He went on to say that the Anglican Communion had been reflecting on the need for a covenant “in the light of confusion, brokenness and tension within our Anglican family ”“ brokenness and a tension that has been made still more acute by recent decisions in some of our Provinces.?
“In all your minds there will be questions around the election and consecration of Mary Glasspool in Los Angeles. All of us share the concern that in this decision and action the Episcopal Church has deepened the divide between itself and the rest of the Anglican family. And as I speak to you now, I am in discussion with a number of people around the world about what consequences might follow from that decision, and how we express the sense that most Anglicans will want to express, that this decision cannot speak for our common mind.
“But I hope also in your thinking about this and in your reacting to it, you’ll bear in mind that there are no quick solutions for the wounds of the Body of Christ. It is the work of the Spirit that heals the Body of Christ, not the plans or the statements of any group, or any person, or any instrument of communion. Naturally we seek to minimize the damage, to heal the hurts, to strengthen our mission, to make sure that it goes forward with integrity and conviction.? Naturally, there are decisions that have to be taken.? But at the same time we must all…share in a sense of repentance and willingness to be renewed by the Spirit.
Read it carefully and read it all and note if you desire to you can watch the full address on video there.
Surgeon to gangrenous patient: There are no quick solutions. Let’s wait and see what happens. Maybe the Spirit of Medicine will heal you. We’ll try to minimize the damage as best we can, but we’ll let the wound go forward with integrity and conviction. In the meantime, we share in a sense of regret and a greater willingness to be renewed by the Spirit.
Thank you, Dr. Williams. Will you permit me to seek a second opinion?
ABoC Williams says: “there will be questions” — ?
There aren’t any questions. It is what it is. That is entirely clear. There is no “confusion” on this side of the equation. TEC has made its stand very clear. There are no more questions or confusions no matter how hard anyone tries to obfuscate.
This dithering around trying to convince people: “Oh come, it isn’t as bad as all that.” just can’t work anymore. It is that bad, and it won’t get better by wishing, and you can’t make people believe otherwise for very long.
[i] Slightly edited by elf. [/i]
A few questions:
[blockquote]And as I speak to you now, I am in discussion with a number of people around the world about what consequences might follow from that decision, and how we express the sense that most Anglicans will want to express, that this decision cannot speak for our common mind.[/blockquote]
If this is so, why does senior staff at 815 believe that the ABC through back channel communications already advised them that he would be taking no actions against TEC on account of Glasspool, save a little handwringing for public consumption? Or is this cleverly worded so as to in fact not be inconsistent with that?
[blockquote] I hope also in your thinking about this and in your reacting to it, you’ll bear in mind that there are no quick solutions for the wounds of the Body of Christ. It is the work of the Spirit that heals the Body of Christ, not the plans or the statements of any group, or any person, or any instrument of communion. Naturally we seek to minimize the damage, to heal the hurts, to strengthen our mission, to make sure that it goes forward with integrity and conviction. Naturally, there are decisions that have to be taken. But at the same time we must all—as indeed your own covering notes suggest for your conference—we must all share in a sense of repentance and willingness to be renewed by the Spirit.[/blockquote]
If this is taken on its face, would not decisions to be taken such as to no longer recognize the ACO, ACC and JSC until TEC is removed, pending their repentance and renewal, and to recognize being in communion with ACNA, further such repentance and renewal? And to fail to do so to discourage repentance and renewal, and in fact to encourage TEC further? Or is this missive an attempt to trick the global south into not doing anything that might upset his prior promises to TEC that he did not intend to take any actions against it?
Why is the healing of wounds sooner rather than later a bad thing? And when did something “a matter of urgency” become something of no particular urgency and why?
[i] Ad hominem comment deleted by elf. [/i]
#3 Pendennis
I think the Global South is way beyond bering tricked.
It is highly likely that the ABoC may have communicated just such an idea to the good folk at 815 2nd Ave. They may believe it.
But it ain’t gonna work no more.
Gosh, the sound of this rhetoric is exactly something out of [i]The Great Divorce[/i] and [i]The Screwtape Letters[/i]
This isn’t even funny. It’s sad.
“If this is so, why does senior staff at 815 believe that the ABC through back channel communications already advised them that he would be taking no actions against TEC on account of Glasspool, save a little handwringing for public consumption?”
