What did the Lusaka ACC-16 Meeting Decide? Some views

There are a number of reports of what went on and what its impact is. A few are below, but if readers can shed further light please let us know and add any links in the comments below.
ACC declines to go along with ‘consequences’ – ENS/Anglican Journal Canada

‘..the council declined to endorse or take any action similar to the primates’ call in January for three years of so-called “consequences” for the Episcopal Church. The primates’ call was in response to the 78th General Convention’s decision to change canonical language that defines marriage as being between a man and a woman (Resolution A036) and authorize two new marriage rites with language allowing them to be used by same-sex or opposite-sex couples (Resolution A054).’

ACC Churns Out Resolutions – The Living Church

‘Resolution C34, proposed by delegates from South Sudan, called upon the ACC to receive the report of the January Primates’ Meeting, including consequences for the Episcopal Church detailed by the primates’ communiqué. It affirmed “the commitment of the Primates of the Anglican Communion to walk together; and commits to continue to seek appropriate ways for the provinces of the Anglican Communion to walk together with each other and with the Primates and other Instruments of Communion.” As part of the consent agenda, the resolution was received without objection and passed without amendment.

A second resolution welcoming the full text of the primates’ communiqué was proposed by delegates from Ireland and Australia. It was initially set aside for further discussion, but was later withdrawn by the proposers. The Archbishop of Canterbury told the delegates that he was pleased with this action, saying that Resolution C34 “covers issues we need to cover,” establishing sufficient concurrence between the ACC and the Primates’ Meeting.

“The consequences [for the Episcopal Church] stand,” Archbishop Justin Welby said in a news conference Monday afternoon.’

ACC-16: Electric Boogaloo – Tom Ferguson, Crusty Old Dean

‘The ACC formally received the report from the Primates’ Meeting in a resolution proposed by Bishop Deng of Sudan. Further, declined to pass a resolution which would have received and welcomed the entire text of the Primates. Some people have been spinning the first action: by “receiving” the Report, is it acknowledging and approving of that report? Others have focused on the second action: Or, by declining to receive the entire text, is that somehow a repudiation? In the end, it did what it was supposed to do: one instrument of communion received a report from another. By failing to receive the entire report, this can clearly be seen as being reluctant to take any further steps, but Crusty is reluctant to see it as some kind of grand repudiation of the Primates, at least at this stage.’


Posted in * Anglican - Episcopal, Anglican Consultative Council

10 comments on “What did the Lusaka ACC-16 Meeting Decide? Some views

  1. Undergroundpewster says:

    The headline should read, “Anglicans meet and decide to not decide anything.”

    This gives TEc a “Get out of jail free” card, and proves that the ACC is useless as an “instrument of communion”.

    Throwing the ball back to GAFCON to make the next move.

  2. dwstroudmd+ says:

    This Anglican Fudge is unbelievable because as usual everything was done and nothing was done and TEc has its cake and eats it too.

    What do you call it when all Anglicans begin at Point A and ambulate in all infinite directions at the same time? Walking together if you are in the Global North coterie and walking apart everywhere else.

  3. tjmcmahon says:

    I’m surprised. I figured after I saw this that the Piskies would be off to storm Lambeth Palace

    I note that TEC went so far overboard with its PR that the ACC actually issued a real press release, and not just the usual fluff-
    (Not that the Gafcon Primates meeting would have anything to do with it, but I think the ACO and Lambeth really, really want the GS to see this rather than the TEC version)

  4. pendennis88 says:

    One may recall that, in the US, TEC has argued in litigation (and not without support, based on Robert’s Rules of Order, though it is not altogether clear and who knows what a UK charitable corporation applies) that voting to receive a report means nothing other than that it was physically received. (They argue that without voting to approve the report, it is not approved even though received.) This was back in the Virginia property litigation, concerning the Protocol for Departing Congregations agreed to by the Bishop and his chancellor, which the Standing Committee voted to “receive”, but later said was not approved when the Bishop changed his mind.

  5. tjmcmahon says:

    True, but at this point, to read the TEC reports, you would think that the ACC voted down the Primates requirements.

    Took me a while, but I now see the logic by which Welby is working- or maybe, how the maneuver is supposed to work.

    1. Primates issue communique, Welby promises to uphold consequences.
    2. Welby allows TEC to attend meeting with the excuse that ACC is out of his jurisdiction.
    3. ACO gerrymanders meeting so nothing is voted on until last day.
    4. Let Douglas find out through various whispered conversations that if he runs for the open chair position, he will lose by the same margin TEC lost in the Primates meeting. Suggest to Douglas it would be best for all concerned if he did not run.
    5. The resolutions are presented in a particular order- with TEC voting on the various doctrinal and polity issues.
    6. Vote to receive Primates statement and IN THE FUTURE “walk with” the Primates.
    7. So, for the next 3 years, no TEC member will vote on any polity or doctrine matter in the ACC.
    8. Schedule next ACC meeting for just past the end of 3 years (so the communique will expire before the next one- Rowan WIlliams playbook, page 9)
    9.Announce that ACC has agreed to uphold Primates communique.

    So, he arranged things so all the doctrine and polity stuff was done BEFORE the ACC voted on the communique, and of course, after they voted, it is a mute point, because the ACC won’t meet during the timeframe of the communique.

    Which, if the plan is what I think it is, leads us up to 2 and a half years from now, when….

    10. Primates meeting scheduled for early 2019 is canceled on some pretext (TBA) which will result in…
    a) 3 years runs out, and Primates cannot extend or strengthen “consequences” for TEC after 2018 GC.
    b) Primates do not have opportunity to make recommendations on Lambeth invitations.
    c) Instead, ABoC meets with liberal standing committee primates (ie- ++Mouneer absents himself), TEC gets back to running ACO and ACC, and Welby invites 200 TEC bishops to Lambeth- which will constitute 2/3 of the bishops that attend.

  6. Luke says:

    Nothing “mute” about the meeting…lots of noise.

  7. Katherine says:

    TJ, you may be right, but by that time nobody in the majority communion (GAFCON), will care.

  8. Jim the Puritan says:

    Whatever happened to “let your yes be yes and your no be no”? (Matthew 5:37)

  9. Marie Blocher says:

    TJ’s last item led me to wonder how long it will be before all the Episcopalians that are left are Bishops.