Speaking at a conference on the proposed Anglican Covenant, the Rev. Canon Gregory Cameron, deputy secretary general of the Anglican Consultative Council, did not offer hope to those eager for other Anglican provinces to follow the North American churches’ perceived leadership in social justice ministries.
Canon Cameron was the final keynote speaker at “An Anglican Covenant: Divisive or Reconciling?”, a conference held April 10-12 at The General Theological Seminary’s Desmond Tutu Center. He explained that the Archbishop of Canterbury has no juridical authority, and noted that while individual bishops have differing levels of sympathy for full inclusion of homosexual persons, neither intervention nor affirmation can be expected at this summer’s Lambeth Conference.
“We must get our ecclesiology right,” he stressed. “Lambeth bishops cannot command and require. They can only commend. Therefore when any of the instruments speak, they don’t speak as law but as advisors. Like the [British] monarchy, they do not rule or govern, but they can be consulted.”
Someone tell this to Bishop Schori.
And when we finally “get our ecclesiology right”, the Anglican Church will have been completely immasculated.
[size=1][color=red][url=http://resurrectioncommunitypersonal.blogspot.com/]The Rabbit[/url][/color][color=gray].[/color][/size]
This posturing contradicts the reality on the ground as evidenced by the Good Canon leading the cheers in the Canadian Synod regarding same sex blessings and the ACC’s hand in the NOLA JDS and the DAR subcommittee’s Windsor compliancy declarations for TEC. There is a fork in the tongue that he speaks with.
Intercessor
From Susan Russell’s blog, talking about the remarks of Ian Douglas who is on the Lambeth design team:
[blockquote]Douglas made clear that the schedule for the Lambeth Conference, in fact, “has no large plenary session†where it would be even possible for “resolutions to be presented and voted up or down.â€
In a nutshell, Douglas drew a picture of a 2008 Lambeth Conference dramatically different from its 1998 counterpart: a community of bishops gathered to converse rather than a conclave of bishops convened to resolve.
We shall see.
During the Q&A;following Dr. Douglas’ presentation, Ian was queried about whether the design team had “designed any contingencies†for the potential of having their best laid plans hijacked (I think that’s the word I used) by those who might be coming to Lambeth with juridical intentions in spite of the design team’s missiological intentions.[/blockquote]
The intent really is to have two weeks of “ndaba”-ing, what we call in Texas, shootin’ the sh*&.
The communion is coming apart. We have one instrument of unity offering a total void of leadership except to undermine and subvert another instrument. Now, the third is going to be holding hands and singing Kumbaya.
robroy, if the Lambeth conference scheduling plans are as you have outlined, the entire shindig will be utterly pointless. The largest and most effective juridical point that can be made will be made by staying away. Boycott Lambeth!
[size=1][color=red][url=http://resurrectioncommunitypersonal.blogspot.com/]The Rabbit[/url][/color][color=gray].[/color][/size]
Can anyone imagine St Athanasius saying this? “The Nicene/Constantinople councils can only commend. They only speak as advisers. So, Arius, if you want to ignore their advice, go ahead and do your own thing. It doesn’t matter at all.”
I was going to say that if this is the case the whole thing is pointless. But I see that somebody already has.
Would not going and making a witness of prayer for common vision under the guidance of the Holy Spirit be more Christ-like? Staying away is even easier than shunning, but true grace is costly, as Dietrich Bonhoeffer reminded us.
An ndaba is a gathering at which the elders come to a consensus. A successful ndaba does make a definitive decision–it may not use the tool of a vote, but it certainly does make a binding decision. It is cultural arrogance to talk about an ndaba as a way to avoid a vote when the agenda is to avoid making a decision. If, and I really mean if, if the Western organizers are hoping to out maneuver the Africans by not having a plenary session with resolutions, I do suspect that they are in for a major surprise.
#7
I don’t see why the Western organizers even need to concern themselves with outmaneuvering the Africans since the Africans, wrongly in my opinion, in all probability won’t be there in sufficient numbers to make any difference.
There is one thing holding MOST of us together: The authority of Holy Scripture.
Ndaba might be a method by Africans to come to a consensus and move forward. Lambeth ndaba is a different matter altogether. It is entirely obvious that to the likes of Douglas and Cameron that ndaba is the Delphi technique relabeled to make it sound politically correct. The design team members are nothing but Delphi “facilitators.”
Just say no to Delphi manipulation!
I agree with the many comments above. The AC has made inaction an art form.
#6 Unity IN CHRIST is extremely important but what does it mean when people claim to be inspired by the Holy Spirit but refuse to acknowledge Jesus as Lord individually or corporately? A covenant would be nice but lets first agree that Jesus is still head of his church. If we do not have even that much in common then the communion is broken. If we get that far then we can start talking about how we discern his will for us.
Talking about other issues before the foundations are resolved is pure diversion.
How can there be common vision without common mind? And so the common union is a thing of the past.
I claim no “ndaba” expertise, but the idea seems to presuppose a broad social consensus and careful, consensus-oriented decision-making.
Very different from the cram-down practiced by ECUSA revisionists.
Don’t forget that one must come to the “correct” consensus in the ECUSA/TEC/GCC/EO-PAC. All other consensi are NOT allowed and consentants will be listened to to their death so the “correct” concensus is achieved.
