The Archbishop of Canterbury is preparing to target individual bishops whose pro-gay policies threaten to derail his efforts to avert schism, The Daily Telegraph has learnt.
In a high-risk strategy, Dr Rowan Williams may even snub them by withdrawing their invitations to next year’s Lambeth Conference.
He has told friends he will challenge any bishop he believes is coming to the conference with an agenda “very much at odds” with his attempts to maintain unity in the worldwide Church.
Dr Williams sent invitations in May to most of the Anglican Church’s 880 bishops around the world for the once-a-decade showcase gathering in Canterbury.
He withheld invitations from only a handful of particularly divisive figures, including Bishop Gene Robinson, who became Anglicanism’s first openly gay bishop in 2003.
But he has now indicated that he is prepared to scrutinise controversial bishops he had already invited if there is evidence that they are unwilling to compromise their views.
There are a bunch of conflicting signals coming out of Lambeth in recent weeks. I would encourage people to have a cautious skepticism about this report and to keep an open mind until there is a statement from the Archbishop of Canterbury backing up this account.
If I had one dollar for all the things I have been told Rowan Williams would do (and that subsequently he has not done) over the last several years, it would add up to a lot of money.
Caveat Emptor.
Waiting for +Cantuar to act decisively is like waiting for Godot. Could happen though, and worth some prayers. Read narrowly, the view described would not incline him to invite any of the “controversial” traditional bishops such as +Minns. Unfortunate, but at this point I would gladly settle for the half loaf of blocking the most egregious offenders, such as 90% of TEC.
APB
“I Like Iker!“
Whether true or not, the coming Lambeth fiasco is an example of what happens in a leadership vacuum. Leadership requires the ability to formulate vision, goals and strategies, then have the will to implement these essentials.
Hint to Rowan – scripture contains numerous example of leaders, both succsssful and unsuccessful. You may note that those who did not follow His Word were never successful in the long run.
The statements from Lambeth over the last few months are definitely pointing in the direction of recognizing dioceses rather than national church bodies as members of the communion. The attempt seems to be to try and divide the national bodies into smaller parts. (half of global south and half of TEC is better than none of the global south and none of TEC) It will ultimately fail though, as the only criteria for membership seems to be that each member should want to maintain unity.
[blockquote] 14 You are not the same as those who do not believe. So do not join yourselves to them. Good and bad do not belong together. Light and darkness cannot share together.15 How can Christ and Belial, the devil, have any agreement? What can a believer have together with a nonbeliever? [/blockquote]
The current crisis is not really about gay bishops. Its really about bishops who no longer believe and publicly declare that, and teach that, and only hire clergy who follow their line, and who actively undermine congregations that do believe. They crept in under the guise of social justice, and they now hold the power in many places.
Social justice is a good cause, and it should be followed by all in the church. Teaching that Jesus never died, that the atonement was a myth and that salvation can be obtained though all faiths is a lie and any that teach these things should be removed from any position of authority.
Unfortunately, those in leadership positions in the Anglican communion don’t seem to want to address the root cause amongst those in authority.
If true, this is better late than never, but what was the hurry in sending out invitations in May? All this did was give a green light to the revisionists, precisely those ++Rowan now presumably wishes to sanction. What the ABC fails to realize is that it is his inaction and mixed signals that are doing the most grievous harm to the Communion. Will he disinvite himself for his feckless somnambulism?
As I said over at SF, the signature action (the only action?) of Rowan Williams tenure was to personally kill the DeS communique. He opposed calling of the primates because that could make the death (or murder) of the DeS communique have some meaning. Look for Rowan to continue the process of trying to erase memory of the sad, short life of the poor little communique.
I will believe what Rowan Williams is going to do when he has done it, and not before. These statements from “sources close to Williams” have been all over the place.
I guess then he is going to resign?
I am in agreement that not only do we have to wait for Rowan Williams to say he is going to do it, we have to actually wait to see if he actually does it.
Until Spence, Ingham, Jefferts-Schori, Bruno, Andrus, etc., etc. begin to scream and holler that their invitations were revoked, this story should be taken with a grain of salt.
cautious skepticism indeed.
At most this seems to be a behind-the-scene public relations ploy to keep conservatives off balance. Rowan has already received and accepted “assurance” that TEC wants unity.
The only positive about this article is in the absence of any ABC comment re Venables. The longer ABC’s silence, in light of explicit requests to qualify and weaken the So. Cone’s overture, the more likely this alternative/emergency Primatial arrangement is to be accepted as is.
When Bill Clinton was president, he used the media to ‘float trial balloons’ on possible policies. If the reaction by the public was positive, he’d go ahead to implement those policies. If the reaction was negative, he’d deny he’d ever had any intention of such a thing!
I wonder if this is such as that? A ‘leak’ to test the waters for reaction before implimentation?
Quote:
“He has told friends he will challenge any bishop he believes is coming to the conference with an agenda “very much at odds” with his attempts to maintain unity in the worldwide Church.”
This could result (if true) in the withdrawing of invites of Global South Bishops who have crossed provincial lines as well as those such as Duncan and Iker — it might play out both ways with only those who are laying low being invited. If that is true, then Lambeth would just end up being a “love fest”.
Assuming for the moment jounalistic accuracy, would this mean he would or would not invite Jefferts-Schori? Either choice for him is catastrophe of one sort or another. Oh, maybe that is why the non-invite observer status was invented…
This is not necessarily good news. By emphasizing the relationship betwen the seperate dioceses and Canterbury, doesn’t he reduce the influence and authorities of the primates , and minimize the accountability of the provinces?
I wonder what Queen Elizabeth is saying “privately†to +++Rowan? After all the preponderance of the Anglican Communion are within the borders of the British Commonwealth of Nations and owe more loyalty to her than to +++Rowan. The greatest breakers of the Anglican Communion are in North America…TEC and Church of Canada. Is Canada still in the commonwealth? They haven’t acted liked they are for many years. I would think that Her Majesty would be very displeased with what +++Rowan is allowing to happen.
Can she fire him?
Canada is part of the Commonwealth, and I am pretty sure that QEII is on the currency.
If +++Rowan’s strategy is to bring individual dioceses into line, rather than deal with “national” churches, I think there is some real hope for movement. For one thing, it makes for more localized decisions that empower more people-there is positively nothing I can do to influence 815, but I CAN talk to my bishop. Two-the bishop and standing committee really have to think through what they are willing to do and sacrifice, rather than acting as part of a herd.
Of course, I am assuming a certain consistency in signals that may not be correct.
Oldman (#15) – The Commonwealth is no longer ‘British’ – it is officially ‘The Commonwealth of Nations’. Most of the member states (e.g India, South Africa….) are republics. Some, however, have retained the Queen as their head of state. Thus she is Queen of Canada. Likewise Queen of Australia. In her realms she can only act on the advice of her Prime Ministers. So no she cannot ‘fire’ +Rowan. It would take an act of Parliament to remove him – and that is not going to happen. Of course, in private she is able to offer advice and sympathy for +Rowan’s plight. Please note, however, just as the Church of England has a high proportion of homosexual clergy so too does the Royal Household. Draw your own conclusions. For what it’s worth, I suspect she is saying to +Rowan, ‘Can you believe these Americans? One lot jumps the gun ordaining a partnered gay man as Bishop. The other lot is intent on destroying the Anglican Communion over it. One does wish they would be a little more quiet.’
Let’s hope if the ABC does start targetting that he has a great deal of ammunition. He’ll need it because there is a lot of targets to aim at from the PB on down.