Which way will Rowan jump? With just a fortnight to go before the crucial meeting of the Episcopal House of Bishops in New Orleans, that question is becoming ever more pressing. But the answer remains frustratingly elusive. Few believe that the American bishops are willing or able to deliver the moratoriums asked for in the Dar Es Salaam communiqué.
But what will Dr Williams do about it? The tactics displayed by Lambeth Palace and the Anglican Communion Office in recent months have done little to dissipate the clouds of confusion. The messages coming out have been mixed, to say the least. On the one hand, sources close to the Archbishop are insisting that he is committed to following through the Dar Es Salaam communiqué when he flies out for talks with the American bishops during the first two days of their meeting. But how strictly will he insist on its terms?
Even if the American bishops overcome their initial huffiness at being asked to respond at all, and that is not certain, it is difficult to see how they could come up with a response that is both adequate and credible. The liberal tide seems to be running just too strongly. Too many of the American bishops have pledged their allegiance to the pro-gay camp. A lesbian is on the shortlist to be elected as the next bishop of Chicago; Gene Robinson has given the go ahead for clergy in the New Hampshire diocese to conduct same-sex blessings; at least two dioceses are developing official blessing rites. Moreover, the American bishops have already resoundingly rejected the primates’ scheme for pastoral oversight for American conservatives. The Episcopal Church’s Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori is understood to be preparing yet another version that may well prove acceptable to her liberal colleagues, but is highly unlikely to pass muster with the conservatives.
It also appears that there is little room for manoeuvre. Dr Williams himself, in a press conference following the eleventh hour agreement of the communiqué at the primates’ meeting in Tanzania, said it would be ”˜difficult’ if the Americans failed to follow its exact wording. So, if the Americans do fail to respond adequately in New Orleans, it would seem that Rowan will have little choice but to carry out the implicit threat in the communiqué and withdraw their invitations to Lambeth. Or does it?
The conservatives remain far from confident that this will be the case. There is a growing concern among them that the Archbishop of Canterbury will yet again attempt to play for time by forging another tortuously ambiguous compromise. At last week’s consecrations in Kenya and Uganda, at which 10 provinces were represented and eight primates attended in person ”” a sign that the core group of Global South hardliners may be larger than some believe ”” all these fears were expressed.
Doubts first began emerging when Lambeth Palace unexpectedly issued invitations in June to all but a handful of bishops for next year’s Lambeth Conference. Not only had Rowan invited nearly everyone”” albeit with caveats ”” but he had done so without consultation. Liberals saw this as a sign that Dr Williams had finally jumped into their camp, and was determined to keep the Americans in the Church even if this meant losing Africans and Asians. In contrast, many conservative primates, including those regarded as relatively moderate such as the Primate of the West Indies, Archbishop Drexel Gomez, were dismayed at the lack of consultation. Some also fear that Dr Williams, having issued the invitations, will find it psychologically difficult to withdraw them from liberal American bishops even if they fail to come up to the mark in New Orleans.
There has also been confusion about the role of Canon Kenneth Kearon, the secretary general of the Anglican Communion, who appears to have been exercising a growing influence in the absence of Dr Williams on study leave. Conservatives suspect that Canon Kearon, with his experiences of the peace process in Northern Ireland, has reinforced Dr Williams’ natural tendency to believe that the crisis can be resolved peacefully if only all the parties can be kept talking long enough.
The hardcore of conservatives, however, want a resolution and they want it now. A number of them are poised to split if nothing clear happens in the wake of New Orlea ns, and the recent consecrations in Africa are a preparatory step for a fully fledged parallel Church if it proves necessary. They have not been reassured by Lambeth Palace’s seeming reluctance to call another meeting of all the primates to make a judgment about the outcome of New Orleans.
Dr Williams has said in the past that he will be guided by his fellow primates about how to proceed, but there has been little indication as yet as to how this will be done. Global South primates believe that only a full primates meeting will suffice, even though Dr Williams will be accompanied to New Orleans by members of the primates’ standing committee.
Aides to Dr Williams are, however, less convinced of the need for another costly and precipitous summit, and may try to pursue other means of taking soundings. With all these variables up in the air and anxieties swirling like smoke, Dr Williams will not find his return to work this week a comfortable experience.
–Jonathan Petre is the religious correspondent for the Daily Telegraph; this article appears in the September 7, 2007 issue of the Church of England Newspaper, page 24
Some say the ABC is “the most intellectually-gifted Archbishop of Canterbury in almost a century,” but his actions as a Christian leader in the current AC crisis may have more significance than whatever he thinks, writes, or says.
[blockquote]Dr Williams has said in the past that he will be guided by his fellow primates about how to proceed, but there has been little indication as yet as to how this will be done. Global South primates believe that only a full primates meeting will suffice, even though Dr Williams will be accompanied to New Orleans by [b]members of the primates’ standing committee.[/b][/blockquote]
Archbishop Mouneer Anis is the only conservative member of the primate’s standing committee who will be present. In particular, ABp Orombi will [i]not[/i] be there. Of course, the newest member, Katherine will be present. Why did the ABC ask the uncharacteristically liberal standing committee along when only he was invited? Yet more orthodox sellout by the ABC, perhaps???
Deleted as change suggested by comment author has been made to the previous comment–ed..
Wasn’t the invitation from the HOB to the standing commitee as well as the ABC? Or do I need more coffee?
Thanks Words Matter, you are correct:
[blockquote]We believe that there is an urgent need for us to meet face to face with the Archbishop of Canterbury and members of the Primates’ Standing Committee, and we hereby request and urge that such a meeting be negotiated by the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church and the Archbishop of Canterbury at the earliest possible opportunity.
