THE Church of England response to the draft Anglican Covenant was published on Wednesday, in advance of a meeting of the international Design Group later this month.
There is a new draft text, overseen by the House of Bishops’ theological group, and building on earlier work done by the Faith and Order Advisory Group. A key addition is a clause prohibiting interfering in other dioceses or provinces without official sanction.
The text identifies a need for greater theological justification and context, wants a “minimalist” approach to doctrinal argument, and suggests significant revisions in key areas such as Section 6, “The Unity of the Communion”, especially on the part played by the Primates’ Meeting.
Could we all agree that we believe in a higher power? How minimalist do we need to be?
I think you could tell this story in a considerably more positive manner than the Church Times choses to do.
There is the legal point that Synod cannot formally delegate its powers to the Primates or any other body. This is balanced by a commitment to the discipline of the Communion that the Church Times doers not mention. I would like to see this commitment fleshed out, not in terms of the Covenant text, but in terms of what it would mean in practice for the CoE. I wonder if it means that the CoE House of Bishops affirm that they will voluntarily uphold the disciplinary decisions of the Primates (just as they voluntarily uphold Lambeth 1.10).
(In short it seems to me that the CoE HOB may be doing just what the TEC HOB refused to do. Namely, to voluntarily commit themselves to accepting the guidance of the Primates).
As an aside, the photograph of Archbishop Drexel Gomez accompanying the web article can only have been chosen to be especially unflattering.
driver8, both photo and text are entirely in character: the Church Times is a publication which, rather like its politically allied British newspapers the Independent or the Guardian, is patently not committed to a hermeneutic of interpreting texts in the spirit in which they were written.
Great! Minimalist doctrine; prevention of discipline —
Why not make worship completely optional and then all the ordination vows will be totally meaningless. Go for it, guys.
Oh, wait. There isn’t even a standard BCP any more, and TEC would rather use the “supplemental texts” anyway.
So as little doctrine as possible. No discipline for misbehaving national churches and worship du jour. Sounds just like the
Gospel, doesn’t it?!?