The process of finalizing an Anglican covenant needs to move forward more quickly if the Anglican Communion is to be preserved.
That was the message delivered Saturday (September 13) by West Indies Archbishop Drexel Gomez, the chairman of the group charged with formulating the pact intended to help ensure unity in basic beliefs, settle disputes, and administer discipline among historically autonomous Anglican provinces.
“I believe Anglicanism has much to offer the world and has made a tremendous contribution to Christianity. But we are at a dangerous point in our history,” Gomez told more than 100 people attending the Festival of Faith at St. Luke’s Episcopal Church in Bladensburg, Maryland.
“There is nothing on the immediate horizon that offers any kind of hope to holding the Communion together other than the covenant,” Gomez contended. “Nothing else is on the table. If that fails, we will see only further fragmentation and disintegration. That is not theory but reality,” he said.
I really wish these guys would say what their goals are. “The Covenant is going to hold the Anglican Communion together.”
If he means that Nigeria or Uganda are going to be in Communion with the TEO, that is ludicrous. Uganda, Nigeria, Kenya, Rwanda… have shaken the dust of the likes of Ms Schori. In fact, it is time for the CDG folks to acknowledge that there will be an alternative province. It may not be recognized by the ACC – a bunch of bureaucrats most of whom are in the pocket of the TEO. It may not be recognized by the current occupant of the see of Augustine. But it will be recognized by the majority of the world’s Anglican’s.
Ephraim+ has said that the covenant might be a means of amicable separation. This seems to me a kluge approach.
ABp Gomez states we need a covenant. Who is we? The part of the AC going with the TEO? They don’t want it. The part going with the orthodox of the GS? They don’t need it – they have the much stronger Jerusalem declaration. So I suppose it is for those that are trying to straddle the ever increasing sharp and high fence. These people don’t need a covenant. They simply need to “choose this day.”
So define realistic goals and work towards them.
The covenant and the next pipe dream.
A very important note by Prof Seitz and Rev Turner regarding the covenant may be found [url=http://www.anglicancommunioninstitute.com/?p=268
Aack, didn’t mean to hit the submit button. The link is [url=http://www.anglicancommunioninstitute.com/?p=268 ]here[/url].
What kind of covenant can the ABC sign? His own church is part of the government of England – he is subject to the monarch and Parliament. Can he sign a covenant that gives authority to any person or group other than the ABC?
The first Lambeth Conference was called after (because?) a British court ruled that ABC cannot govern churches beyond the realm of the Prime Minister. Can ABC sign a covenant that gives him any amount of authority over other AC member churches?
This looks like an impossible situation.
Isn’t Amerian Democracy wonderful?
Who would trade it for Catholic prelacy?
Marcia asks,
[blockquote]Can ABC sign a covenant that gives him any amount of authority over other AC member churches?[/blockquote]
One might ask whether one wants Rowan “Homosexual relations can be equivalent to Christian marriage” Williams having authority one’s province?
I find it unfathomable that the current draft puts Rowan Williams as the ultimate arbiter of all things Anglican. Uggh. The man who is probably singularly most responsible for the current crisis is rewarded for his non-leadership thus so.
Chris Seitz and Phil Turner are worried that the covenant is so weakened that it will be toothless. I am more worried that the covenant will be framed in such a way as to divide the orthodox. The Drexel Gomez/Mouneer Anis types with the Orombi/Akinola types.
Gomez contended. “Nothing else is on the table.
GAFCon is on the table! But I don’t think ABC can sign anything organizational without disestablishment. The English government will neither let foreign churches join the establishment, nor let CoE submit to any international body. We can meet and have conversations, but no decisions can be made that simultaneously effect both CoE and foreign churches.
Robroy #1 correctly says “If he means that Nigeria or Uganda are going to be in Communion with the TEO, that is ludicrous.” Does ++Gomes consider such ‘unity’ to be the only definition of ‘holding the Communion together’? That unity is already broken. GAFCon FCA is rebuilding a funcional body that can reconnect most Anglicans, unified by biblical guidance. I don’t know how CoE will be part of it.