After a day of discussion on Aug. 1 concerning the proposed Anglican Covenant, there is widespread support in principle for such an agreement among the bishops attending the Lambeth Conference. It is unlikely that anything would be in place for at least 10 years, however.
During a Lambeth Conference media briefing Friday morning, the Rev. Canon Gregory Cameron, deputy secretary general and director of ecumenical affairs for the Anglican Consultative Council, explained that there is currently no provision to welcome into the covenant a diocese whose province rejects it.
“At the moment we are playing a ball game to win provincial support,” he said, “but provided it is within the constitution and canons of the province, there is no harm in having a diocese declare itself in sympathy with a covenant.”
I rembember being called on the carpet by Chris Seitz when I suggested that that covenant might take 10 to 15 years. Well It will take that long and maybe longer and at the end of the day do nothing. The AC is as corrupt as is TEC. It’s time to leave the whole rotten mess.
Gregory Cameron is a politician, so one must always be alert to the “music” behind the words. I don’t claim to know what the subtext of his remark is, but it does contrast with the expressed hope of at least two TEC bishops (and I know there are more) who would wish their diocese’s assent to the Covenant to be recognized even in the (extremely likely) event that General Convention rejects it hands down.
But Fr. Dan what is the point? What possible difference could it make if a diocese signs on to the covenant or not?
10 years, eh? In the meantime a great deal of slouching towards Gomorrah can happen in that decade. In effect, there would be zero chance of a course correction of any worth to TEC or the AC. Indeed, something is rotten in the state of Canterbury. So much for the vaunted indaba process.
How many millions have been blown on this garden party?
Now that’s interesting.
I was ruminating a while back about the “communion/federal vs. liberal/conservative” classification and the strategies being employed by the “communion conservatives” and “communion liberals,” both of which it seemed to me were based on the opposing “federal” factions.
That is, the ComCons had (still have, I suppose) a strategy of developing a covenant which they trust that FedLibs will refuse to sign on to if it limits their ability to be “liberal” in any meaningful way; and they’re hoping that the FedLibs can swing enough of a majority in the offending provinces that those provinces will simply select themselves out of the Communion without anyone having to figure out a way to forcibly throw them out.
Meanwhile, the ComLibs appear to have a strategy (or at least they’re acting as though they do) of dragging out the Communion processes — the “Listening Process,” the “Windsor Process,” the “Let’s revisit this at the next meeting” process — as long as possible without producing anything that actually restricts the liberal side, in the hope that the FedCons will eventually run out of patience and choose to split off in disgust.
But if the Covenant process is going to take another decade, then that raises the prospect that both strategies might succeed. Then we’d end up with the FedLibs in one independent structure, the FedCons in another independent structure, and the ComLibs and ComCons left together to rattle around in a much smaller Anglican Communion.
Br. Michael,
Ok, theologically I’m right with you. TEC is evil incarnate. So let us go. Where are we going to go? What do you suggest?
I’m with Br. Michael and perhaps optimus prime. The choice has been difficult for me, but at the end of the day, I think the best place for orthodoxy is in the PCA. There is no way I could raise my children in another mainline denomination, and the evangelical churches would probably turn them into moralistic therapeutic deists.
[blockquote]Where are we going to go? What do you suggest?[/blockquote]
Well, the AC can’t go to Disneyland. That’s just where the bishops are at right now.
Scott H,
What is the PCA? I’m thinking EO myself. I’ll check that out and see if they offer the true faith. If not, maybe I’ll look at the Pentecostals or the Baptists (maybe both). Someone’s got to have the faith right; it’s just a matter of time to find the right one. Rome is locked in its own heresies. Every time I attend a Mass I hear another Pelagian sermon. Last week it was: “What’s the gospel about – oh here is God’s Kingdom, now what can we do to attain it”, then the Isaiah lesson, “oh I think there’s an answer here said the priest. We have to discern what is right and wrong so we can choose rightly.” It was just like an Indiana Jones movie! Sure you guys might think you’ve retained the ‘true Church’ but you’re still preaching heresy just like Luther accused you of. So no Rome for me.
Man, the pickings are getting sparse for Churches hey?
The PCA is the Presbyterian Church in America. I doubt you’ll find Pelagianism there. They actually believe what there confession–The Westminster Confession of Faith–says. Interesting concept, huh?
That should be their instead of there.
Indeed! I just want to be sure though – how do you know they believe what their confession says? I want to be sure that I’m getting into a church where its members actually practice in some visible, knowable manner, the faith that they confess. So how have you been able to tell?
#12–I’ve been to their churches and I have read many parts of their website (www.pcanet.org). Some churches are more contemporary in their worship than others, but the high church PCAs are similar in style to ECUSA/Anglican churches but with much better preaching.
I can easily see the covenant being put off not only 10 years, but even 20 years. Imagine this: If ECUSA doesn’t like the shape it has taken in 10 years, what would they have to do to derail it? Probably not much. I think they successfully prevented it from being seriously considered this time around.
