(ENS)
Anglican bishops from Latin America and the Caribbean, meeting in San José, Costa Rica, May 18-22, released a declaration reaffirming their call for the Anglican Communion “to preserve its participative nature, diverse, ample and inclusive,” characteristics they say are essential to Anglicanism.
The declaration was signed by 21 bishops, including the Primates of Brazil, Central America and Mexico, and Bishop Lloyd Allen of Honduras, president of the Episcopal Church’s Province IX.
Saying they represent the “plurality and diversity that are universal characteristics of Anglicanism,” the bishops acknowledged that they “hold different positions on the themes that are presently discussed in the Communion.” However, they continued, “we have also experienced that the plurality and diversity we represent has become a rich source for growth, rather than a cause for controversy and division.”
The bishops unanimously expressed their determination “to remain united as members of the same family and will continue to come to the Lord’s Table, together.” They invited all bishops, clergy and laity “who identify with this vision to join together and work for an effective reconciliation, interdependence and unity in the diversity of our family of faith and so preserve the valuable legacy of which we are guardians.”
The declaration is intended to “renew and ratify” a position proposed in a statement that that was issued at the Latin America Anglican Theological Congress meeting in Panama City October 5-10, 2005.
Inspiring and inspired.
What sad news this is for the orthodox who uphold the Truth.
What is this group? Is is self-appointed? Why no Southern Cone bishops? Why no Drexel Gomez? Can this body (all liberal bishops, without exception) really speak for Latin America and the Caribbean?
I have to wonder if they are worried about which side their bread is buttered.
The Duke, the Global Center was formed at the CETALC (Comisión de Educación Teológica para América Latina y el Caribe) conference held in Panamá in October of 2005. The bishops there produced the Panama Declaration, stating that they were Global Center, and not aligned with either the Global South or the Global North. The Southern Cone is aligned with the Global South, so I wouldn’t expect any bishops from that province to attend a Global Center meeting. Not all of Latin America is part of the group known as the Global South, and not all bishops in the Caribbean agree with ++Gomez. Yes, I believe that the Global Center bishops can speak for Latin America and the Caribbean.
Can there be any more evidence that we are spinning our wheels with this discussion? There can be no reconciling until the one offending says “I’m sorry. I won’t do it again.” That will not happen with reappraisers. There is no way forward. Let us divide what is left – my parish diminishes every day – before there is nothing left to sort out. How hollow empty buildings are! These Bishops are false shepherds. Communion means union and we do not have that.
Aren’t these all Provinces with direct dependence on ECUSA/TEC for monetary support via longstanding agreements. I trust they will form the nucleus of ECUSA/TEC siphonophants in the “true Anglican” communion that ECUSA/TEC is forming around the gospel of “inclusivism”. Time will show the hands being played for what they truly are.
Bp Allen was at the Plano Conference in 2003. It sounds as though somebody got to him….
#8: There are several bishops who were at the Plano Conference in 2003 who, having realized what their orthodox views might cost them, now walk some version of The Episcopal Church’s party line on “plurality and diversity”.
PS: And, sadly, one need look further than TEC’s so-called “Windsor Bishops”, or even some in the Network, to see examples of this.
I agree with Brad. I am increasing dismayed at the lack of action and waffling on the part of the AC and the ABC. They remind me of the good Bishop in KIngdom of Heaven, “Convert to Islam today, repent tomorrow.” I long since lost any hope or respect for TEC, and what ever I had for the AC is going fast.
Re #9
“Not all of Latin America is part of the group known as the Global South, and not all bishops in the Caribbean agree with ++Gomez. Yes, I believe that the Global Center bishops can speak for Latin America and the Caribbean.”
Not a regular poster but couldn’t let this one pass.
ALL the bishops of the Church in the Province of The West Indies (CPWI) agree (at least publicly) with ++Gomez.
None of those Dioceses/Provinces mentioned are a part of CPWI. CPWI is made up of, for the most part, island-nations – English-speaking formerly British colonies. This other group is made up of nations in Central/South America and speak Spanish.
Don’t let the moniker “Caribbean†fool you.
Gone Back to Africa: CPWI is not the sole province in the Caribbean.
