The Rev. Dr. Charles K. Robertson, Canon to Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori, has issued the following statement:
We will not predict what will or will not come out of this meeting, but simply continue to be clear that The Episcopal Church, along with the Anglican Church of Canada and the La Iglesia Anglicana de Mexico, comprise the official, recognized presence of the Anglican Communion in North America.
And we reiterate what has been true of Anglicanism for centuries: that there is room within The Episcopal Church for people with different views, and we regret that some have felt the need to depart from the diversity of our common life in Christ.
The Rev. Dr. Charles K. Robertson
Canon to the Presiding Bishop of The Episcopal Church
December 3, 2008
Hogwash.
But recognized by whom? Over half the provinces in the AC are in some kind of state of either “impaired” or “broken” communion with TEC, and they comprise well over half of the world’s practicing Anglicans. OTOH, the CCP/FCA movement and this new province in formation will be recognized by OVER HALF of the world’s Anglicans.
So just who is really recognized internationally, and who isn’t? The Archbishop of Canterbury has only one vote. Each of the roughly 20 million or so Anglicans in Nigeria and the over 9 million Anglicans in Uganda also have a crucial say in this matter.
Outward, formal recognition and REAL legitimacy are two different things.
David Handy+
This statement has so much spin it is pathetic. If the Canon to the PB and the PB really meant that TEC was open to everyone, why would 4 dioceses and hundreds of congregations have departed TEC? Not to mention the host of clergy and former postulants who left and found safe haven in these lifeboats until this new province gets formed. It will be interesting to see what the primates do in February.
“Pay no attention to that [woman] behind the curtain; I am the great and powerful Oz!”
Yeah, what Brien (4.) said!
So just who is really recognized internationally, and who isn’t? The Archbishop of Canterbury has only one vote.
This is the problem with many of these break-away groups. They represent to their membership that they are actually recognized as part of the Anglican Communion when they are not. While it is true that the ++Canterbury has only one vote, it is also true that there is only one vote that counts-the ++Canterbury. That is plain and simple the defin ition of being Anglican: being in communion with the See of Canterbury. So, for now, the new group is the same as the old groups but with more members.
“And we reiterate what has been true of Anglicanism for centuries: that there is room within The Episcopal Church for people with different views, and we regret that some have felt the need to depart from the diversity of our common life in Christ.”
This is so obviously false, I wonder that he dare make the statement. But we have all seen this incongruity again and again from TEC, and nothing I have read (or thought of) answers the question. Is the supposition simply that the bulk of those who read such declarations will accept them at face value? That those who know better are so few that their knowledge is unimportant? Or does
+Robertson really and truly believe what he has said? If so, how can this be? I continue to be at a loss, for this taxes even MY cynicism.
Larry
Shortly after a Navy Captain is selected for promotion to Flag Rank that officer is brought along with all the other new Flag Officer selectees for a period of orientation and information sharing that will be useful as they make the transition from a high level of responsibility to a much higher level. The training process is informally referred to as, ‘Knife and Fork School’ because it helps these senior officers to better deport themselves as senior representatives of the Navy.
One aspect of the training focuses on taking some of the objectionable ‘saltiness’ out of the colorful language expounded by some in the stereotypical Navy of old by offering substitute words that are inoffensive replacements for the coarser traditional vocabulary. As an example, the coarse two word phrase describing the manure of a male of the bovine species when the term is used as an exclamation of extreme disbelief and complete rejection should be replaced with strong of the word, ‘Incredible!’
With the foregoing as background and speaking as a fully conversant Navy man, my comment about TEC’s statement on the new province is:
Incredible!
Brian from T19 (#6),
Pardon me, but your bias is blatantly showing.
Now, I admit, my comment above (#2) also betrays my own bias (the ABoC “has only one vote” and by implication his approval isn’t the really important thing). But I don’t think you even tried very hard to be objective here. You sounded a bit peeved and upset.
The fact is that the CCP/FCA does NOT present itself as an already recognized province in the AC. Your stereotyped opinion of “these breakaway groups” just doesn’t apply here. It is only a “province in formation,” as Archbishop Duncan (boy, it feels good to say that) explicitly said yesterday. And the process of gaining recognition throughout the AC may take some time, perhaps several years. But my point above, was that the MAJORITY of the world’s practicing Anglicans are already behind this move.
To be blunt, Brian, WHO SAYS that Canterbury’s vote is the only one that counts?? Yes, I know that’s been the traditional shorthand way of determing who is in the official AC and who is not, before and after the formation of the ACC about 40 years ago. But my point is that being Anglican and being in the official AC are NO LONGER synonymous. Not at all.
And if you turn around and ask me, “Who says so?” And that’s only fair. I’ll reply, “The majority of the world’s Anglicans.”
Your perspective, Brian, smacks of the kind of COLONIAL mentality that Archbishop Duncan (see, I can’t say it often enough) bemoaned so eloquently last summer in his great programmatic speech in Jordan on the eve of GAFCON that called for a new “Global (Post-Colonial) Settlement” for worldwide Anglicanism.
Or as CANA’s +Martyn Minns aptly put it, England isn’t the center of the universe. It’s not even the center of the Anglican universe anymore. Thanks be to God.
Part of this who New Reformation is REDEFINING the basis of Anglican identity. And part of what makes it so radical is that we who are part of the FCA movement (and I do include myself, even though I’m technically still in TEC as a priest canonically resident in the Diocese of Albany) are insisting that Anglicanism once again become a kind of Christianity that’s PRIMARILY defined by doctrine, and not just by polity structures.
I will admit, Brian, that I was being somewhat facetious in saying that ++Rowan Williams only has one vote. But I was only half joking. And after all, isn’t the ABoC merely the primus inter pares, the supposed first among equals?
David Handy+
(FWIW, that’s post 2500 for me, in just a little over a year)
Oops. A little hasty. I don’t know how that extra “who” got in a sentence where it didn’t belong. In the next to last paragraph, what I meant to say, of course, was, “Part of this New Reformation is REDEFINING the basis of Anglican identity.” And the CCP/FCA/GAFCON movement is insisting that the MAIN factor be doctrinal. Hence the emphasis placed on doctrine in the Jerusalem Declaration.
This naturally poses a very real challenge when Protestant, low-church, evangelical Anglicans are seeking to build a new Anglican entity in North America together with high church, Anglo-Catholic partners. I’m acutely aware of the difficulties we face. But I’m still excited and confident that there is a sufficiently broad basis of agreement on the essentials of Christian orthodoxy to make this adventuresome new Anglican Church of North America work.
A new day has dawned for Anglicanism. And to me, it’s future is as bright as the promises of God. The Master said, “I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH.” And that’s just what I expect him to do.
David Handy+
oooo! oooo! Claiming the brand name and denying the reality thereof in the same breath, ECUSA/TEC/GCC/EO-PAC is trying to do to anglican what it has done to christian. Gamaliel’s test is surely being applied to the situation…………..so, let’s just wait and see, shall we?
Presuming to speak for the Canadians and Mexicans. Isn’t that just typical!
lol rof
Question: Does the Anglican Church of North America also presume to speak for Mexico?