On the Dublin [Primates'] Meeting: A Global South Anglican Editorial

Unless and until there is unequivocal commitment to honour the agreed basis of Lambeth Resolution 1.10 and implement the decisions of previous Primates’ Meetings (2005, 2007, 2009) expressed in the respective Communiqués, especially that of Dar es Salem 2007, it will only lead to further erosion of the credibility of the Primates’ Meeting and accentuate our failure to honour the work already done by them.

What is most disturbing and difficult is that given the intractable miry situation the Communion is already in and being further driven into, there was hardly any timely and intentional prior consultation and collegial engagement of all concerned (or at least as many as reasonably possible) in preparing for the Meeting to ensure certain degree of significant and principally legitimate outcome to hold and move the Communion together. In light of the critical importance of the Meeting, the preparations are gravely inadequate. As it stands, the Meeting is almost pre-determined to end up as just another gathering that again cannot bring about effective ecclesial actions, despite the precious time, energy and monetary resources that Primates and Provinces have invested in attending the Meeting. This, most Provinces could scarcely afford. With the disappointingly lack of serious transparent planning and leadership beforehand to prepare the Primates for a genuine meeting of minds and hearts to face the very real and obvious issues before us, it will be strenuous to expect any significant, meaningful, credible and constructive outcome of the Dublin Meeting.

Read it all (my emphasis).


Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Anglican Primates, Global South Churches & Primates

One comment on “On the Dublin [Primates'] Meeting: A Global South Anglican Editorial

  1. Bart Hall (Kansas, USA) says:

    It is the standard operating procedure of leftists to “continue dialogue” whilst in fact continuing to push towards their intended goal regardless of promises, rules, custom, or anything else. There is not the least intention to arrive at a “common understanding” other than capitulation by the other side.

    When perhaps a third agree with the leftists there is an “emerging consensus” on the matter. When 80 or 90 percent agree with conservatives there is, of course, “no consensus,” and we must keep talking.

    We must remember in this discussion that in the Episcopal Church over three-quarters of its [i]BISHOPS[/i] actively rejected both the authority of scripture [i]and[/i] the 39 Articles (GC’03, B-001). That the crushing majority of students at its main seminary, EDS, are unabashedly homosexual. And that Episcopal churches all across America are performing same-sex ‘weddings,’ including — to cite just one recent example — a transitional deacon in Columbus, Ohio.

    There is absolutely no point in talking with people who are not approaching the issues in good faith.