#8 in 1998 1.10 passed [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambeth_Conference#Thirteenth_Conference_.28July_18_-_August_9.2C_1998.29]526-70[/url]. This was not a close vote. Even without those who in good conscience cannot attend, the Lambeth Conference will still be orthodox. It never fails to astonish me how many people who support SSUs think that the vote was close. I’m not thinking of you #8, but rather people whom I’ve met recently. The very vast majority of the Anglican Communion are Windsor Report people. If Revisionists think they are going to carry Lambeth, they are in for a shock.
Re: #11 and #12 above – Please let no one presume without evidence clear to all observers that any Anglican Communion Bishop invited by the ABC to Lambeth this year in fact refuses to acknowledge Jesus as Lord individually or corporately. On this blog there have been far too many comments that attribute inflammatory beliefs to unspecified progressive-minded “enemies”, just as on Susan Russell’s “Inch at a Time” blog the comments she gets are also too frequently accusations against nameless orthodoxy-sensitive individuals and groups of reactionary agendas that have nowhere been spoken for anyone’s record.
Just because people are feeling angry does not mean their thinking is sound.
Well that link didn’t work out so well. The vote was [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lambeth_Conference#Thirteenth_Conference_.28July_18_-_August_9.2C_1998.29]526-70[/url].
#16 I am not making any statements about what anyone believes only that before meaningful discussion can take place it would be worth going around the table and finding out where the various bishops really are in their faith. At least as reported in the press and as I have seen on at least one video not all bishops can clearly articulate their own faith in Jesus.
You assume that every Bishop accepts Jesus as Lord. I do not. But the next question is “How can we know what Jesus expects from us?” and that immediately gets to the point raised in post #9. If we cannot agree on the basics of how to follow Christ then the rest is a lost cause.
#13, Irenaeus: “Very different from the cram-down practiced by ECUSA revisionists.”
Very different from the cram-down shenanigans practiced in 1998 by Lord Carey, as well.
PW, so I guess that Lord Carey made all those bishops vote for Lambeth 1.10?
The Archbishop of Canterbury as an Instrument of Unity – lost.
The Primate meeting as an IoU – thwarted.
Lambeth Council as an IoU – reduced to meaningless “ndaba.”
That leaves us with the ACC, which seem to be mostly bureaucrats in the TEO pocketbook. The AC is doomed.
[blockquote] “Lambeth bishops cannot command and require. They can only commend. Therefore when any of the instruments speak, they don’t speak as law but as advisors. Like the [British] monarchy, they do not rule or govern, but they can be consulted.†[/blockquote]
Canon Cameron failed to mention the British Prime Minister and the British Parliament, so he appears to be saying that the Anglican Communion is ungovernable. It seems to me that the Primates, as Apostles of Christ have the power to rely on Scripture, consult with each other and their congregations, make proposals, and to vote by ballot. There is no reason to consider that they should be restricted to the role of the powerless British monarchy.
If I remember correctly, the Archbishop of Canterbury deferred to the “Anglican Consultative Council†and the “Anglican Communion Office†when he was in New Orleans and it seems that “The Anglican Communion Office†often issues clarifications of the Archbishop of Canterbury’s statements. This makes me wonder if the Archbishop of Canterbury should reconsider his deference to the ACC and the ACO and instead defer to Scripture and the Primates of the Anglican Communion who are also bound to defend the faith.
Henry Grenville, Post 16,
Evidently you haven’t been to any of Bishop John Shelby Spong’s recent lectures (he is retired bishop, but very active on the lecture circuit) or have you read any recently published books by Episcopal Bishop John Shelby Spong? If you google his name you will probably be able to read his thesis.
I wonder if he has been invited to Lambeth?
Betty See #23: “…and instead defer to Scripture…”
It is becoming quite tedious to see this code word when one could easily (and more honestly) say ” defer to the Scriptural admonitions regarding the sinful nature of homosexual relationships and how to rid Mother Church of the insideous GLBT agenda.”
Sorry, that was in #22. Apologies.
Cennydd,
I agree that “the one thing that is holding MOST of us together is: The authority of Holy Scripture.”
Padre Wayne, You may see code words where there are none but I try to write as clearly as I can, I do not infer anything except what I have written.
PadreWayne, I don’t think any covenant can replace the Authority of Scripture.
Betty See,
You, IMHO, did NOT use code words in your comments regarding Lambeth. In fact the 1998 Resolution 1:10 based its affirmation on scripture. Many in the GLBT community (and supporters therof) see “code words” where there are none. Unfortunately those same folks fail to see the wonderful transforming power of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ. They choose to remain in their present condition, speaking from the spiritual standpoint.
We are all called on to move into “theosis”. We can choose to bear our cross and grow in Christ or remain where we are and gather only the crumbs from the banquet table. We are indeed the children of God and brothers and sisters of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ. God the Father would have us come fully into the likeness of His Son Jesus, however many wish to remain as they are, clinging to their sins to do so. It is such a pity that the GLBT community fights so fiercely for fleshly things which can bring no one nearer to the image and likeness of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ. The great sadness is that God has so much more in store for each of us than we can possibly find here in our fleshly nature if only we relinquish our wills to Him.
Peace be with you!
Barry
Thank you for understanding, Barry, and also thanks for your thoughts about the “wonderful transforming power of our Lord God and Savior Jesus Christ”.