Over the succeeding five years [since 2003], the inability of Anglican bishops to worship round a common altar has not been addressed, and even with a boycott of over 200 bishops the opening eucharist in Canterbury Cathedral saw three primates and a number of bishops refrain from receiving communion due to their theological difficulties with the American church. These positions were not softened during the three weeks at Lambeth, but hardened with some bishops convinced that dialogue in the terms proposed by Dr. Williams was now fruitless.
Up until now, the Anglican Communion has held together “by appealing to diversity,” Bishop [Greg] Venables said.
However, he asked “Can we sacrifice what we believe for unity? I don’t think we can make that decision on the spur of the moment. It is unfair to ask people to sacrifice their convictions for the sake of a unity that is by no means certain.”
The attempts at conversation had not worked. “I hoped we would be able to talk about very serious things, we tried to but were unable to,” he said. The small group process helped “but there wasn’t enough trust. The level of conflict, fear, mistrust, frustration hasn’t allowed it.”
The problem of authority within Anglicanism was not being addressed, he argued. “Anglicanism has always said we were not a vertical church, but now it would help to have a council of cardinals to help us.”
“You have authority in the local church, authority in the diocese, authority in the province, why not have it in the whole church?” he asked. However, there are “no ground rules to define the Anglican Church. No ground rules outside the province. Now we have no way of avoiding the division,” Bishop Venables said.
“We talk but nothing is decided. People are frustrated,” and Lambeth 2008 did not address these needs, Bishop Venables said.
[blockquote]”It is unfair to ask people to sacrifice their convictions for the sake of a unity that is by no means certain.â€[/blockquote]
Exactly so, and when one ponders how any temporary unity may be strained with further outrages perpetrated by TEC and the ACoC in their diseased “prophecy,” the orthodox will be essentially buying a pig in a poke if they bend now.
“…Up until now, the Anglican Communion has held together “by appealing to diversity,†Bishop Venables said…”
Bishop Venables is putting his finger on the sore spot: there is no real unity but unity in Truth. “Unity in diversity” is a clever slogan that obscures the reality that the kind of “diversity” that the American church is talking about removes the very foundation for “unity.”
bishops should follow their conscience. However, it does not mean God was not present during the Eucharist. In the end, it seems like one is choosing one’s conscience above participating in God’s life. It does seem like narcissism rather than humility before the sacrament.
Bishops should have a conscious formed by the Tradition of the Church not the zeitgeist and not even br mistaken modern and postmodern fads masqerading as “theologies”. When real conscious comes up against the mnerely trivially current erroneous, real bishops stand for Truth, not truthiness. Witness Athanasius and 5 exiles!
The bishops standing against error are right not to commune with those perpetrating the same. Note that the perps whine disconsolantly that their errors are not validated by this and whimper about the unity they destroyed and do not repent!
Bishops should follow their conscience except in TEC where they must follow (hide behind) General Convention.
dwstroud, why do you think progressive bishops haven’t been formed by the tradition (s) of the church? Of course bishops stand up for truth, not truthiness. And that’s a great witness.
Perhaps the dissenting bishops are right. I don’t know. All I would know is the efficacy of the eucharist. Perhaps their hearts are pure. Perhaps perfection is important. Perhaps they are without error, and God bless them for it. I’m full of error, and yet, I still find myself pulled toward the Eucharist. And I’d even say the confession of sin beforehand.
We don’t doubt the efficacy of the sacrament! It’s about broken communion.
JW — I have no doubt that they celebrated the Eucharist — with those with whom they were in Communion, that is.
So all of your fears that they did not celebrate the Eucharist may be assuaged. ; > )
They just didn’t celebrate the Eucharist with people with whom they are not in communion.
Keep it up, the-few-GS-Primates-that-were-at-Lambeth!
JW, I think that the self-centred nature of the ACTIONS of the bishops in which they refuse the admonition of the Communion – notably the VA Communion report and report of the Theology Commission of the HOB, the emergency Primates meeting PRIOR to the “consecration” of VGR called by the ABC, the Windsor Report & Dromantine Communique & Dar es Salaam Communique, the clear explications of The Road to Lambeth, and the broken communion with over half the Provinces, not to mention the canonical interventions of orthodox bishops from other Provinces in response to calls for their assistance, AND explicit removal of Frank “I can lie because I hold truth to be pluriform and sign on the line with no intention of compliance” behaviours” from Roman-Anglican dialogue about Mary, and the repudiation of THE error of VGR by the RC and Orthodox and Protestant Churches, to cite an inexhaustive list – de facto proof of their theological errors and persistence in those errors. They are the very living definition of heresy; they persist in rending the body of Christ Universal as well as Anglican; they state their intention of persisting in error and they attempt to induce others to make complicity with them. Not to mention their distortion of Scripture and pastoral care to relabel sin into benignity in the face of the consequences of their blind FOLLOWING AFTER the American polity and zeitgest.
That’s the warm-up, JW. The thorough-going heresies of theology will no doubt be footnoted in the history books of religion which record the demise of TEC. I’m not writing that one-handed after breaking my R wrist in a fall. But I assure you that following after the attempts to be applicable and relevant to “modernity” that characterize the PECUSA/ECUSA/TEC/GCC/EO-PAC have “come home to roost” – as Urban T Holmes noted they must (just not as he wished and expected). If you wish a brief listing, see his “Education for Liturgy” in WORSHIP POINTS THE WAY edited by Burlson. H rejoicingly names names and lolls about in the dystopia of the “differentiated theological mind” purveyed against the received Tradition.
The chickens have come home to roost in the HOB, and, to their itching ears and false doctrine and teaching, they say the roaring they hear is approval rather than that of the lion-like devouring Adversary. Feathers and blood of inconsequentiality en-fleshed are flying and the heretics consider it a ticker-tape parade in their honor! They are given over to their heart’s desire-they think. They are noteworthy as exemplars, of course, but only in the sense that “the whole purpose of your life may be to be one of error’s consequences” exampled to others as a warning and caution and urgent call to quickly repent. Pretending to lead, they follow slavishly their culture and topple off the bridge in an ecstasy of blindness and self-absorption under the siren call of “relevance”. God help them. They refuse to hear their brothers’ and sisters’ cries to turn back and be saved. Kyrie eleison!