The Lambeth Commission, included bishops from all provinces of the global church, speaking about the Windsor Report in an interview with this reporter published June 4, 2005, the Anglican Archbishop of the West Indies, the Most Rev. Drexel Gomez, a member of the Lambeth Commission, said
“We concluded on the basis of who we are and on the basis of our own Anglican self-understanding that the actions of the Church in the United States and the Church in Canada have departed from the Anglican way of doing church. We said it (homosexual behaviour) is not only un-Anglican but contrary to Scripture. In that context, we called on the churches involved to express ‘regret’. The language was chosen deliberately. Some of us wanted to put ‘repent.’ But we felt, let us put it in the language that is the lowest common denominator to get a response. To express regret and say you won’t do it again is very close to what the New Testament calls repentance. We felt that if we went that way, we had a far better chance of evoking a response as opposed to just coming up to them and saying repent. We asked them to have a moratorium – not to do it again. And to explain the theological reasons why they acted that way.”
The 2.3-million member Episcopal Church in the United States, which is led by Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, convened the general convention in June of 2006 but did not fulfil the wishes of the Windsor Report.
“Canon Sugden, who is the executive secretary of Anglican Mainstream, a network of orthodox Anglicans was in the island earlier this week on a short visit.”
Reporter Mark Dawes’ article is in many places unclear and confused, and in some places incoherent. Yet there seem to be places where new information is divulged (at least new to me). It will take some time to sort this all out. Perhaps some of Mark Dawes’ personal opinions have been turned into “facts on the ground” by Dawes’ sloppy reporting. Or perhaps there are new insights to be “gleaned” here.
Sorry, that should be:
Perhaps some of Canon Sugden’s personal opinions have been turned into “facts on the ground†by Dawes’ sloppy reporting.
The money quotation, apparently from Bishop Duncan, though the closing quotation marks are absent in the original:
” So are we seeing a schism or a revolution? A long overdue development is taking place, namely that significant and meaningful leadership is now being given in the Anglican Communion by Christians from Africa and Asia. This is being expressed in the very practical issues of first determining to stand by the teaching of the Communion; second, refusing to attend a dumbed-down Lambeth Conference which will not address this issue decisively and which will include those who have deliberately defied that teaching; and third, by providing the orthodox oversight that orthodox Anglicans are requesting.
Communion teaching has been established for most nigh a decade in Lambeth 1998 I.10.
The Lambeth Conference 2008 has been dumbed down to prevent any exercise of the clear majority of the AC bishops who spoke their mind in Lambeth 1998.
There needs to be oversight by Communion adherent bishops for the orthodox Anglicans caught in ECUSA/TEC as the actions of the same clearly demonstrate.
Nice to see that Carribean journalists get things right as often as American ones do. [/sarcasm]
History has flip-flopped. Nearly two centuries ago evangelists went to Africa. Now the Africans are returning the favor. I’m sure this upsets the TEC hierarchy no end.
The author neglects to state that the African primates consecrating these schmatic bishops are also failing to live up to the recommendation of the Windsor Report not to undertake these ventures. But, of course, they rejected WR from the start. They use WR to beat up TEC, but they really don’t believe in it themselves. They rejected the conclusions of the report of the committee that studied TEC’s response to Windsor.
They also are selective in their insistence that TEC and ACoC follow Lambeth 98 Res. 1.10, as if it were a requirement, but no Lambeth Resolution is. So, I suppose they could point to that to justify their refusal to carry out the Listening Project outlined in that Resolution with any integrity (if you don’t mind me using that word).
It is clear that they have already made up their minds to drive TEC out of the Communion, or destroy both. That the Sept. 30 “deadline” means nothing to them, but is just another convenient cudgel, is evident from these most recent consecrations. It certainly means nothing to ++Drexel, who should resign from the Covenant Design Group now that he has openly declared where his efforts lie.
BfB, please get a paper bag and breathe slowly and deeply into it for several minutes. You must be hyperventilating. Your last paragraph is certainly the result of hype.
No one is driving ECUSA/TEC out of the Anglican Communion. They once were walking apart and were instructed on what it would take to walk together. Then ECUSA/TEC passed from trotting apart (ala KJS post-Dar es Salaam) to galloping apart (March HOB meeting results). If anyone is driving the ECUSA/TEC out of the AC, it would appear to be the “new thang advocates” whose hell-for-leather pursuit of power and its abuses in the name of the new thang agenda is altogether evident. These drivers know not “gee” or “haw” or “hold up” or suffer any reins upon their version of “truth”.
Now, if the breathing has settled down sufficiently, perhaps a little consultation about delusions and projection with an affable psychologist or psychiatrist can help prevent recurrences?
Just a thought, of course…….
BfB is correct: ++Drexel should resign his chair of the CDG. The Covenant, if it is ever to happen, is to be an instrument whereby Anglicans worldwide will be able to communicate about how to live together in communion. One should not start with one of the writers of such a covenant already demonstrating he has no desire to live together in communion.
BfB is also correct that these primates rejected a committee which reported that TEC had lived up to its part of the Windsor Report as best it could (given the polity). The WR is used as an idol, much as they use Holy Scripture — inerrant and unchanging — and yet there is a selectivity about their use of both WR and the Bible.
Drexel stayed away from these “emergency measures” and even openly criticized them for quite sometime.
The fact that he was part of this consecration speaks volumes.
Maybe ECUSAns should stop whining about how put upon they are and start trying to discover how they lost the best ally they had in the conservative camp.
One should not start with one of the writers of such a covenant already demonstrating he has no desire to live together in communion.
On the contrary, he has demonstrated that he would like orthodox believers to remain in the communion rather than be chased from it, as TEC wishes.