Americans will represent nearly 25 percent of about 650 Anglican bishops scheduled to attend the conference, which starts next week in Canterbury, England.
In responding to questions from the media, Episcopal bishops are being encouraged to respond in a way that emphasizes two main themes:
Ӣ When Anglicans work together through the power of the Holy Spirit, we change the world; and
Ӣ At the Lambeth Conference, the bishops of the Anglican Communion review our deep unity in Christ.
The method can be illustrated with a triangular diagram, according to a handout developed by Auburn Media, part of Auburn Theological Seminary. The handout was part of a packet sent to Episcopal bishops recently by Bishop Clay Matthews of the Presiding Bishop’s Office of Pastoral Development.
How can they be 25% of the bishops at Lambeth when the American church is such a small part of the Anglican communion? I don’t think the absences of GAFCON attendees alone would explain this level of over-representation.
Margaret, it’s simple. TEC has many TINY dioceses. Some of its dioceses have less than 1000 ASA — i.e. it has dioceses smaller than some parishes.
A commenter on a thread below did these calculations yesterday as to various provinces and their “bishop density” — i.e. member to bishop ratio. TEC has one of the lowest numbers in the whole Communion. (i.e. each bishop is responsible for way fewer members (Communicants) than most other provinces).
[url=http://new.kendallharmon.net/wp-content/uploads/index.php/t19/article/14105/#246476]Comment By TWilson[/url]
From the entry: Kenneth Kearon Writes to Bishops Attending Lambeth
For a sense of the severity of the problem the Elves are onto, let’s look at how bishop-intensive a selection of provinces are (diocesans and archbishops only, no assisting or suffragan):
Wales 10,714
Korea 12,500
Philippines 19,786
Rwanda 20,000
USA 20,522
Scotland 28,571
Ireland 32,500
Central Africa 40,000
England 40,909
Kenya 50,000
Canada 56,528
South Africa 82,759
Nigeria 135,338
Australia 144,556
Uganda 274,438
I just did this in a back of the envelope fashion, and I’m still stunned.
Some questions regarding what was said in this article”
(1) Why does ECUSA have so many bishops for such a small national membership and uch a small ASA? This seems to be executive staffing overkill. There really desn’t seem to be a need for so many bishops.
(2) Why does a bishop from ECUSA need guidance from ECUSA’s leadership to prepare him for Lambeth?
(3) Can’t ECUSA’s bishops think for themselves? Do they need a ‘party-line package’ of information from ECUSA’s leadership in order to be prepared to make utterances and decisions at Lambeth?
Perhaps also of interest in relation to this thread is a comment posted over at Stand Firm last night. This elf can not verify the truth of the comment, but if so, it does possibly indicate a desire for control or some kind of coordination among the TEC bishops. We’d welcome more information about this report:
http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/14100/#246416
–elfgirl
3, It makes sence. If they are properly coordinated they can control the process to the advantge of TEC. The liberals have always been better at this sort of political organizing than the conservatives.
Except, interestingly, at Lambeth 1998.
Hmmm, if this sort of micro-management continues, perhaps it will be an increasingly annoying bur under the saddle of the moderate/orthodox bishops. Crikey, SOMETHING has to wake them up!
Orwellian groupthink for use in the land of England post-1984 to control the world. Anybody else thinking irony, besides me?!