Asked whether the Archbishop of Canterbury ever considered not inviting Bishop Ingham, Mr. Kearon said, \u201cno, it was never considered.\u201d\u009d<\/p>\n
Bishop Ingham, in a telephone interview, said Bishop Robinson should be invited. \u201cIf the archbishop wants to keep everyone at the table, then everyone should be invited. The unfortunate message this sends is that schismatic bishops and primates are welcome but openly gay bishops aren\u2019t.\u201d\u009d<\/p>\n
Bishop Ingham also said he was surprised that the Lambeth invitations came out before the Canadian church\u2019s General Synod in June, which will consider the issue of same-sex blessings, and before Archbishop Williams\u2019 scheduled meeting with American bishops in September. \u201cHe\u2019ll get a very warm welcome there,\u201d\u009d he said, wryly.<\/p>\n
Mr. Kearon also clarified that the Archbishop of Canterbury did not consider inviting Martyn Minns, the breakaway priest from the Episcopal Church who was recently consecrated bishop and head of the Convocation of Anglicans in North America CANA) by the primate of Nigeria, Archbishop Peter Akinola.<\/p>\n
\u201cHe (Minns) wasn\u2019t even being considered. He wasn\u2019t eligible to be considered,\u201d\u009d he said. \u201cThe principle in which he\u2019s not being considered is because the Archbishop has decided that CANA and AMiA (another breakaway group called the Anglican Mission in America) are the same class.\u201d\u009d He noted that at the time that AMiA consecrations took place in 2000, then-Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey said that \u201che couldn\u2019t accept them as regular consecrations; that he would not regard himself as being in communion with the bishops concerned, and the primates agreed to that. The two bodies are in the same position.\u201d\u009d<\/p>\n