#12: I’m in the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, which has a little of interaction with the PCA. I can assure you that both the PCA and the EPC take the Westminster Standards (Confession and Catechisms) with the utmost seriousness. You may or may not find the Reformed approach to the Faith congenial, but you would unquestionably find it in both denominations.
That should be “a lot of,” not “a little of.”
Scott H, but do you know Presbyterians and how they act outside of the church? I mean one could walk into a church and think all was ‘kosher’ and then realize that once people were out of the church they were as heretical as ever. Or is it more about just where you find the ‘right’/faithful preaching? They do Eucharist every week correct?
#15: So how have you guys dealt with the issues of WO and SSB?
#17 Sure–I know many. The PCA that I have been attending has Holy Communion weekly, though it may be an anomaly in the rest of the denomination.
#16 I went to an EPC church in college, and I would also recommend this denomination. They also have a very high view of Scripture and the Westminster standards.
“Anglican Covenant May Be 10 Years Away” – Does anyone care anymore? Will we even be talking about this in 5 years, let alone 10? Very doubtful — change is afoot, but it happened in Jerusalem, not at Lambeth!
This is the moment when Lucy starts to pull the ball away and it begins to dawn on Charlie Brown he’s been had again.
“It is unlikely that anything would be in place for at least 10 years, however.’
=================================================================
The revisionist movement within the Anglican Communion is a dynamic process driven by an agenda devised by radicals who believe that the key to victory is a quick ascendancy within the Communion of their “prophetic” leadership.
The orthodox movement within the Communion is a dynamic response of those Anglicans who are determined to preserve “…the Faith once given….”
A goal 10 years in the future is not a “dynamic” response to a situation that is likely to go irreversibly out of control in the near future.
In fact a 10 year delay is a sign, not a symptom, of ineffectual and incompetent leadership during a critical point in time.
If our bishops are not leaders, what are they?
#19 Thank you very much. Another church to add to the list to check out. OK, EO, Pentecostals, Baptists, PCA, and EPC, oh right and the LCMS. Maybe one of these will fit my needs; let’s hope. Which one do you think Br. Michael?
I vaguely remember the 10-year figure bandied about almost from the beginning of this “Covenant” gambit. So this truly comes as no surprise. One thing we should remember is the Canon Kearon is the most talented “balloon” popper in our larger circle. He’s done a great deal of damage with his negative suggestions, although he’s probably right this time.
Gloria in South Carolina
Re the PCA:
[url=http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/13761]PCUSA Crucifies Christ All Over Again[/url]. Their are caving in AND preparing for lawsuits (sounds alot like the TEO).
This was a surprise because I thought that their “supreme court” had declared homosexuality out of bounds:
[url=http://www.standfirminfaith.com/index.php/site/article/11081]Christianity Today’s Take on the PCUSA High-Court Ruling[/url]
For the Westminster Confession folks – does your version include the bit about the Pope being the Antichrist, the sabbatarian stuff and the stuff about the duties of the civil magistrate (State)?
Oh crap, well now there’s another church out of the question. This ‘church shopping’ is becoming tiring. Man, I need to find a church to serve in soon before I wear out my ability to serve faithfully searching for a church!
#25: wow, hang on, according to their polity being locked into a confessional statement which all must adhere to, does this mean that they will institutionalize the blessing of SSU so that no one could dissent from that ruling and remain PCUSA?
Optimus – I hope you aren’t mocking folks who are hurting because that would be cruel? Live up to your name.
Robroy,
That’s the PCUSA–not the PCA. The PCA split from the then PCUS in 1973 over issues of theological liberalism.
No driver8, I’m not mocking. I truly don’t know if this would lock them all into an institutionalized SSB without the ability to dissent. That would be horrible. But it also does point our a danger in confessional polity if this is indeed the case. Do you know if it would ‘lock them in’?
Oops that should say “point out” NOT “point our”
Scott H, Thanks for the clarification. Ok, so PCA is still on.
I saw a sign on a church recently that said:
Why bother changing churches?
Does it matter which one you stay home from?
Peace
Jim Elliott <><
OP, here’s the denomination web site. [url=http://www.pcanet.org/]Presbyterian Church in America[/url]. I’ve been a member of four different PCA congregations over the past 26 years (cradle Piskie). In general, I’d say you would find plenty of committed, conservative Christians who walk the walk. There has been a move towards more frequent Communion, but this varies widely. My own church moved from quarterly to monthly. I’ve heard there are some weekly and that would definitely be my preference. All of the churches I’ve belonged to were traditional in worship style, but there are some congregations that lean contemporary. We trads use the Trinity Hymnal, Psalter readings, the Apostle’s Creed (most often used), the Nicene Creed and the like. (I’ll admit, I do miss the BCP (1928). The preaching is generally excellent, but be prepared, sermons are rarely short!