Why do you believe this to be true? I haven’t seen anything about this — where have senior staff at 815 revealed this?
NYC scuttlebutt. 815 and related TEC entities, like most bureaucracies, are not made up of people all with one mind, and it is hard to keep a secret in a big place. I don’t have evidence that it is true. But I know people whose sympathies are with what TEC is doing, who have reason to know and have heard it, so I tend to believe it is very likely. That it fits known facts and prior back channel communications we do know about, all the more so.
watch his hands and not his mouth. He does nothing at all to sanction liberals whilst always trying to hold the thing together….if we can just hold it together a bit longer then they will accept the innovations. If he REALLY had concerns then this would and could hve been dealt with long ago…
Sometimes the Holy Spirit has to be given time to work out God’s purposes; other times, the Holy Spirt must be allowed to come with a sword and fire to devour what is not of God. A good leader is the one who knows which time is which. Ms Glasspool’s selection may not inspire the latter (afterall, political correctness may require one male and one female gay person, each, to be a TEC bishop), but I would suggest that if Mr Barlow is selected in Utah, the latter may very well occur, even if the AbofC is not of that mind.
And I add a reflection that an Archbishop capable of stating the RC church has lost ‘all credibility’ because of the sins of a grotty few is unable to say the same of a church willingly embracing what is sinful – where is the same condemnation for Schori et al?
Based on his words and deeds, it is clear that the ABC approves of, and will do nothing to stop, TEC. His clarion call to inaction in spite of TEC’s continuing actions speaks volumes.
#7-
Some of the HoBD communications seem to indicate this is the case as well, although no one is saying it directly.
There is also the substantial evidence provided by the current circumstances.
A) All the people the ABoC needs to talk to about consequences are currently in Singapore. So, they know, without question, whether he has talked with them or not. More important, they know that he has not DONE one thing required of him by Windsor and Dar (read Abp. Anis earlier today in Singapore).
B) The only rational thing to do was to implement the consequences BEFORE this meeting started, not send a video saying that you were thinking about maybe doing something, and talking to someone OTHER THAN the 20 Primates most seriously impacted by TEC’s outrageous behavior and prevarications of the last 12 years.
C) He has not yet implemented the Dromentine Communique, the Windsor report recommendations or the Dar Communique, nor taken any action on his own letter of last summer. So why on earth would anyone think he will take action on the Glasspool consecration?
D) This statement redefines the problem, once again, into one where he can issue one of his “we are not of a common mind” statements. That is not the problem. The problem, as the GS has clearly recognized (see ++Okoh’s sermon/speech of yesterday), is that we are not of a common Gospel.
I think the AB is working on the finishing touches to his two-track system proposal.
What two tracks? That had been his suggestion earlier on, but the current form of the Covenant does not seem to include an actual model for two tracks to exist in any formal way.
The “Standing Committee” finished their own final form of the Covenant and sent it out to all the Provinces without any further comment from the ABoC or any of the other “Instruments.” It seems to imply that an ecclesiastical entity can be in some kind of relationship with the rest of the AC without actually signing onto the Covenant, but it doesn’t really spell this out — at least as far as I can see.
Someone correct me if I’m wrong.
So there are no finishing touches to be worked on. Provinces seem to be welcome to dither on indefinitely “studying” the Covenant without actually signing onto it with no impairment of the “bonds of affection.”
In light of learning about Benedict XVI’s trip to Malta (a the truly Christian response of repentance and amendment of life), against the backdrop of ArchBp Williams’ addressed, I am convinced the Anglican Communion (here in the West) is the more dangerous place for God’s people to be.
Does anyone else find it curious that, after seven years of this archbishopal(?) drivel, there are people still paying attention to him?
17, I do. I really do. He could announce that the sun is coming up and I would want second and third opinions.
RE: “I am in discussion with a number of people around the world about what consequences might follow from that decision, and how we express the sense that most Anglicans will want to express, that this decision cannot speak for our common mind.”
KJS’s letter to the Primates re. the Glasspool consents went out in March, prior to the HOB meeting which began on March 19. It has been a month, and he’s still “in discussion”???
tj # 13 is correct. Stratgically, from Cantour’s perspective, it would have made more sense to announce the consequences prior to the GS4 meeting.
