No one here, whether communion conservative or federal, wants the week to end with an innocuous communiqué and, I think, there is a very good chance that that danger has been averted…Creating a new global structure based on this paradigm, is, at this point, the consensus hope, the common ground. Some sort of articulation of this New Paradigm is where I think the communiqué will eventually settle. I am a fed-con but not a separatist. I am federal because do not think that any historic see is essential to Anglicanism and would be willing to break ties to Canterbury if necessary. At the same time I think there is still hope for the Communion as a whole. That hope, however, does not rest within the present structures of Communion. It rests here in Jerusalem. If a disciplined, ordered, faithful, global body is birthed here (or at least conceived), bounded by a firm corporate confessional commitment and governed by conciliar adjudication, then, though Canterbury dithers and fails, global Anglicanism does indeed have hope and a future.
May God, in His mercy, grant us enough of a place to stand faithfully — distinct enough from TEC so that our “Spiritual Covering” (a very importantdynamic) may be of leaders truly commited to Jesus Christ as Savior and Lord — so that the Holy Spirit can genuinely work through us.
Hi Matt,
I wonder if you could briefly articulate for me how you foresee the following ‘shape’ of Communion working: “bounded by a firm corporate confessional commitment and governed by conciliar adjudication”?
Who would develop the confessional statement to which people were bound and how would the process of this discernment around the development of a confessional statement occur? Why does conciliar adjudication need to be bound by a confessional statement (law) rather than a clear articulation of relationship (discernment of grace)?
Thanks.