Tuesday, 20 June 2006

Windsor Resolutions: texts

Updated Tuesday afternoon
The Special Legislative Committee has now reported out several of these resolutions. To make it easier to follow, here are links to the latest texts:

A159 Commitment to Interdependence in the Anglican Communion to be merged with A166

A160 Expression of Regret passed by Deputies, now goes to Bishops

A161 Election of Bishops debate by Deputies continues Tuesday Alternative text that was discussed

A162 Public Rites of Blessing for Same-Sex Unions now merged into A161

A163 Pastoral Care and Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight

A164 Continued Attention to the Millennium Development Goals

A165 Commitment to Windsor and Listening Processes

A166 Anglican Covenant Development Process to be merged with A159

Posted by Simon Sarmiento on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 at 12:20pm BST | TrackBack
You can make a Permalink to this if you like
Categorised as: ECUSA
Comments

I felt so touched when reading part of Chris Sugden's thoughts to Titusonenine, in which he said he & 'Anglican Mainstream' wasnt to go on "holding hands firmly" with 'the orthordox' in America, This sounds gr8 to me --surely holding hands is what it's all abput !? :-)

All forgiven ?

Posted by: Laurence Roberts on Sunday, 18 June 2006 at 7:13pm BST

Surely TEC had no idea that 'the bonds of affection' required this kind of wide ranging Consultation, asit has never happened beforein throughout the AC ?

Hong Kong got on and ordained Lee Tim Oi and Jane Hwang withought consultation--even after WW2.

ECUSA consulted no-one about ordaining women as priests or even bishops.
When the CPSA incorporated a good deal of missa normative and its langauge of eucharistic Sacrifce it din't check with Zwinglians --in east Africa--and beyond !
And when Sydney introdued 'lay presidency' no one was consulted.

Get my drift ?!
Lots of bishops and priests have introdiuced, experimented with, and done all sorts of new and unheard of things, which seemed creative or needed in a particular time & place --without consulting folks in the wider national church --let alone the AC !

This happens in all Churches and denominations it's called (real) life, creativity and sometimes in answer to the demand of love.
Bede Griffiths Ashram in India combined Hindu ceronies into theLatin Mass--it eveolved organically 'on the ground'

In Yorshire we have an ordained, woman RC priest.

All the this hullaballoo is --as we all know--about gay folks getting some recogntion, some inclusion, some ministry-- I find that very often straight folks carry on like this with tantrums and so on if they can't get theri own way and exclude us queer folks--- not alwys of course, just an awful lot !! :-)

I suddenly feel a kind of joy --maybe its jsut the thought of how fresh the Spirit's breezes can be............. The heart of the Eternal is most Wonderfully kind'--thanks for this Fr. FAber.

Posted by: Laurence Roberts on Sunday, 18 June 2006 at 7:32pm BST

Laurence, you write:

"In Yorshire we have an ordained, woman RC priest."

Details, please? Surely this "RC" priest is not actually recognized as such by the RCC?

Posted by: Nadine Kwong on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 at 3:18pm BST

Laurence Roberts has a remarkably selective recollection of recent events in Anglican church history!

The appointment of the first Eames Commission on the ordination of women signalled that such issues required consultation throughout the Communion, so the the pretended surprise over VGR does not carry any weight whatsoever. Given the existence of Lambeth 1.10, nobody could claim to be surprised at the international response to GC2003.

Li Tim Oi was ordained in Hong Kong in wartime, when consultation was impossible. The Bishop afterwards wrote to +William Temple to inform him, but Temple wrote back to require him not to continue.

Certainly ECUSA consulted nobody about ordaining women: not even internally. It was done illegally, according to ECUSA's own rules, and afterwards they changed the rules to accommodate it.

Sydney did initiate discussion of lay presidency within the Communion, but has not authorised it following the negative response it received.

There is no such person anywhere in the world as a RC woman priest. The RC Church does not believe itself to have the authority to ordain women.

Belonging to any organisation does require members to observe certain agreed principles, and the need to consult grows more important, the greater the significance of the organisation and the geographical distance between its members. I can not think of any organisation more important than the Church of Jesus Christ.

For all that, it is a voluntary society, and individual members, congregations and even provinces are not compelled to remain if they decide that they can not accept the agreed principles - such as the creeds, holy orders or mutual interdependence. This appears to be the case with ECUSA. Surrounded by prayer on all sides, it has chosen in Columbus, Ohio, to follow its own course.

It is a source of great sadness to those who wanted to keep the Communion together, and of great anxiety to its own members who do not share the vision articulated in GC and who fear the purges which some such as Via Media have threatened following the Convention. But that is the decision of the province, and it must be respected, just as one hopes that minorities within ECUSA will, in the end, be respected.

Posted by: Alan Marsh on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 at 3:50pm BST

How can any convened meeting of any Christian Church dictate to God the Holy Spirit how and when that Spirit may (or may not) intervene in the life of the Church? Refraining from nominating practicing gays to the episcopacy simply overrules God!

