Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams’ Pentecost letter to the bishops of the Anglican Communion was not the anticipated communication in which he reportedly would ask bishops to predicate their attendace at the Lambeth Conference this summer upon their willingness to accept the recommendations in the Windsor Report.
A spokesman said Archbishop Williams had modified his plan to write to bishops whose stated positions ran contrary to the colleagial gathering of equals he envisions for Lambeth. Instead, Archbishop Williams has been in telephone contact with a number of bishops, asking that they honor the integrity of the meeting, the spokesman told The Church of England Newspaper.
“… asking that they honor the integrity of the meeting”? Most attending bishops will be spending a great deal of time and money, and traveling halfway across the world, to meet and confer in person with their fellow bishops. Sounds like +Rowan thinks this doesn’t pay quite enough honor to the meeting — or perhaps to its host — and that his episcopal colleagues should also be required to pass through a theological metal detector if they wish to gain admission to his party.
Society-page hostesses sometimes fall into the subtle trap of ascribing more importance to their soirées than is really warranted. One hopes for better from the ABC.
If only that were true, D.C. How does the ABC expect bishops who already do not respect the Windsor Report to respect the “integrity of the [Lambeth] meeting” based on acceptance of the Windsor Report?
If, as Bishop Tom Wright said, that the original letters would be viewed by many as “too little, too late,” I wonder what he thinks now that even they were too decisive for this Boneless Wonder of an archbishop. Wright’s rather been made to look the fool has he not, after going forth and preemptively defending the Archbishop of Canterbury, and then having the Archbishop retreat as he’s done to pleasant little phone chats. Why have we heard nothing about this from Bishop Wright?
“… asking that they honor the integrity of the meetingâ€
It seems that too many US bishops are honoring the meeting of Integrity to honor the integrity of Lambeth.
YBIC,
Phil Snyder
Telephone call transcript:
Rowan: I ask that you honor the integrity of the meeting.
Bishop Cowgas: Huh? Oh, yeah, sure [tee hee!]
Rowan: Thanks. See you at Lambeth.
[click]
Telephone call transcript #2:
Rowan: I ask that you honor the integrity of the meeting.
Bishop Spork: You can count on me. Can I bring my Asherah Pole?
Rowan: I’m sure your Indaba Group will love it.
Bishop Spork: Ubuntu, baby!
[click]
Telephone call transcript #3:
Rowan: I ask that you honor the integrity of the meeting.
Bishop Robinson: You didn’t invite me!
Rowan: Oh, right, sorry, wrong list. [click]
#1 But didn’t Rowan say in his Advent letter that accepting the invitation to Lambeth constitutes an acceptance of Windsor and the Communion’s desire to move forward in the covenant process? This was the minimal theological test. He did also say, explicitly that an invitation to Lambeth was not an endorsement of a Bishop’s orthodoxy. It seems only right that he have private conversations — at the very least — with Bishops who continue to publicly flout the positions and teachings of the Windsor Report. It is his party, after all.
Remember: there is a stated, accepted teaching on human sexuality in the Communion. And the uniform word from the Communion is that the trouble we are having is that we have two provinces who are explicitly living outside that teaching. If a U. S. Bishop’s aim is to attend Lambeth and [i]change[/i] the teaching on human sexuality — or at least convince the communion that TEC can to move forward in its agenda to bless same sex unions and consecrate more non-celebate gay or lesbian Bishops without consequence — such a Bishop is not adhering to the purpose of Lambeth: he or she is seeking to undermine it. If I were in Rowan’s shoes, having such conversations would be the least I would do.
Telephone call transcript #4
Operator: I have a collect call from Canterbury, England. Will you accept the charges?
Bishop Wingnut: No.
[click]
Insofar as it is compatible with my personal opinions well documented in my writings and which I have never repudiated or remarked as incorrect, I have no problem with your statements, Bishop _________.
However, to keep up the appearances whilst we wait for the crumbling of the Anglican Communion and shedding of those regressives amongst it, will you make some noise which I may take as an affirmation of your agreement to continue in the Never-Ending Process so that I can state unequivocally your involvement in the same? Press one for yes, two for probably, three for possibly, four for maybe, five for “uh-huh”, six for “harumph”, seven for “snore”, eight for “doubtful”, nine for “unlikely”, and ten for more options. Oh, and have a jolly nice day. This has been the automated ABC bishop dial-up caller. Void where prohibited by law, reason, or inadequate technology.
Chazaq #5-7 and 9 – outstanding detective work.
I am glad to hear that the denizens of Lambeth Palace have learnt how to use that dusty bakelite telephonic aparatus in the corner of some of the rooms. Now to remember which wire goes into the correct socket. Also wind it up before attempting to connect.