The Conference approves the following statement of nature and status of the Anglican Communion, as that term is used in its Resolutions:
The Anglican Communion is a fellowship, within the one Holy Catholic and Apostolic Church, of those duly constituted dioceses, provinces or regional Churches in communion with the See of Canterbury, which have the following characteristics in common:
1. they uphold and propagate the Catholic and Apostolic faith and order as they are generally set forth in the Book of Common Prayer as authorised in their several Churches;
2. they are particular or national Churches, and, as such, promote within each of their territories a national expression of Christian faith, life and worship; and
3. they are bound together not by a central legislative and executive authority, but by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of the bishops in conference.
The Conference makes this statement praying for and eagerly awaiting the time when the Churches of the present Anglican Communion will enter into communion with other parts of the Catholic Church not definable as Anglican in the above sense, as a step towards the ultimate reunion of all Christendom in one visibly united fellowship.
–Resolution 49 of the Lambeth Conference of 1930
[i]they uphold and propagate the Catholic and Apostolic faith and order as they are generally set forth in the Book of Common Prayer as authorised in their several Churches;[/i]
As John Wilkins said to me once, “But you don’t define what IS the orthodox faith”, i.e., “Catholic and Apostolic”.
what is meant by set forth in the Prayer Book “as authorized in their several churches”? We’ve already seen that more than one province has re-written their Prayer Books to [i]weaken[/i] the C & A faith, so that there is no common ground there.
Oh, and
[i]”they are bound together not by a central legislative and executive authority, but by mutual loyalty sustained through the common counsel of the bishops in conference.”[/i]
Not by common doctrine? Only by mutual loyalty? I would have liked to see “common doctrine” included in this clause.
Jim,
Isn’t that part of the point? (and the problem). In 1930 there were basically two streams of Prayer Book tradition, one that derived from the Church of England and the other from the Episcopal Church. I suspect that for most of those present at Lambeth “common doctrine” was assumed and it was not considered needful to state it explicitly.
Discipline and worship were understood to vary from province to province, but underlying doctrine was taken for granted. Hence the degree of ambiguity in past Lambeth declarations that causes such problems today in reaching a definitive answer. Unfortunately, it is not possible (or desirable) to emulate Saul at Endor and inquire of past authorities what they would have done under the circumstances.
[url=http://catholicandreformed.blogspot.com]Catholic and Reformed[/url]
exactly right. Those assumptions have led to our present problems.