The American Heritage Dictionary defines Caribbean as: “Of or relating to the Caribbean Sea, its islands, or it Central or South American coasts or to the peoples or cultures of this region.”
Venezuela, Columbia, Guyana Suriname, French Guiana are all considered Caribbean nations. Panamá, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, Belize and Mexico all have coasts on the Caribbean Sea and West Indian communities. Episcopal or Anglican churches in Panamá, Nicaragua, and Costa Rica are predominantly Afro-Antillano, or Caribbean. The bishops of Panamá, Nicaragua and Honduras are of West Indian heritage.
#12
“CPWI is not the sole province in the Caribbean. The American Heritage Dictionary defines Caribbean as: “Of or relating to the Caribbean Sea, its islands, or it Central or South American coasts or to the peoples or cultures of this region.â€
Never said it was, and that’s exactly my point, Padre. That’s why I said “Don’t let the moniker ‘Caribbean’ fool you.” There really is no “Caribbean” Anglican church so nobody can speak for the Caribbean. There is the church in the West Indies, and the church in Central/Latin America, with whom ++Gomez has no connection nor influence. Neither church can speak for the Caribbean.
(Similarly, TEC’s HOB doesn’t speak for the North American Anglican church – there is no such entity)
I think we are in agreement…wouldn’t you say?
I am no conspiracy theorist but I wonder why this group calls itself “Anglican Bishops of Latin America and the Caribbeanâ€, knowing full well they are really from Central/South America (as commonly understood) and they do not include the only 100lb gorilla in the region (whether they like him or not) ++Gomez, and his Province.
That’s like the US establishing NAFTA without Canada!
I’m saddened to see both +Tamayo of Uraguay and +Lloyd Allen of Honduras on this list. I believe they both were once counted as reasserters who supported the Global South.
[Maybe there will be a retraction from +Tamayo like there was with the Panama Declaration
( see: http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=9641 )
One can only hope?!?]
Speaking of the Panama Declaration:
When the Panama declaration came out (cited by #5) a number of us worried that there seemed to be no clear followup to the formation of CAPAC, and that the opportunity to unite orthodox Anglicans in the Americas (esp. Caribbean and Latin America) was perhaps being lost. It seems that proven to be true over time. Has CAPAC had any meeting or done anything since it was announced with such fanfare?
CAPAC formation:
http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=8058
background:
http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=7767
Panama declaration:
http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=9481
my comment on that thread about a lost opportunity for CAPAC was here:
http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/?p=9481#comment-349721
By the way, if you can’t get into the old T19 site, the Google Cache brings up all of the above just fine.
#13, you cite them excluding +Gomez. But also +Venables. Last time I checked, Southern Cone was in Latin America!
True Karen B, but my comment was related to the title “Caribbean”. Of course the same can be said about South America. This makes the statement that these bishops speak for “Latin America and the Caribbean” all the more ridiculous.
Bishops should speak for the churches under their charge, and for GOD.
Karen B. (#14): Regarding both +Tamayo of Uraguay and +Lloyd Allen of Honduras I believe we have a situation (repeated elsewhere..even in formerly reasserting places here in the US) where generous and kind orthodox leaders have taken this inclusive view: “We can use unorthodox resources and personnel in our parish/diocese, but we won’t let it shape our (or our people’s) perspective. We’ll receive the messenger, but gently refuse the message.” This approach has not worked.
There are many US parishes where the kind and gentle orthodox priest (or many diocese where the kind old bishop) allowed unorthodox priests and unorthodox teaching to enter in. The attitude was “The Truth will stand. The Church knows the faith and knows its job. I can be open (loving?) enough to allowing various teaching from my new assistant, Sunday school teacher, youth leader, etc… and these will not change the shape of Christian Faith HERE”.
If you believe that to “love” the re-appraiser, or “accept” him/her as a “full member of the Church” means making him/her a leader/priest/bishop/missionary in your church/diocese, then you will see re-appraiser views reshape the faith of the WHOLE church.
Of course we must love and accept the re-appraiser. But, people (the Church) are shaped by what they are taught by their Christian Education teachers, priests, and bishops (and by the people and resources we send to other parts of the world, like Uraguay, Honduras, Cuba, Mexico, etc. . . ). Duuuhhhh!