The Anglican Communion has become like a really horrible cocktail party. Nobody really wants to be there anymore but everybody is afraid to be the first to leave. There needs to be some way to dissolve the thing and let people who can find common objectives form new groups.

Let us all hope (for the sake of TEC, the Anglican Church in Canada, and the Anglican Communion) that this assault upon the Canterbury Leadership of our Church is resisted by the majority of the Primates of the Communion.

Such hubris on the part of FOCA, GAFCON and the Global South (who have absented themselves from the Lambeth Conference and allied thmselves with other dissident Anglican Groups) cannot be allowed to deflect our Church from its mission of a broad inclusivity of all people, regardless of race, ethnicity, gender or sexual orientation, within the world-wide Anglican Family.

The raising up of the suggested new provincial structure is tantamount to a schismatic departure from the authorised polity of our fellow Anglican Churches in North America and Canada. Such a rival structure - under the eirenic umbrella of Anglicanism - could only provoke further schismatic activity on the part of a determined minority within the Anglican Family.

If this principle is allowed to go ahead, then one could suggest a change of name for the new Church - 'Ecclesia Terra Incognita'.

The honourable title of 'Anglican' should not be allowed to be used by any other church which has been constituted in schismatic opposition to the Churches already existing under the Anglican umbrella in the countries concerned.

Well, well. +Bob Pittsburgh wants to be a Primate. What a shock!

What exactly does it mean to be a "Province of GAFCON" but not a Province of the Anglican Communion? If the GAFCON powers-that-be admit them, are they pretending to be the real arbiters of recognizing new AC Provinces? And what is likely to be the response of TEC and the AC?

Does that mean that (x)Duncan is now going to depart Lambeth?

Nah, the bishops there probably won't be so . . . well, I don't think it will happen.

The liberals have been establishing facts on the ground for many years now and the strategy has allowed them to totally undermine the once great Episcopal church.

Now, we have the GAFCon-ners taking a cue. The facts that they are establishing is that the TEC and ACoC are no longer recognized by the majority of the world's Anglicans as legitimate representations in North America and that there will be a new province of Anglicanism in the U.S. and Canada. Will the current ABC recognize this new reality? Probably not. Will the next (if there is a next)? The mass exodus of the orthodox and the death of the pew potatoes (average age is ~60 now) will result in a TEC the size of the Metropolitan church. The next ABC will go with the numbers.

This is one of the most shocking and incredible things imaginable. It is frightening to think that these people could invent such a position for themselves, having fabricated these organizations and roles for themselves in the first place. It is like cancer cells in the body that have deliberately self-replicated in order to have sufficient numbers to overwhelm the opposition. They just seem to keep spawning bishops who have only one role-to cause damage. Is this just hatred of liberals or gays, or are gays really just pawns in their game of seeking control at any cost to their follow Christians or the whole Communion? They simply have no right to do this and, if allowed to do so, will create chaos in every diocese. Their plan all along has been to become the "real" or "official" Episcopal/Anglican Church in the U.S. and Canada and this is a planned strategy. Many members of Common Cause are in open rebellion against their bishops and some of the "bishops" in this group have questionable status, such as Minns. The arrogance and self-righteousness of these people is astounding. These self-selected and manipulative people have only one intention, which is to undermine the Anglican Communion, the Archbishop of canterbury, and their respective national churches. The message to liberals is "we're taking over, so get out". The fallout, especially among gay Anglicans, will be devastating. Clergy and parishes will be caught in the crossfire, especially with the hostile intention of Common Cause to root out and destroy those who disagree. Allowing Gafcon/Common Cause a seat on the Primate's Council will result in their domination of the Council and dreadful actions which will destroy any efforts toward reconciliation and unity. Historic Anglicanism will cease to exist and be replaced by an untraconservative/protestant/fundamentalist sect, whose main order of business will be expelling and demonizing gay people. This is outrageous and they cannot be allowed to get away with it. This is all about power and control and not about the Gospel. It's sad that all this effort hasn't been spent on furthering Gospel instead of hurting and hating others in the name of Christ.

