Interesting how quick the ENS author is to try and say MORE than the GS leaders themselves said. Note this paragraph where ENS tries to interpret the words of the communique (my bold):
Compare it with this passage from the communique:
19. We were pleased to welcome two Communion Partner bishops from The Episcopal Church USA (TEC) and acknowledge that with them there are many within TEC who do not accept their church’s innovations. We assure them of our loving and prayerful support. We are grateful that the recently formed Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) is a faithful expression of Anglicanism. We welcomed them as partners in the Gospel and our hope is that all provinces will be in full communion with the clergy and people of the ACNA and the Communion Partners.
Do you think the complete omission of any reference to the ACNA might have been an oversight???
I noticed the same thing, taz. Nor does the fact that “deposed” Bishop Duncan consecrated the Holy Communion for all these Global South bishops rate a mention.
[blockquote]Nor does the fact that “deposed†Bishop Duncan consecrated the Holy Communion for all these Global South bishops rate a mention. [/blockquote] Yes, one finds it interesting that the “not a member” of the Anglican Communion is welcome to perform sacramentally in more provinces than the “officially recognized, bona-fide, seal of approval, full communion with Canterbury” member. Even those who maintain nominal full communion with TEC are beginning to find the leadership of TEC embarrassing to have around.
Interesting how quick the ENS author is to try and say MORE than the GS leaders themselves said. Note this paragraph where ENS tries to interpret the words of the communique (my bold):
[blockquote]It also urged Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams to take action against the two provinces, as suggested in the Windsor Report [b](presumably in Section D),[/b] the 2005 Primates Meeting Communiqué from Dromantine [b](presumably paragraphs 13-19)[/b] and [b]apparently in the so-called “Schedule”[/b] appended to the 2007 Primates Meeting Communiqué from Dar es Salaam.[/blockquote]
#1 – Karen B. – I thought it was interesting you picked this paragraph because the “so-called” stuck out in my mind.
Note that not one word was written about the teachings or the spiritual centeredness of the Encounter. Only what may affect TEC.
I noticed with interest this passage from the ENS article:
Some 130 delegates from 20 Anglican provinces in Africa, West Indies, Asia and South America attended, according to the communiqué, along with what it called a number of “our partners in the Gospel” from Australia, New Zealand, and the United States. The statement welcomed two Communion Partners bishops from the Episcopal Church and “acknowledge[d] that with them there are many within TEC who do not accept their church’s innovations. We assure them of our loving and prayerful support.”
Compare it with this passage from the communique:
19. We were pleased to welcome two Communion Partner bishops from The Episcopal Church USA (TEC) and acknowledge that with them there are many within TEC who do not accept their church’s innovations. We assure them of our loving and prayerful support. We are grateful that the recently formed Anglican Church in North America (ACNA) is a faithful expression of Anglicanism. We welcomed them as partners in the Gospel and our hope is that all provinces will be in full communion with the clergy and people of the ACNA and the Communion Partners.
Do you think the complete omission of any reference to the ACNA might have been an oversight???
I noticed the same thing, taz. Nor does the fact that “deposed” Bishop Duncan consecrated the Holy Communion for all these Global South bishops rate a mention.
[blockquote]Nor does the fact that “deposed†Bishop Duncan consecrated the Holy Communion for all these Global South bishops rate a mention. [/blockquote] Yes, one finds it interesting that the “not a member” of the Anglican Communion is welcome to perform sacramentally in more provinces than the “officially recognized, bona-fide, seal of approval, full communion with Canterbury” member. Even those who maintain nominal full communion with TEC are beginning to find the leadership of TEC embarrassing to have around.
My sense is that “not a member” indicated a bit of pique.