Thinking Anglicans

Birmingham diocese rejects Anglican Covenant

The Diocese of Birmingham voted today on the Anglican Covenant, and rejected it.

According to our correspondent, the voting was:

Bishops 1 for. (Suffragan bishop absent).

Clergy 17 for, 17 against, 1 abstention.

Laity 12 for, 25 against, 1 abstention.

10
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
10 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
6 Comment authors
John DinnenFather Ron SmithChris Smithdavid rowettJean Mary Mayland Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Richard Ashby
Guest
Richard Ashby

Excellent news that the diocese aren’t going to roll over and pass this because it is supported by the ABC. It would be interesting to know what lobbying was done by those opposed to the Covenant since we know that only material in support is coming out of official channels.

Jean Mary Mayland
Guest
Jean Mary Mayland

That is wonderful news! I congratulate the laity in Birmingham Diocese for their discernment and courage.

Jean Mary Mayland
Guest
Jean Mary Mayland

If anyone wants to reads material putting the case against the Covenant it can be found on the web sites of both Modern Church and the No Anglican Covenant Coalition.(NACC)

Chris Smith
Guest
Chris Smith

May this momentum continue to build in every part of the globe! After the rejections are all counted against those who want such an ill-advised “Covenant” it will be an interesting bit of timing for the Archbishop of Canterbury: Will he “move on” and open the path for a new ABC? It would be great if Rowan would suggest his successor be a woman, but obviously, Anglican Canon Law would prevent him from making such a gesture. Giles Fraser might be an excellent choice.

Father Ron Smith
Guest

“Hear what the Spirit is saying to the Church” – So far. anyway, Loudly and Clearly! Go, England!

Father Ron Smith
Guest

Now that GAFCON is in the process of forming its own ‘church – at the ‘First Meeting of The Divine Commonwealth Conference’ in Nigeria, under the provenance of the Archbishop of Nigeria; is there, I wonder, a possibility that the Anglican Covenant may no longer be a necessity. With the imminent departure of GAFCON, it may no longer be necessary to ‘discipline’ the rest of us on matters of gender, sexuality, and a ‘sola Scriptura polity? Perhaps all those Churches outside the sectarian ‘Divine Commonwealth’ can settle down to just being plain old Anglican Christians again. This may be the… Read more »

david rowett
Guest

It was suggested to me years ago by someone who might have known what he was talking about that ++Rowan’s intention all along was to allow the talking around the Covenant to continue until it simply evaporated into irrelevance. This would avoid the need for hissy-fit splits and the further empowering of the noisy. And lo and behold…..

Chris Smith
Guest
Chris Smith

I believe David Rowett’s post in this thread may be accurate but it is still disappointing because Rowan looks weak. I had high hopes that Rowan would change his position and announce publicly that the Covenant was and is a very bad idea that divides and devalues human beings, not to mention the disenfranchisement of glbt members of the Church. Is it too much to ask? Apparently it is.

Father Ron Smith
Guest

I, personally, do not believe that the Covenant was actually Rowan’s own idea. Those pushy Prelates from the Global South were hopeful it might push out TEC and the Anglican Church of Canada. I cannot think that this was Rowan’s plan – especially in the light of ‘The Body’s Grace’.

For those who might want Rowan out of the picture: think again – about who might follow him. Remember, his predecessor was less welcoming of ‘change’.

John Dinnen
Guest
John Dinnen

It is because we don’t know who the next Archbishop of Canterbury will be that it is especially important to reject the covenant.