This Primates meeting is fast turning into a trial.

“The Episcopal Church is not in any way a monochrome body,” Archbishop Williams observed, “and we need to be aware of the full range of conviction within it.”

Like all the other provinces of the AC ARE "monochrome" bodies? Why can't we hear the "full range of conviction" in THEM? Say, the Rt. Rev. Mdimi Mhogolo, Bishop of Central Tanganyika (see here http://anglicanfuture.blogspot.com/2007/01/mutual-responsibility-and.html )---or even Davis Mac-Iyalla from Nigeria?

While I am pleased that +Christopher Epting will be speaking, I OBJECT to this continuous effort to portray TEC as "different" "special"----heretical?---compared to the rest of the Communion.

There is multiplicity and NON-uniformity ***throughout*** the AC, and only a POWER-PLAY by the Primatial Majority can make it *appear* otherwise!

Since this document would have had to be turned over to the plaintiffs in Calvary vs. Bishop Duncan and all in accordance with the judicial order requiring expedited discovery with a deadline of January 31, it is not surprising that The Diocese and bishop has chosen to reveal its contents. In this manner the diocese will have a chance to "get ahead of the story" so to speak. Calvary, the plaintiffs in this case, petitioned the court to grant such expedited discovery as it believed that the Diocese and +Duncan had not complied with the settlement that had been reached, was attempting or soon would be attempting to deprive Episcopalians at Calvary of their property (I assume as members of a TEC faithful congregation), and that the steps the Diocese had taken and was continuing to take were simply in furtherance of the strategy presented in the Geoffrey Chapman Memo a few years ago. The petition lists a number of actions taken by the Diocese in furtherance of this effort and alleges that the Diocese, by these actions, has left The Episcopal Church. The Diocese has denied the allegations and denied that +Duncan signed any allegiance etc. to the off-shore primates. The full petition and the entire court record can be found on-line at the office of the protonotary of Allegheny county Court of Common Pleas Civil Division no. GD-03-020941. Since the settlement was confidential, only those records not subject to that order

I can only echo the comments of JCF. Will the Primates of the 'Global South' be willing to be as gracious as the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church of the Untied States and allow those from their own Provinces,who disagree with them, to be invited to address the meeting? I think not.

When WILL His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury show an evenhandedness in his dealings with conflicting opinions across the Anglican Communion? And the presence of His Grace the Archbishop of York does little offer a broad perspective of the life of the Church of England. Let ++Cantuar lead by example and invite +Worcester and +Carlisle.

Yes Tanzania is supposed to define the ConsEvs line in our sands of time and place and person, or else Nigeria will not attend the next Lambeth?

See: http://www.livingchurch.org/publishertlc/viewarticle.asp?ID=2897

Has anybody information about which African primates will meet with whom in Nairobi before the Primates' Meeting? Who has organised this caucus, and what is its agenda? This "instrument of communion" seems to be developing into an "instument of oppression". I'd take big odds that this is a planning meeting for taking over the agenda of the main event to achieve a narrow political end. It seems very likely that it is a rehearsal for how the members of the caucus will attempt (probably successfully) to take control at Lambeth. Is it worth the candle to persist, do you think?

Can anyone think of anything good that has ever come out of a Primates Meeting? Does it have any solid achievements to set against its record as a focus of disunity?

Bishop Robert Duncan of Pittsburgh writes:

29th January, A.D. 2007
4th Monday After the Epiphany

TO THE CLERGY AND PEOPLE OF THE DIOCESE:

“Our position simply stated is this: We are the Episcopal Church in this place and we have no intention of standing anywhere except where we have always stood ("the Faith once delivered to the saints") or being who we have always been (mainstream Anglican Christians). ”

For 15 or 20 years this has been the ever-stated position of the Networkers and their allies. But is it too good to be true?

The test of Truth is Time; the unavoidable clash with Reality. The pensions issue in Virginia now at hand and that of property will show.

When the fine print and the Canons have been read, it may well be that the Networkers have allowed themselves be led astray by their own talking points.

(BTW the use of phrases like “the faith once delivered to the saints” has from the mid 2nd century – pseudo-epigraphic letter of “Jude”, the “Pastorals”, and so on – been the signal of innovation).

