Savi Hensman responds to Rowan Williams: A better future for the Anglican Communion?

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, has recently published “reflections” proposing major changes in the way the Anglican Communion is organised. Because of growing willingness in the Episcopal Church (TEC) both to consider it possible that lesbians and gays, including those who are partnered, may be called to any kind of ministry within the church, and also to respond positively to requests to bless same-sex unions, he has suggested a “two-track” approach. Provinces such as TEC in North America would not be able to carry out certain functions such as representing the Anglican Communion in ecumenical circles, while those which signed up to a Covenant would have a more central position.

This research paper describes the background, examines the evidence on which the Archbishop’s main points are based and discusses the implications. It is suggested that some of his claims about the nature of change in the church are historically incorrect, and that TEC has made greater efforts to abide by decisions made at international Anglican gatherings, and the overall ethos of the Communion, than many provinces which might sign up to the Covenant. Important aspects of the Anglican heritage have been rejected in recent years by some of TEC’s most vigorous critics, at a cost to the vulnerable in society and church mission and ministry.

While the intention of the Archbishop’s proposal is to promote Christian unity and spiritual growth, there is a strong possibility that the results will be the opposite. A different approach, less focused on institutional structures, might be more effective in addressing divisions and ultimately enabling Anglicans to move towards a deeper unity.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Anglican Identity, Archbishop of Canterbury, Ecclesiology, Theology

4 comments on “Savi Hensman responds to Rowan Williams: A better future for the Anglican Communion?

  1. driver8 says:

    I found this pretty depressing reading. The quality of theological argumentation is often low and its history partial to a point which is hard not to describe as misleading (see for instance the purported length of time “TEC” has been discussing its current theological revisions). It’s less a research paper and more a sequence of talking points from the TEC progressive leadership.

  2. RomeAnglican says:

    Pretty pitiful. If this is the best they can come up with . . . . (and, come to think of it, it probably is).

  3. dwstroudmd+ says:

    http://walkingapart.us/tiki-index.php

    An historical tour de force……………………………

  4. Larry Morse says:

    This only demonstrates that length and quality have no necessary relationship. We have read all of this over and over before, and much more briefly said. We should not WANT unity with TEC. The reasons are clear and compelling. And the unity is in fact broken. We have not been damaged thereby, but have only gained in integrity. Larry