Statement from the President of the House of Deputies on the Primates Communiqué and WCG Report

In stark contrast to the increasingly relational tone reflected in the Primates Communiqué, the Windsor Continuation Group has taken a step backward, issuing a report that yearns for greater ecclesial centralization achieved by concentrating power in the hands of bishops and archbishops, further marginalizing the laity and diminishing the influence of member churches in the common life of our Communion. The authors of the report””two retired primates, a primate, two bishops and a retired Cathedral dean””believe an “ecclesial deficit” exists within Anglicanism and propose to remedy it by strengthening three of the four “Instruments of Communion”, namely the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lambeth Conference and the Primates Meeting. The instrument they have overlooked is the Anglican Consultative Council; the only instrument that includes lay people, priests and deacons and that has a constitution that codifies its membership, procedures and authority. The ACC’s meetings have proven much less susceptible to outside manipulation than those of the Primates Meetings, as the machinations at Dromantine and Dar es Salaam made painfully clear.

Yet the Windsor Continuation Group argues that the Communion must receive statements from the Primates: “with a readiness to undertake reflection and accommodation,” while questioning whether the Anglican Consultative Council can “adequately” exercise the purely consultative function it currently serves. This illustrates a triumph of ecclesial ideology over common sense.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Anglican Primates, Episcopal Church (TEC), House of Deputies President, Primates Meeting Alexandria Egypt, February 2009, Windsor Report / Process

14 comments on “Statement from the President of the House of Deputies on the Primates Communiqué and WCG Report

  1. Phil says:

    Bonnie Anderson seems to me to be a loose cannon with no sense of institutional responsibility or leadership. Think Nancy Pelosi with glasses. And why does she continue to serve in a church called “Episcopal” when she thinks it should be run like a mob?

    In any case, I am grateful that in writing, “However, this statement stops short of recognizing the pain and division caused by several of the Primates themselves,” she’s finally recognized the damage done by Schori and Hiltz.

  2. Philip Snyder says:

    I say that we give more power to the ACC – after a bit of democratic reform. Let the number of delegates to ACC be determine by the ASA of the province – with each province having its Primate and one other person as a minimum. Then, for every 500,000 (rounding to nearest 500K) ASA (over 500,000), the province gets one more delegate. Each province gets to determine how it selects its delegates.

    So, the delegate count would look like this
    ASA Number of Delegates
    0-749k 2 (Primate + 1)
    750k-149k 3
    150k-249k 4
    etc.

    Apportionment to be determined every 3 years.
    That way, the ACC truly represents people other than the bishops in the Anglican Communion.

    YBIC,
    Phil Snyder

  3. Cennydd says:

    “However, this statement stops short of recognizing the pain and division caused by several of the Primates themselves – an ironic development, considering the group’s call for ‘accountability’ – but it nonetheless recognizes that our current difficulties are not the fault of a single party.”

    I would remind Dr Anderson that it is specifically the actions and pronouncements of ECUSA and its leaders over the past forty years, and especially since 1979, which brought about this situation in the first place! I don’t think she needs to be further reminded that these words and actions are precisely why hundreds of thousands of faithful orthodox Anglican Christians have felt abandoned by ECUSA and have left the Church, never to return. She knows very well why we have left. She has either helped to initiate these problems, or she has bought into ECUSA’s revisionist heresy and apostasy hook, line, and sinker.

  4. moheb says:

    I wonder if Dr. Anderson had read paragraph 11 of the Communique. The Primates do support the findings and the recommendations of the WCG:

    “11. The Windsor Continuation Group Report asks whether the Anglican Communion suffers from an “ecclesial deficit.”[6] In other words, do we have the necessary theological, structural and cultural foundations to sustain the life of the Communion? We need “to move to communion with autonomy and accountability”[7]; to develop the capacity to address divisive issues in a timely and effective way, and to learn “the responsibilities and obligations of interdependence”[8]. We affirm the recommendation of the Windsor Continuation Group that work will need to be done to develop the Instruments of Communion and the Anglican Covenant. With the Windsor Continuation Group, we encourage the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Anglican Consultative Council and the Anglican Communion Office to proceed with this work. “

  5. Choir Stall says:

    “…further marginalizing the laity and diminishing the influence of member churches..”
    Well bless me. Anderson finally understands the heavy-handed primatial tactics of the PB and wishes for the member churches to be respected.
    ..
    …oh, wait.
    She didn’t mean US. Just a faceless TEO.

  6. BlueOntario says:

    Hasn’t TEC been running around telling any court that would listen that they are a hierarchical church. So…who answers to whom? More to the point, who gets to say?

  7. Virginia Anglican says:

    [blockquote]Let us be encouraged by the Primates’ renewed energy in God’s mission and not allow ourselves to be bogged down in the proposals of the Windsor Continuation Group. As we all serve God’s mission, we trust that the Holy Spirit will recreate and renew the whole of the Anglican Communion. [/blockquote]

    And there’s your mandate for GC 2009. It’s going to be a groundbreaking summer for TEC….

  8. dumb sheep says:

    The ACC doesn’t need to be strengthened. TEC owns it lock, stock, and barrel.
    Dumb Sheep.

  9. dumb sheep says:

    PS: the link to the rest of the article doesn’t work. I get a “site no found” message on TEC’s page.
    Dumb Sheep.

  10. Daniel says:

    Let’s perform a thought experiment. Let’s suppose that instead of a small, dedicated cadre of liberal reappraisers, a small band of reasserters gradually began a takeover of TEC beginning in the 1960s and over time pushed, prodded, and manipulated the system/canons to the point that Bonnie and her ilk felt marginalized, oppressed and unable to continue in TEC. Do you think she would still be writing the same piece? I didn’t think so. I am coming to the inescapable conclusion that these people are sore winners and cannot tolerate anything other than total capitulation to their position and adulation/acceptance of it.

  11. Ian Montgomery says:

    [blockquote]The ACC’s meetings have proven much less susceptible to outside manipulation than those of the Primates Meetings,[/blockquote]
    Surely this is masterful deceit as the ACC it totally manipulated by TEC and its money?
    I love the suggestion of proportional representation by ASA! Will not happen though because ACC belongs to TEC.

  12. Albany* says:

    #10. Quite right. And there is no difference between thought and desire with them.

  13. young joe from old oc says:

    [blockquote] “As we move into a greater sense of mutuality and interdependence in the Anglican Communion through renewed relationship in service to God’s mission in the whole world, it is imperative that we hear the voices of lay Anglicans from around the Communion. We cannot determine where God is leading the Church unless we are aware of how the Holy Spirit is at work at every level of ministry in every province of our Communion. Proposals to centralize authority in the hands of primates and bishops are potentially impoverishing to our faith.” [/blockquote]

    In other words, “As we seek to advance the MDGs with greater cooperation from third world church leaders, we have to prevent them from filtering our pure message of sexual equality and global re-education and redistribution. So, unless the principal decision-making is going to be left to one of the chosen ones like Barack Obama or one of the Clintons or Fidel Castro or Nelson Mandela, it’s always bad to centralize power. And even though most of my cronies and I speak ill of American culture and most of America’s history in private, the Anglican world should follow the American democratic/progressive tradition and seek to take as broad and extensive a vote as possible on important issues. That’s the only way that we can ensure that the Communion is following the holy spirit that I’m comfortable with. After all, surely all enlightened individuals understand that [i] vox populi, vox Dei. [/i] Of course, my people will have the final say on whether each demographic was properly represented in the vote.”

  14. Cennydd says:

    I have a better idea: ABOLISH the ACC!