Home › T19 Categories › * Anglican - Episcopal › More Lambeth Invitations Likely

More Lambeth Invitations Likely

Posted on June 7, 2007 by Kendall Harmon

The invitation list for the 2008 Lambeth Conference of Anglican bishops is not complete, according to Canon James Rosenthal, communications director for the Anglican Consultative Council (ACC).

Invitations were sent May 22. The initial invitation list was compiled based on past precedent and the recommendations of the Windsor Report, according to Canon Rosenthal and other aides to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams who spoke with The Living Church.

Bishops who have not received invitations included those whose consecrations are valid but whose jurisdictions are anomalous, bishops not engaged in stipendiary episcopal ministry, and a handful of bishops whose manner of life or public actions are cause for concern. Invitation also were not extended to retired but semi-active bishops known as “assisting bishops” in The Episcopal Church or “honorary assistant bishops” in the Church of England.

Some previous Lambeth Conferences included bishops holding administrative positions within their national churches, but no such invitations have yet been extended for 2008. Episcopal bishops in this group include the Rt. Rev. C. Christopher Epting, the Presiding Bishop’s deputy for ecumenical and interfaith relations; the Rt. Rev. F. Clayton Matthews, director of the Office of Pastoral Development at The Episcopal Church Center; and the Rt. Rev. Steven Charleston, dean of the Episcopal Divinity School in Cambridge, Mass. All three are actively engaged in stipendiary church ministry and are active members of the House of Bishops, but are not directly engaged in “episcopal ministry,” the ACC said.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Archbishop of Canterbury, CANA, Episcopal Church (TEC), Lambeth 2008

7 comments on “More Lambeth Invitations Likely”

  1. Karen B. says:
    June 7, 2007 at 3:47 pm

    Ok, maybe it’s the early hour of the morning. But I’m having real trouble reconciling this from the article:

    The initial invitation list was compiled based on past precedent and the recommendations of the Windsor Report, according to Canon Rosenthal and other aides to Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams who spoke with The Living Church. (emphasis mine)

    with this from the Windsor Report itself:

    ¨ pending such expression of regret, those who took part as consecrators of Gene Robinson should be invited to consider in all conscience whether they should withdraw themselves from representative functions in the Anglican Communion. We urge this in order to create the space necessary to enable the healing of the Communion. (para 134)

    While we recognise that the Episcopal Church (USA) has by action of
    Convention made provision for the development of public Rites of blessing of same sex unions, the decision to authorise rests with diocesan bishops. Because of the serious repercussions in the Communion, we call for a moratorium on all such public Rites, and recommend that bishops who have authorised such rites in the United States and Canada be invited to express regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached by such authorisation. Pending such expression of regret, we recommend that such bishops be invited to consider in all conscience whether they should withdraw themselves from representative functions in the Anglican Communion. We recommend that provinces take responsibility for endeavouring to ensure commitment on the part
    of their bishops to the common life of the Communion on this matter. (para 144).

    So, please tell me. How is inviting bishops who served as consecrators of Gene Robinson, and how is inviting bishops who have authorized SS Blessings in their dioceses (Schori, Maze, Chane, Andrus, Bruno, Smith, Mark Beckwith to name a few of them) a case of “following the recommendations of the Windsor Report”???

    Seems to me the recommendations of the Windsor Report have been thrown out the window, frankly.

    Windsor Report link here:
    http://www.anglicancommunion.org/windsor2004/downloads/windsor2004full.pdf

  2. BabyBlue says:
    June 7, 2007 at 5:07 pm

    Another PR offensive. It’s not what is announced that is so interesting – it’s why Jim Rosenthall and his buddies are doing this. They are planting more seeds in the press – and the question is why? Responding to Uganda and Nigeria by threatening to invite all those Americans who haven’t been invited before? WOW. The Cat’s away and the Mice are at play.

    bb

  3. Vintner says:
    June 7, 2007 at 5:52 pm

    Not so surprising, Karen B, when you look at the phrasing. The Windsor Report did not recommend that the ABC not invite those bishops. The Windsor Report encouraged those bishops to withdraw themselves. Very different. Robinson’s case, I believe, is different. I think the WR specifically targeted him and asked that he not be included in the councils by the ABC.

  4. Pageantmaster Ù† says:
    June 7, 2007 at 6:17 pm

    #2 BB spot on.

    Pack ’em in!

  5. hyacinth says:
    June 8, 2007 at 12:27 am

    From here on, it’s all about strategy. Follow who gets in and who doesn’t and the reasoning behind the decision. Its time to start assessing who has a legitimate basis to warrant an invitation and how votes may be cast.

  6. Irenaeus says:
    June 8, 2007 at 1:14 am

    “Not directly engaged in episcopal ministry”

    Unlike Bp. Bennison.

  7. Irenaeus says:
    June 8, 2007 at 1:28 am

    Baby Blue [#2]: Picking up on your “P.R. OFFENSIVE” point, should we get ready for a Rosenthal press release announcing the release of WINDSOR REPORT II—prepared by Abps. Robin Eames and George Carnley, with assistance from Canon John Peterson, Canon Kenneth Kearon, Dr. Jenny Te Paa, and David Booth Beers, Esq.?