Williams says he is powerless but his failure to use his “bully pulpit” has left him mired in Hamletlike indecision and left both sides in feelings of dissatisfaction.
He did sort of use his bully pulpit. Rowan asked for three moratoria: No to blessing homosexual unions, no to more homosexual bishops, and no to foreign interventions.
With the new province foreign interventions cease. The diocese of LA has just start violating the first. B033 will be repealed this next summer.
Any consequences for the violators of the moratoria??? No, I thought not. Just empty words.
In this case the ABC’s inaction will work to the benefit of the ACNA. Since he won’t deny them and the vast majority of the Communion will acknowledge ACNA, it will, over time, become the de facto orthodox expression of Anglicanism in North America. This state of affairs will allow ACNA to continue to change facts on the ground. It completely fits with the ABC’s M.O. over the past 5 years and I’m sure he’ll stick to it going forward. At the end of the day it’s bad news for TEC and great news for ACNA.
I hope #3 is right – it would seem if ACNA is given just breathing room, then it can take root. If ECUSA does not get any help in trying to kill it off, I would think ACNA’s long term prospects are good, as it will continue to grow as ECUSA continues its decline.
Chris (#3), I think that you are ‘right on.’
If the ABC had taken a negative position regarding the new province, then that would have had a significant ‘dampening effect’ on support/sympathy for the new province among the ‘institutionally loyal orthodox’ and the ‘somewhat less than orthodox’ Anglicans in the Anglican Communion and within ECUSA and the Canadian Church.
As it is, the ABC has not said ‘yes’ and he has not said ‘no.’ It seems that he is just letting things ‘cook.’
This looks like a ‘loss’ for the revisionists.
Very Laodicean of him.
what is the point of having a figurehead and a leader who so regularly avoids leading and shuns the limelight….honestly we might as well save the money and be congregational for all the impact he has. Rome- burning- fiddling – three words that spring to mind
http://www.sbarnabas.com/blog
Contra #3, 4, and 5, I think this is something of a blow to ACNA’s chances of formal recognition. Middle-of-the-road Primates are likely to be uneasy about the precedent of a rival overlapping province — note that I say rival, which is the part that makes this new territory — and while an endorsement by the ABC may have swayed them I think an “I can neither approve nor disapprove” stance is going to be read as “I don’t like it but won’t say so officially.”
Ah, the Great Equivocator has spoken again — sort of. 😉
This amounts to a tacit recognition……the best we can expect, I suppose, but a recognition just the same.
I’m a liberal priest in TEC; however, I support the formation of ACNA. It seems to me that Rowan’s response is consistent with his usual attempt to ride the fence. Why should there not be a place where folks of a like mind and heart can call their spiritual home? I disagree with my conservative brothers and sisters on just about everything, but to oppose the formation of a third province is, I think, adopting a scarcity mentality. The size of a church doesn’t really matter, in my opinion. I sometimes attend services at a church where there are only about a half-dozen faithful (it’s not a TEC church, btw). Yet they have been faithful to their calling for decades, worshipping God and doing the best they can. The new province, recognized by the AC or not, will be a haven for those who also view themselves as faithful servants. The Lutherans have been able to do this for many years; why not Anglicans? Let us put an end to all of the bickering and ad hominem insults and remember that the mission of all Christians is to serve God and to care for those who are in need. May the Advent season be a time of finding our way once again to the One who really matters, Our Lord Jesus.
Ross (post #8) – I think that GC’09 will go a long way to solidifying moderate primatial support for an officially recognized North American alternative to TEC. As I see it, there are two groups who are their own worst enemy in terms of appealing to Communion moderates: one is the Common Cause folks, who can appear too pushy for their agenda; the other is TEC, who can appear arrogant and theologically way off in left field (or actually outside of the stadium).
TEC can be relied upon to become ever more loonier and ever more off base, at least for the next 5-10 years. I think that it can be safely assumed that TEC will continue shooting itself in the foot.
The key question will be in how the Common Cause group relates to the moderate Primates. By taking a “hands off” response, Rowan Williams is signalling that the ACNA has some level of credibility (otherwise he would have condemned it). This, I think (as does post #3’s author), plays in the ACNA’s favor. Not for immediate recognition next February, but over the next couple years after the expected actions of GC’09.
GoSane, you speak with the spirit of Christ in a way many reasserters and reappraisers don’t. God bless you and thank you.
[blockquote]However, the archbishop will not give it his endorsement either, arguing his office does not have the legal authority to make, or un-make, Anglicans.[/blockquote]
Which is why this Archbishop has made himself irrelevant.
Par for the course if it is true – I don’t see the ABC doing much of anything on any issues. The ABC has a very important position in our communion. He needs to use it or lose it.