You can lead a Primate to water but you cannot make him drink. If Canterbury is anything but helpless in this regard, least of all able to lead by example by drinking freely and deeply with people of the whole range of active views, then CoE joins the list of provinces to be expunged and excommunicated by Abuja. Yes to Anglican Mainstream. No, to Inclusive Church. Ironic.

Inevitable, given Rowan Williams?

Are we now witnessing a birth of bell jar Anglicanism? Afraid of the world Jesus came to save? Disgusted completely by the world Jesus came to save? Lying about the world in order to save it from itself? Uninterested in the world Jesus came to save? Truly anointed above all others to sit at Jesus right hand at the Great Feast's place of honor?

Whatever it is going to be, Tanzania will greatly help get this dubious conformed ConsEvs fever, right out into the open. Akinola must not be nearly so sure of his outcomes as he wishes, or else he would not be so strongly hinting that maybe he will not have reason to attend Lambeth after all.

I find it fascinating that Bishop Duncan speaks of "being accompanied" by a "non-Network, Windsor-compliant bishop." Unless there is some additional name yet to be revealed, this seems to imply that Bishop MacPherson of Western Louisiana will be present to "accompany" Bishop Duncan. This seems to me the height of cheek. Bishop MacPherson has been invited directly by the Archbishop of Canterbury. He has recently accepted election as chair of the Presiding Bishop's Council of Advice. If Bishop MacPherson agreed with Bishop Duncan that there was no longer a home in nor a place for The Episcopal Church, I can't imagine he would have accepted that position. He may have some points of agreement with Bishop Duncan, but it doesn't look like that's one of them.

This apparent subordination of Bishop MacPherson seems to indicate Bishop Duncan's sense of peer status with Bishop Jefferts Schori. Since she is "first among equals" among Episcopal bishops, there is some accuracy there; but he is among the equals, and not himself "first." As Moderator he is, perhaps, "first among equals" for the splinter of the Network; but the Network is not on par with The Episcopal Ccurch as a Province of the Communion. She is Primate. He is not.

Bishop Duncan is, as we used to say, "takin' on airs." One can only hope he will find this interview before the Primates meet - one from which Bishop Jefferts Schori will go on and he will go home - less satisfying than he expects.

To be fair, I think William Crawley is right to link the Telegraph report and the secretary general's view: the SG said he agreed with Paul Marshall's analysis and Marshall said the ABC is fomenting schism. Simple logic leads to the conclusion that the SG thinks the ABC is fomenting schism. Or am I missing something?

Jenny

I do accept the validity of making such a link. I just think it is poor quality journalism:

(a) not to even mention the Church Times source (published on Friday, available to the Telegraph journalist in central London on Thursday) when you recall that William Crawley is the host of BBC Northern Ireland's main Sunday morning radio Religious Affairs discussion programme. I'd be astonished if Crawley didn't have access to the CT on the web!

(b) not to even mention Marshall's original article, published some time ago now, thus giving the impression in the blog item that Kearon was speaking entirely off his own bat.

Crawley is not merely a blogger, he is a BBC journalist.

Anglicanus is spot on when he poses the question: "When WILL His Grace the Archbishop of Canterbury show an evenhandedness in his dealings with conflicting opinions across the Anglican Communion?"

++Rowan Cantuar has turned out to be a sick JOKE, although most of us felt he was a good choice in 2002 before he stabbed his friend Jeffrey John in the back.

What a misogynist act and a humiliation for PB Jefferts Schori, lawfully and canonically elected to represent TEC as Primate, to have the ABC invite TEC's Constitution-and-Canon-Law-violator +Robert Duncan to the meeting as well as one of her contenders for the election as PB in 2006! ++Rowan absolutely has no finesse.

Surely, Duncan did not run? they don't want their "numbers" on paper, do they?

hello simon. Sorry not to reply earlier. I've been on holiday. I went back and had a look at Crawley's bbc blog and he wrote a whole post on the Marshall letter before writing on the Kearon business. You seem really upset by the Sunday Telegraph and Crawley on this. Come clean: did you write the Church Times article?! I'm a journalist myself and I don't agree with you analysis here.

Jenny
Not only did I not write that article for the CT but I had no knowledge of the email until I read about it there. That's why I was upset! :-)

We'll have to agree to disagree on this. I can live with that...