We invite the Archbishop and members of the Primates’ Standing Committee to join us at our expense for three days of prayer and conversation regarding these important matters.[/blockquote]
I still anticipate fudge which is given the blessing of the ABC and the “uncharacteristically liberal” Orombi-less primate’s standing committee.
Well, I would like all “orthodox” Episcopalians to consider this: it doesn’t matter anymore what your HOB does. Whatever it does, after all this, will it have any credibility? Will you believe it? Will you trust it? Do you think truly that repentence has suddenly occurred after years, even generations of this?
Its just far too late at this point for any rational, sane person to believe that the Episcopal Church is going to turn the ship around. Its certainly possible a political deal will be cut to “save the Anglican Communion,” but it will be a lie believed only by people who have reasons to “believe” things they know really aren’t true.
William#2 (#6): Exactly!!
“Now when these things begin to take place, look up and raise your heads, because your redemption is drawing near.” Luke 21:28
“Can a corrupt tribunal have any part with you, one which frames evil into law?” Psalm 94:20 (BCP version)
#6 you are exactly right. I’ve watched meetings and organizations come and go for thirty years, and I’ve believed in years past that this meeting or that would be decisive. I’ve even earned my living from the controversy at times. The events in Kenya and Uganda have given me a vision of things to come. The pictures of the bishops are genuine signs of hope for me. I am still seeing as through a glass darkly, but I am confident that the long hoped for and prayed for alternative to franchise Anglicanism is being brought forward in God’s way and time.
It is a big change for me to say that I don’t really care what happens at the House of Bishops. I used to think it mattered. What matters is watching the signs of the times, and being ready. Something new, faithful, and orthodox is coming. If the House of Bishops comes along, great. If Rowan comes along also great. If not, well…I just can’t get worked up about the old institution any longer.
[blockquote] Aides to Dr Williams are, however, less convinced of the need for another costly and precipitous summit, and may try to pursue other means of taking soundings. [/blockquote]
This is a divide and conquer strategy. It is always a lot easier to get everyone to agree with you if you meet with them individually. Put them into a group and you risk losing control of the process, ala what seems to have happened at DeS to Rowan Williams. I rather doubt he has any taste for that experience again.
Precipitous, however, is the right word should a summit of the primates occur, and even now it is the right word. The Anglican Communion stands on the brink of collapse, destruction and ecclesiastical war.
But costly is not the right word when one is trying to save something that one supposedly loves. We make immense sacrifices of time, treasure and talent for the people and things we love. Where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.
Thus I think there is a push for a divide and conquer type of process.
“Aides to Dr Williams are, however, less convinced of the need for another costly and precipitous summit, and may try to pursue other means of taking soundings. ”
Just was surfing, looking at net-conferencing. There are many products that allow for this. I bought a video camera for $29 to do this with my daughter at college. I believe that Microsoft Live meeting is free. Probably each province has a tech-y type. Let them work it out.
TEC will not offer the ABC even a fig leaf of compliance. The revisionists have a clear majority in the HoB. Even if the “institutional” liberals manage to cobble together a bare majority to commit TEC to observe the Dar requirements, the hard revisionist minority will simply defy that HoB resolution.
TEC is disintegrating as a juridical entity. The only hope for the Anglican Communion to avoid TEC’s fate is for the Communion to discipline TEC decisively. For the reasons stated in the article, that looks doubtful. However, Bp. Spong’s outburst may signal that the grapevine has it that the ABC is not going to let TEC slide…
If the HoB does agree to anything substantive, are they going to sign the document or merely verbally assent to it? There is an unfortunate difference between these two modes with some of the participants.
There are many problems with the DeS communique. The deadline (that the ABC apparently strenuously opposed) was good, but…
Publius brings up another fatal flaw. If 75% of the HOB assent to the first two provisions for moratoria, but 25% don’t and proceed onwards, the assent by majority is meaningless. There needs to be unanimity. Is that going to happen???
The only way I might trust the HoB is if the PC/PV is established with all personnel installed, and with protection from lawsuits for current and future members. Any promises without this structure in place have no lasting value.
ABC needs to separate the roles of ‘Primate of All England’ and ‘First Among Equals.’ Inviting and structuring the Lambeth Conference as he did makes him seem more like ‘Primate of All Anglicans,’ which is NOT a title he has. He is treating the AC like his ministry, not like a distinct entity of which the CoE is a member among many. If he can prevent a Primates Meeting (or any other) from happening, he is using too much power, certainly not being ‘Among Equals.’
I was impressed by the statement that 1/3 of the Primates, who expressed approval of the recent consecrations, represented 3/4 of the ASA of Anglicans worldwide (40 of 54 million). So, the 2/3 who were quiet only have 1/4 of the worshippers. Who matters more to Rowan Williams?
The most important paragraph is this one:
At the time, however, Rowan’s invitations were heralded as a brilliant move by Doug Leblanc:
http://www.getreligion.org/?p=2435
David Van Biema took a similar track in Time:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1630227,00.html
and Jordan’s Hylden’s piece:
http://www.firstthings.com/onthesquare/?p=767
also blew it on the Lambeth invitations.
Rowan’s invitations are not coming in quickly, and, indeed, some in his own province have expressed at least some ambivalence about whether they are coming to Lambeth.
Dr. Williams has brought this problem on himself and the only real way forward will make him go back on his own word.
Thanks for cleaning up my post #2 and then getting rid of the extraneoous #3.
cssadmirer, I wrote a chronology of the how the ABC has lost credibility here that you might be interested in.