Oh, and Communion is distributed to the congregation in the pews a la “wee cuppies”. My first three congregations used wine, the present grape juice (grrrr). I have no idea if we are the exception, but in my experience, yes.
#34 Geez – funny, but also sadly true.
#35 Thank you very much. The only challenge for me might be the Communion. I do like to take it every week and theologically speaking, I think it is key. I do like the traditional service; I cannot stand praise music and I’m not much of one for contemporary services. I do also prefer prepared sermons and long ones!
I was wondering how the PCA decides how the Church will respond to issues like WO, SSB? Who is involved in the decision-making and what kind of process does discernment have to go through? Thanks again.
Covenant? FORGET IT!
OP, PCA has a yearly General Assembly which would address such issues. I believe that involves all of the ordained – teaching elders (pastors), ruling elders and I would imagine the deacons but am not certain.
Since I’m not the best source of such information, I would suggest going to the website, loads of info, including a pdf. version of the Book of Church Order, the Westminster Confession, etc.
The Communion issue, yeah, that can be a sticking point.
Don’t Presbyterians view Communion as a memorial only? I don’t think they believe in anything like the Real Presence.
10 years? – that makes this process seem almost precipitous:
http://www.forwardinfaith.com/artman/publish/article_442.shtml
Optimus:
Have you considered here: http://rechurch.org/recus/recus/index.html
I can assure you, you won’t have to worry about WO or SSB; there is weekly Communion (no grape juice!), traditional service (and music!), and good sermons. For a sample, see here:
http://www.stfrancisrec.rezbuilder.com/page/page/3540094.htm
In Christ,
Larswife
Optimus, I do not know.
39: Thanks again, I shall take a look at the site in more detail. I suspect I may struggle with PCA’s understanding of the Eucharist since I do believe in the Real Presence. But we shall see.
42: Looked at the website a bit for churches but there isn’t one particularly close by. But thanks for the info; I will keep an eye out for more growth.
43: Thanks for that article; it is nice to have a summary of possible outcomes.
Br. Michael: Tough one hey?
45, Not really.
What do you mean not really Br. Michael. I thought you said you do not know where you would go?
I’m hovering till I see what GAFCON will do in the way of a statement on the sanctity of life.
Anyone know where the PCA stands on this?
But GA/FL, GAFCON doesn’t have a structural way forward and so really won’t be a feasible alternative for about the same amount of time as the Covenant.
47, Not yet, but I wiil and after your last couple of comments I can assure it will be where you are not.
Why, where am i going to be?
Optimus, this is becoming personal and I am not going to continue down that route. I apologize for any thing that I may have said that offends you.
[i] This thread is beginning to swerve into a private conversation. Please return to discussing the posted article. [/i]
-Elf Lady
Optimus Prime: Here’s some pertinent information.
First, the PCUSA is the liberal, mainline Presbyterian denomination. You will find conservative, evangelical Presbyterians in the Presbyterian Church in America, Evangelical Presbyterian Church, Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Associate Reformed Presbyterian Church, and several other smaller denominations.
Second, few of these ordain women. The EPC allows it as a local option (local to the presbytery, not the congregation), but in practice few have done so. The PCA, OPC, ARPC and others prohibit it.
Second, SSBs are non-existent in these denominations as well. They are unanimous in holding to the biblical teaching regarding homosexuality.
Third, you will find that the practice of weekly Communion is gaining ground in at least some of these denominations (certainly in the EPC and PCA that’s the case). It is, however, by no means universal. Can you tell me where you are? I might be able to point you to a weekly Communion congregation.
Fourth, the language of “Real Presence” in Communion is something that Presbyterians who know their tradition would have no problem with. Calvin used the term “spiritual presence,” by which he meant that while Christ was really present in Communion, He was not physically present (i.e., no transubstantiation). Though there’s a lot of hair-splitting in the Reformation-era writings about this question, I do think there’s little question that the Reformed should be closer to a “real presence” rather than a memorialist view. That said, there are a lot of Presbyterians who don’t know their tradition well, and so have gravitated to a Zwinglian (memorialist) perspective. There is even now a movement among Reformed scholars of the sacraments to recapture the Calvinist view of them.
On a few other miscellaneous matters mentioned above: just about all of the conservative denominations have yearly General Assemblies. They differ as to participation, but typically they consist of all teaching elders (pastors, primarily), a set number of ruling elders (laypeople who make up the session or consistory–equivalent of vestry–in the EPC a minimum 2-1 ratio of ruling to teaching elders is mandated, though larger congregations will have more REs). Preaching is central for all of these denominations, and so the tendency is for longer and very biblical sermons. Contemporary worship is growing, but still not dominant. Typically, the older the church the less likely it is to be contemporary in music, though many church plants, like mine, are using a blended form with a variety of music.
Can I answer any other questions for you? I am glad to be of help.
Sorry, Elves, I posted that before I saw your 53. Optimus is welcome to e-mail me for further information at:
dfischler@verizon.net
Sorry elves lady.
I will email for more info in time 55, thanks.