The Anglican Consultative Council failed to follow its rules in soliciting approval for its new constitution, critics of the London-based ”˜instrument of communion’ tell The Church of England Newspaper.
Some provinces were never asked to approve the ACC’s new constitution, while others were asked to approve “in principle” a draft version that differed from the final document lodged with the Registrar of Companies for England and Wales on July 10, 2010, while a third group reported that the draft it approved was substantially similar to the one adopted.
The resulting uncertainty has likely resulted in two Anglican Consultative Councils under law: a limited corporation created under English law on July 12, 2010, and an English charitable trust registered in 1978.
Read it all (requires subscription).
Update: You may find the full article there.
The Curmudgeon’s trenchant analysis is needed for this one.
Wow. Just wow.
The legal advisor to the ACC reported at the most recent Standing Committee:
These words look to have been very carefully chosen. Notice he doesn’t say the Provinces “approved” or “ratified” the new Constitution/Articles (which certainly was demanded by the old Constitution). In addition, it looks as though even the phrase “the Provinces” doesn’t mean “all Provinces of the Anglican Communion” but something like “more than one Province”.
Is such a ratification legal under English law?
The Governance of the Communion is in chaos.
Who adjudicates?
Tragically driver8 (#3) you are right …
Does anyone know what precipitated the perceived need for new Articles in 2002?
I see the web version of this article can be read on George Conger’s site here
Just amazing.
Pageantmaster will be able to answer better than I can. Crudely, however, I think one initial concern was the financial liabilities that could be incurred by the Committee members under the old Articles (particularly in relation to the organizing of the Lambeth Conference).