Speaking today in an exclusive interview with The Christian Post, the retired archbishop said the covenant will not solve the essential problem of the Anglican Communion, which he identified as a crisis of biblical orthodoxy where the historic Anglican counterpart in America has embraced immorality and refuses to repent of it
The Anglican Covenant, which calls upon archbishops and presiding bishops leading the 38 Anglican provinces worldwide to promote unity within the denomination, “will not help convert the sinful,” he said.
Ultimately, it is the Anglican leaders themselves, not a committee, who have to be responsible for the spiritual life of their churches.
“It’s (the success of the Anglican Covenant) dependent on their willingness to repent, but they (the leaders of the American Anglican Church) have no fear of God,” he said, comparing them to Eli, a priest in the Bible whose sons died because he failed to discipline them.
“None of the resolutions have worked. None of the committees have worked,” said archbishop Tay. He described the Anglican Consultative Council, a ”˜major decider’ in the Anglican Communion, as ”˜U.S.-controlled.’
Well, isn’t that interesting? I wonder how ++John Chew feels about this blunt, caustic, highly provocative statement by his predecessor?
I tend to agree partially with +Tay. Namely, I agree that the whole idea of the covenant is an unfortunate mistake (however well-intentioned and popular it may be), but I admittedly wouldn’t go so far as to say, as he is quoted anyway as saying, [i]”I can’t see how Bible-believing people can agree to the covenant.”[/i] Wow, that’s harsh.
There certainly seems to be an important, rather puzzling story lurking beneath the surface here, when ++Chew has been so heavily involved in the whole Covenant process. The fact that the Province of SE Asia is no longer giving oversight to the AMiA movement, like Rwanda continues to do, also suggests that a significant shift has taken place in the vibrant ethnic Chinese Church in Singapore with regard to how to respond strategically to this persistent, deep crisis in Anglicanism.
David Handy+
As soon as I read the headline, I knew I would find an NRA comment here.
Blunt, yes. Caustic, no. When you have so much concern for “pastoral” that you forget “right or wrong” in an effort to conciliate the zeitgeist, like ECUSA/TEC and the ABC, to hear the unvarnished truth must seem very rough. In truth, it is the whitewash applied to the tombs that is caustic, giving the appearance of purity and full of rotting and dead men’s bones. The Dominical requirement is to clean up from the inside out.
Money quote: “If you are using the sacred word to include dirt; that use of the word is an abomination.”
That is exactly what Rowan Williams has been doing.
Br_er Rabbit (#2),
I’m glad I didn’t disappoint you (wink).
Robroy (#4),
As usual, I agree with you.
David Handy+