Posted by: John-Julian, OJN on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 at 4:46pm BST

“Sydney did initiate discussion of lay presidency within the Communion, but has not authorised it following the negative response it received”—Alan Marsh

Oh, please Alan. Everyone who follows this issue with the Jensenites knows that lay presidency takes place in Sydney. Just as same-sex blessings are not “authorized” in the USA, but take place here anyway.

Posted by: Kurt on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 at 6:16pm BST

Alan, I'm following 'Colombus, Ohio' on the 'Stand Firm' blog-- I know "Why don't I get a life?" :-) (which can be reached via the Integrity website), and so I'm certain that they have not yet Responded to 'Windsor'. Does that mean that when you say 'ECUSA has chosen to go its own course', you are referring to the election of the new Presiding Bishop ? I'd appreciate it if you could clarify this, for me. I am probably wrong, as otherwise it would mean that, you feel TEC may not elect it's own leadership, if too 'liberal'.
I can't imagine that you would oppose their right to elect a woman (even if you were not to be, yourself in favour of WO., which I don't know).

Sorry if there are too many dodgy or wrong assumptions here.

BTW

My thanks for the rest of your response. Let me read it over some more, and put my thinking cap-on. No-one could ever accuse me of being too-objective!.... :-)

Posted by: LaurenceRoberts on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 at 6:36pm BST

Nadine
Thanks.

It was a Sunday paper- The Sunday Telegraph, if I'm not mistaken, a most exciting report. I'm not sure where I put it for safe keeping, but if I do find it I'll give further details. I have not yet had the pleasure of meeting her, myself. She may even be leading the solitary life--can't quite recall.
Also on tv a few weeks ago was aprogramme about women being ordained priest in France.
Some years attended mass in the chapel of the Assumptionists in Kensinton, w. London. An anglican woman priest presided, but the rite was the roman rite. But it was a eucharist for ordinands and the sisters were otherewise occupied elsewhere.

Alan, of course some RCs, including Joseph Ratzinger don't recognise these women RC priests, anymore than they recognise RC priest- theologians & priest-justice and peace activists, or anglican clergy. Or recognises Lavinia Byrne as a religious, and so hounded the IBVM., that she had to leave their hearth, to protect them. For me , we use the word 'Church' very loosely. Words are powerful tools if used well. 'The Church' is not, in my belief, the clergy, the bishops --not even if residents of Rome or Canterbury! Not even if you get 'em all together in Lambeth or the Vatican.

JC Ryle in his inimitable (19th century way) said the Church is made up of all who are in Christ. And I also like the BCP phrase 'the blessed company of all faithful people'. I now think of it as containing me and all the unfaithful too. It is an assembly, is '2 or 3...'. Who knows what it may yet be revealed to be ? It certainly ain't co-terminous with this, that or any ecclesiatical polity.
John Woolman the 17th century Quaker said, 'the Catholic Church is made of people of all religions and none,,, we shall look upon their faces, at the last..'..... Lovely visions of human becoming......
Another nice thing that once happened and that is gracenote moment ( and beyond legislation, committes and all that) :--
at my cousin's funeral mass (he'd died in a terible accident and was a young man)in Westminster diocese, somewhere, the young priest said to me, " Father, come & concelebrate". I said, "I'm an anglican", and he replied come on through to the sacristy and I'll find you an alb" etc. And that was it. It was of great help to me and all the family. The 'RC side' of the family the counin's people ('Irish Catholics') were particularly delighted.
To my mind these small but wonderful things are individual acts of humanness, and reach the parts committees and canons can't.....

Alan

I really do think that all this consultation business is a function of the shrunken world and advent of email, tv., and easy air-flight for the affleuent.
But also, it's instructive to notice the things we get our knickers in a twist about ! It's usually sexuality (appropriately enough for knicker-twisting)& power, including gender, gender roles, sex itself- of course, and who is in charge.
An evangelical(lay) woman parodied this in evangelical circles, I heard recently, by making a T-shirt saying : ' I have the dick, I make the rules'. As if to confirm her point her vicar removed her licence to preach, but refused to tell why / on what grounds.

The reaction to 'The Philadelphia Eleven ', WO in the C of E, & to Gene Robinson would seem to bear me out.

As many of us have been offering our stories to the C of E for a long time, and have found little appetite from it, for 'consultation', leads me to suspect, it as a delaying tactic at best, at worse dishonest & manipulative. The powerful have varied tools at their disposal to silence dissent, one way or another. (You know the sort of thing-- 'good cop' ( consult, we'll listen,etc ) 'bad cop' (bullying,outright rejection, bad language as in Lambeth 1.10 which replace the work of the section; & the WR which is everybit as homophobic as Eames said it wasn't.)

Posted by: LaureneRoberts on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 at 9:03pm BST

Hi Alan,

I felt I got so caught up in my last post, there was something I didnt say. About your feelings- hope that's not impertinent.

