Leaders of the Anglican Communion said Thursday (Feb. 5) that they, not dissident conservatives, will decide what role a newly formed traditionalist North American church will have in their worldwide fellowship.
Concluding their weeklong meeting in Alexandria, Egypt, the Anglican leaders also said a new North American church should not “seek to recruit or expand their membership” by attempting to convert others.
Conservatives angered by the liberal drift of the Episcopal Church in the U.S. and the Anglican Church of Canada set up a rival church in December. The Anglican Church in North America (ACNA), led by Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh, aims to be recognized as the official Anglican franchise in North America.
But the 30-odd Anglican primates, or archbishops, meeting this week (Feb. 1-5) essentially put a damper on those plans. While acknowledging that “there is no consensus among us how this new (church) is to be regarded,” the primates unanimously agreed that “it is not for individual groups to claim the terms on which they will relate to the communion.”
Nothing I’ve heard from Bob Duncan or other ACNA leaders suggests, to me, that they are dictating anything to the rest of the communion. They have stated their desire (to become a recognized as a fully Anglican entity) and they will make their case to the Primates. The ACNA bishops, as far as I can tell, know that they are not empowered to declare anything.
If reasserters truly believe that TEC & its members are in spiritual danger, they would be hypocrites to stop making converts. Either they’re right, or they’re not. For them, this is not some personal preference or a different “expression” of the same truth.
Kendall, you are right about the “on own terms” proviso. I too believe that this is about the Episcopal Church and what we might call the “polity defense” (which I believe has already provided cover for Dr Schori–I’ve seen it reported that it will be up to GC to consider gracious restraint as an option). This line is more about the covenant and what it might do for the Communion than it is about the ACNA.
Brien Koehler
Maybe we should petition the REC for inclusion rather than seeking to remain aligned with the dysfunctional AC.
“Leaders of the Anglican Communion said Thursday (Feb. 5) that they, not dissident conservatives, will decide what role a newly formed traditionalist North American church will have in their worldwide fellowship.
Concluding their weeklong meeting in Alexandria, Egypt, the Anglican leaders also said a new North American church should not “seek to recruit or expand their membership” by attempting to convert others.”
=====================================================================
What hasn’t been addressed in this communique is the behavior of ECUSA towards othodox/traditional Anglicans who have been and are being persecuted by revisionist diocesan bishops and the presiding bishop. Persecuted to the point where they have found it necessary to flee and find sanctuary in ACNA or in other church bodies.
These persecutions exist, they are real and yet the ‘good primates’ seem to feel that caution and admonition need only be addressed toward ACNA.
This, as expressed in the communique, is a very dishonest statement. Do the ‘good primates’ have consciences? Are they supporting heresy in order to maintain an uneasy staus quo? What part do the extensive financial resources, even in hard times, especially in hard times, of ECUSA play in all of this?
Do the ‘good primates’ expect ACNA to NOT carry out the Great Commission, especially when the efforts of ECUSA to do so are heavily tainted by heresy?
The ‘good primates’ must know that ECUSA’s General Convention is only several months away. They must also know that it appears to be the intent at that convention of ECUSA’s radical leadership to formalize canons for same-sex ceremonies and to open the door wide to approve canons permitting active NGLBT clergy.
They must also know that Dioceses such as Albany and diocesans such Bishop Love will be probably brought under attack at that convention.
How can a national covention force a diocese to follow its pro-GLBT canons? Easy answer, by attacking and deposing a diocesan bishop who refuses to comply and then sending in a radical revisionist bishop to take over the position of bishop of the diocese.
Do the ‘good primates’ really want something like this to happen? Do they want to want to face Final Judgement with this on their records?
You might think this article, for all its tendentiousness, had come from the [i]Episcopal[/i] News Service.
Before relying on this article, read the full text of the communique, and then watch the Anglican TV interview with primates Orombi and Venables. The interview will bring some clarity.
Libraryjim,
All would be welcome. I thought that a long time ago. (One caveat, the female “priests” from Pittsburgh, the Uganda connection and CANA as well as the Female “deacons” from those places and others, would have to give up their ordained status-i.e. No collars, no “the Rev.” They could be “set apart” as deaconesses.)
We have already received into communion those who are more “high church” than most of us in the REC. Also, the 1979 Not the Book of Common Prayer, toast!!
Brien, you make a good point. You will get more truth from the interview with ++Venables and ++Orombi than from Reuters, and it won’t be slanted. They went straight to the point.
Recchip and LibraryJim: You describe the model that we should all follow. I really don’t care what the “Alexandrians” think.