I find it interesting that following nearly a decade of speeches, writings, meetings, delegated committees, and responses to crisis after crisis, that there is anyone here who doesn’t understand that when it comes to this ABC, “what you have been seeing is what get.”
Were you expecting clarity in presentation? Maybe immediate, decisive and compelling action? Possibly a move away from seeking political accommodation? Don’t hold your breath. It’s not likely to happen.
Basic counseling theory dictates that a persons personality is relatively fixed by their mid-twenty’s. I once attended a symposium where a participant asked, “So, can you give us an example of what can dynamically change personality after, say . . . 25?” The answer provided by the presenter was swift and to the point: “A stroke!”
Of course, I believe all things are possible through God, but short of His intervention, I wouldn’t expect any changes in how +++Rowan Williams chooses to deal with the matters at hand. He is who he is and he does what he does because of who and what he is.
#19 Moving Forward: Of course he did not announce any consequences before the Singapore meeting because there are not and will not be any consequences. Consequences are what we just can’t have.
#3. I wouldn’t trust 815’s version of anything, including what they believe is back-channel and leak-able. If they are going to be put in a second-tier, they would not be told this, not until the details were in place. My hunch is that what 815 could be intimating is that Kearon is making assurances. But his ‘assurances’ of this or that are precisely what are now under negotiation. That is, if the Communion is to survive. Lots of things have to be taken into consideration: the status of the so-called Standing Committee, the role of Ian Douglas (no longer a presbyter ACC rep), the effect of Glasspool, etc.
Dr. Seitz,
You are no doubt correct, both on TEC having occasionally leaked less than credible information (assuming I take your inference correctly) and that TEC itself may be receiving assurances from someone not in the loop himself.
One is left to wonder who it is the ABoC is negotiating with, as it seems the leadership of the Global South is not among them. It would seem to have made sense for ++Rowan to do anything he intended to do before this meeting rather than after. At this point, we are faced with the Standing Committee participating, via KJS and Douglas, in the consecration of Glasspool, and there is no indication to date that the ABoC disapproves of said consecration, other than that it comes at an inconvenient time for him. So far, we have an observation that it is not in keeping with the mind of the Communion. Which puts it on a par with mediocre sherry.
+RDW does consult very widely, including with the Primates in question. I suspect he stayed away from Singapore for a number of practical reasons, but if he is going to introduce consequences that would satisfy the GS and the Communion concerns more specifically, it would be better if he does it off his own bat and not as if pressured from attending a meeting. At issue is the credibility of the Standing Committee, rules governing the representations at ACC, the status of those consenting to Glasspool (esp the PB). I disagree that +RDW has not stated disapproval for the Glasspool consent, and as the consecration has not yet happened, he would not speak to it. But anyone can see that the situation is dire. BTW, I do not believe +Mouneer was speaking of a Canterbury-free Communion, but of no need to create special structures to create something not already in place. “There is a Communion right now” is what he said, and the implication is, those who do not wish to associate with it have by this intention gotten what they sought.
#22 – I didn’t intend to suggest they are under the illusion they control him. I think they believe they have a promise he will go to bat for them. Pershaps not expecting a home run, but they are hoping for a single. (For others, not expecting a cow shot, just a run or two. Personally, I think he’s been a walking wicket so far.)
Since +RDW has been publically and clearly critical of Glasspool’s consent; and has spoken of consequences; and has infuriated the Left Wing, it is hard to know how that translates into assurances back channel to 815. Would this take the form of: ‘I promise to make sure the consequences do nothing to satisfy the concerns of 80% of the Communion, which is now prepared to exist without me’? Gosh, if this is what he has told 815, then he has written his obituary and that of the Communion. It is hard to know what kind of cosmetic consequences could be dreamed up now that would keep the Communion intact. That game is over. Can the PB be assured of a place at the next Primates meeting? I doubt it, without terrible fallout. Can the Standing Committee as presently defended continue on? That seems unlikely. I’d be curious to know who at 815 is saying all is going to be well. That sounds suspiciously like delusion or insider group-think. Better to see TEC making noises of being its own Communion, with the PB its Head, etc. That kind of noise making does not follow from a green light, but from a yellow or red one. But we shall soon seen.