I don't want you or anyone to feel discouraged or worse. I don't want you or anyone to be, or feel pushed out of the Church. But I honestly don't think it's going to happen. I do want lgbt folks to feel welcome, able to stay, join , or return; without having to hide. So I just hope there could be room for all, rooms for us all :-)

I hope I haven't been hurtful, if succumbing at times, to point-scoring or being too 'clever'.

with best wishes
Laurence

Posted by: LaurenceRoberts on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 at 10:17pm BST

Dear Father Laurence

Don't worry, I don't take offence of any kind. Open debate and discussion helps to clarify matters, for which I am grateful.

The RC Church has categorically refused to ordain women as deacon, priest or bishop, and any woman who claims to have been ordained as a priest in newspaper articles you have seen is certainly not a Roman Catholic priest. RC Bishops do not have authority to ordain women, whatever their personal view of the issue.

GC is free to elect whoever it wishes to be its presiding bishop, even a lay person if it wishes, but it has to choose between independence (which is what we have seen this week) and interdependence, if it wishes its choice to be received by other provinces of the Anglican Communion, to which it says it wants to belong.

A basic principle of consultation is that you don't go in to it having decided the outcome in advance. That is where Sydney got it right - they floated the idea of lay celebration but then withdrew when they received strong negative reactions.

ECUSA apparently believes that it alone has the guidance of the Holy Spirit, validating every decision they take, even when they go it alone in the face of the whole Anglican world - and in the case of WO, the RC and Orthodox churches as well.

There is of course a wider fellowship to which all faithful Christians belong, but somewhere in this inconvenient stage which we call life on earth, we find that we have to take decisions about our institutional life, and if the whole world disagrees, it is often a signal that we have got it wrong. It is best to find out before taking the decision irrevocably.

To my grief and shock (I have tried hard to be optimistic to the very end) ECUSA has decided to go it alone, and will cease to be part of the Anglican Communion very soon. We are all the poorer for being separated from Rome and the Orthodox, and ECUSA has now separated itself in favour of another religion, which looks more and more antinomian and even Gnostic in "pretending to extraordinary revelation and gifts of the Holy Ghost". I count this as a great loss.

Posted by: Alan Marsh on Tuesday, 20 June 2006 at 11:49pm BST

Shouldn't we at least stop pretending that the dominant faction within the ECUSA bases even the vaguest of it's pursuits on matters of divinity? Their agenda is entirely based on secular, worldly political activism. The "Holy Spirit" has nothing to do with it.

Posted by: Ryan on Wednesday, 21 June 2006 at 1:05am BST

“To my grief and shock (I have tried hard to be optimistic to the very end) ECUSA has decided to go it alone, and will cease to be part of the Anglican Communion very soon. We are all the poorer for being separated from Rome and the Orthodox, and ECUSA has now separated itself in favour of another religion, which looks more and more antinomian and even Gnostic in "pretending to extraordinary revelation and gifts of the Holy Ghost". I count this as a great loss.”—Alan Marsh

No Alan, if there is any “separating” to do, Canterbury et al must do it. The GC was very clear about that. However much grief and shock you are unfortunately experiencing, rest assured that most Episcopalians feel neither. We were not in communion with Canterbury for sixty years (until the 1830s, actually) after Independence. Maybe the English will have to ponder the separation for sixty more, until they start consecrating women and gay bishops, too. When they do, we Americans will be here to re-establish communion.

Posted by: Kurt on Wednesday, 21 June 2006 at 1:57pm BST

>>>Their agenda is entirely based on secular, worldly political activism.

Some of us would refer to it as "corporal acts of mercy," though I suspect that term isn't used much by the Anglo-Baptists in Fort Worth.

Posted by: New Here on Wednesday, 21 June 2006 at 3:19pm BST

Kurt said, "However much grief and shock you are unfortunately experiencing, rest assured that most Episcopalians feel neither."

Actually, I have to wonder whether most episcopalians will be content with the news that GC has walked out of the Anglican Communion. Every American Anglican I have met over many years has been severely (and sometimes embarrassingly) Anglophile, and I somehow doubt whether the inevitable isolation of ECUSA will play well with the folks in the congregations.

Kurt also said, "We were not in communion with Canterbury for sixty years (until the 1830s, actually) after Independence."

Try reading the new history of the episcopal church by Bishop Edward Luscombe. Your comment is a non sequitur.

Posted by: Alan Marsh on Wednesday, 21 June 2006 at 7:10pm BST
Post a comment









Remember personal info?

Please note that comments are limited to 400 words. Comments that are longer than 400 words will not be approved.

Cookies are used to remember your personal information between visits to the site. This information is stored on your computer and used to refill the text boxes on your next visit. Any cookie is deleted if you select 'No'. By ticking 'Yes' you agree to this use of a cookie by this site. No third-party cookies are used, and cookies are not used for analytical, advertising, or other purposes.