The general synod ”“ the church’s parliament, meeting in London ”“ passed a motion recognising the breakaway group’s desire to remain Anglicans but declined to promise to ally with them in their ongoing wrangles with the mainstream US church.
In a two-hour debate, efforts by liberal supporters of the US Episcopal church failed in attempts to throw out or adjourn a motion supporting the breakaways, but succeeded in diluting it with the help of moderate bishops.
Supported and advised by conservative evangelical members of the synod, Lorna Ashworth, a lay member from Eastbourne who is of Canadian extraction, appealed to members to support the group, describing those involved as loyal, faithful Anglicans in North America.
In other words, ++Rowan Williams doesn’t want to risk losing TEC’s financial support of the ACO.
The Guardian’s interpretation of the Synod’s action is the most accurate of the ones I’ve read. The Synod recognized that ACNA may be sincere in its desire to maintain communion with the Anglican Communion. Wow, what a step forward.
A small point I know, but it seems right to remember that so far, ACNA itself has not sought any sort of approval, recognition, acceptance, or indeed any other response from the C of E..
Archbishop Duncan has expressed his appreciation for a totally unsolicited motion in favour of his Church. And that is about as far as any of this can go until the AC is approached formally.
The blue touch-paper may well have been lit, but we are a long way from seeing the fireworks.
Chris Baker – Durham UK
#2 Dan Crawford
The Guardian writes: “The general synod ….but declined to promise to ally with them in their ongoing wrangles with the mainstream US church”
There was no motion to do anything of the sort before General Synod. This is pure fiction. How can you possibly rate this article and its writer, who I frankly gave up reading years ago.
Pageantmaster, I am not rating the article or the author. I am commenting on the content of the resolution which strikes me as so insipid as to be meaningless. Given some of the other headlines proclaiming that the C of E has “recognized” ACNA, the Guardian’s seems more accurate. As for the author, well, I share your opinion, but since I read this article, I have obviously not quite given up yet.
Unfortunately the article did not mention the evidence presented to Synod of depositions, inhibitions, expulsions and law suits. But that would have been expecting too much from the Guardian! Anyway, the important thing is that Synod members heard that evidence.
The first line was a hoot: “The Church of England today offered the slenderest of lifelines …”. The liberals keep telling themselves that ACNA wants and needs explicit recognition from CofE or ABC or ACC, or whatever. Oh well, if it makes the liberals feel better, let them have their fantasies…