#26 – Were I not aware of his jettisoning of the DES communique, the pass he gave to the TEC HoBD meeting in New Orleans, his stacking of the JSC in favor of TEC, and, worst of all, his awful and quite public intervention to protect TEC’s interests in Jamaica, I might be more persuadable about that. And I don’t know that he has infuriated the institutionalist part of TEC’s left wing (funny that we call it a left wing when TEC consists now of a large left wing, a small group of communion partners, and that is pretty much it). But we shall see.
Persuadable about what? That if strong decisions are not made that satisfy the GS leadership ranging from Chew to Orombi, the Communion will collapse? That was my main point. RDW does not have the options he has had in the past because the past is not today. The Communion is at a different place and his choices are different and narrower. My only other point is that I was never persuaded that noises out of 815 back channel were credible, as you were suggesting that (‘all will go well’). I doubt that. I doubt that 815 is in any position to know what RDW will be deciding and that they can be confident it will be well with them.
I am inclined to give Dr. Seitz a certain credence based on the fact that some of the public rhetoric from the GS has cooled off in the last 24-36 hours, which might indicate a positive interaction with the ABoC.
However, the issue remains that ++Rowan has given no public indication that he is actually going to take any action- he has spoken of “relational consequences” and “not representing the mind of the communion”- but those were givens from the outset- and not dependent on any action of the ABoC. He may, indeed, realize that there is no way on earth that the PB can legitimately sit on the SCAC when she is not in communion with 20 out of 39 churches. But at some point, he needs to tell her that.
My greatest fear is that he may think that if he gets the PB to back off actually participating in the consecration personally, that he can maintain some fiction that she can retain her seat on the SCAC and in the Primates Meeting. And if he does think that, things are going to deteriorate very rapidly.
The other major concern I have is that ++Rowan has so loaded the Communion structures with people reluctant to take disciplinary action, that if indeed he now wants to do something, the Communion structures will not respond.
to 29. Given the current climate in TEC, and the reactions of prominent TEC leaders to Abp Rowan W’s address (such as on Preludium, whose author recently dismissed the Lambeth Quadralateral, without much notice): If the Presiding B of TEC failed to consecrate Glasspool she would face a storm in TEC greater than Rowan W will face from the Primates should he choose to continue on as if nothing has happened.
Chances of Schori not being in LA for “the big day” are nil.
TEC has gotten used to the idea of going its own way.
#28, just for clarification, persuadable that the Williams intended to take strong decisions that would satisfy the GS leadership to prevent the Communion from collapse.
And I was not predicting his behaviour. If you read carefully, I was stating what the circumstances now governing the situation are, inside of which +RDW must now operate. I think it is perilous to try to read the future when we are in the period we are in, and I would not believe anything TEC-815 thought would happen or would not happen as relevant. I do not believe there is some cozy relationship between 815 and +RDW, and that goes both ways. 815 is hedging its bets all the way down the line. If they get ‘consequences’ they do not like, watch the strategy to change very quickly: the PB as head of her own Communion. That is a prediction I am prepared to make re: 815. I believe this has always been Plan B.
PS–just read some of the prior notices. I agree that the odds of the PB not being involved in the consecration of Glasspool are zero. This is a banner moment for the PB. She likes going her own way, proudly. This will be a ceremony with great pomp and massive enthusiasm: TEC breaking free from the shackles of injustice, etc. Also, frankly, I can’t imagine a scenario where she would be asked not to attend — RDW is not stupid. That would not change the GS’s view of TEC one iota and he knows that. In my view, at question is whether he thinks there is some tertium quid, some hidden choice that will buy more time. I can’t see it. Too much light has poured into the Communion from TEC’s patterns of behaviour. Communication may be rapid with internet, but cultural realities still mean something. It takes time for 1/3 of the GS to know what genuinely to believe. They know now. Patience has worn out.
Thank you Dr. Seitz, for your 32 and 33. I think you are absolutely correct on your “plan b” scenario. I have wondered for a while if it might not be evolving into “plan A.” Given the current status of TEC with the majority of the Communion, this condition exists de facto to a great extent already. And you are also certainly correct, as evidenced by statements from ++Mouneer Anis and ++Ian Earnest, that the GS has run out of patience.