These boys make me carsick with all their thrills, twurls, spills and mind expanding, running as fast as you can, recreational self-destructive speeding religiosity...I better go take my long, all night nap and then wake up to see who they are going to take-over/turn-on/turn-out and turn-into on Friday....ah, such inspiration to love thy neighbor, it's amazing ANYBODY still wants to go to Church with this kind of ugly silly grandstanding goings on...but wait, Church is a Holy place, take note...send a memo quick to +Duncan Pitts.

If CCP becomes a "North American Province" of Gafcon, this will give them legitimacy and sense of entitlement. They will become a "church within a Church", but ehir real goal is to become "THE" Church. They will create havoc and make extravagant claims while undermining local bishops. Many are already doing this. Bishops and other clergy will be scrutinized for "orthodoxy" and they will be ready to accuse their fellow clergy of heterodoxy if not heresy at the drop of a hat. If they can create situations where congregations are led to beleieve that their clergy are unsound, they will rush in to save the day. Clergy suspected of being liberal will have to look over their shoulder constantly, while gays will be forced out or into deep closets. In the 21st Century in Canada, where the laws of the land protect gay rights, even allowing gay marriage, gay people will either have to leave, fight a pitched battle, or be forced to live in secrecy and hypocrisy. The Anglican Church will become an oppressive relic, attracting right-wing zealots. The majority will be displaced or will have to live with a terrible tension. How can there be two Provinces in North America? Gafcon has only exiisted for a month. It has no right to call the shots anywhere.

Standby for the announcement of a New Improved North American Province on or about the last day of Lambeth.

“The facts that they are establishing is that the TEC and ACoC are no longer recognized by the majority of the world's Anglicans as legitimate representations in North America…”

Seriously Robroy. You don’t know this. You don’t know any of it.

Not “Anglicanism”, not “majority”, not their views on “legitimate”, not “representations” neither in the form of the present one, nor in the form of any possible (but illegal and unlikely) eventual “new” province in North America.

Why do you make such ridiculous claims?

...and tomorrow the world, robroy.

"The mass exodus of the orthodox and the death of the pew potatoes (average age is ~60 now) will result in a TEC the size of the Metropolitan church. The next ABC will go with the numbers." -- robroy

It is conservatives who always die out, robroy -- where are the conservatives who supported slavery in America in the 19th century, or racial segregation in the 20th, or who fought the rights of labor in Britain and America, or who resisted the vote for women? Conservatives seem constitutionally unable to do anything but live in the moment -- if they looked ahead, they'd see that their causes are already lost in every progressive democracy. Have you talked to twenty and thirty somethings? You've GOT to be an older guy, right? Sexual orientation is just not an issue among the younger generations -- and it doesn't matter whether they are culturally and politically liberal or conservative. Once you and those who agree with you die, where will these numbers come from, robroy?

For those nostalgic for a blast from the past, an individual posting as "NP" has surfaced at Ruth Gledhill's blog. Statements like "if someone was a thief and would not stop stealing but even asserted their behaviour was good and holy, I would not think him fit to be a vicar" have a familiar ring.

I'm so very tired of references to the "vast majority of Anglicans" (q.v. robroy above). The number of members of a few provinces is indeed impressive -- and yet, if one looks at the number of provinces who support this sort of nonsense, their proportion is significantly lowered. Just because +Ajuba claims a huge number of Anglicans in Nigeria, his is still one province and one province only.

And +Bob Pitts a primate?!? I shudder. He will NOT be taking the largest, most successful (in numbers) parishes with him! There's going to be a huge row in Pittsburgh this fall...

robroy, the War of the Sons of Light and the Sons of Darkness is a book of the Qumran community, and they weren't Christians. This idea that there is some sort of war going on between the evil liberals bent on destroying Christianity and the Virtuous Conservatives valiantly defending the Gospel is romantic and all, but it ain't reality. Fear is a good motivator, as is the idea that one is "standing for" something. Conservatives here frequently desire a Church that "stands for something", but surely you can see the damage this kind of self aggrandizement does. Just stop finding things wrong with liberals for a minute and, as Mother Julian advised, pay attention to what you, not they for once, are doing to add to the mess. The perpetuation of the persecution myth and War of Virtue, to coin a title, is a very bad thing. It is not Christian to create this situation. It is based on fear as a generator of anger. You can still have all your conservative beliefs, including your dismay at what you see as the error of liberals without concocting this "us and them" mentality. And yes, I know liberals do it too. I also know that I do it with great regularity. But it comes directly out of our human brokenness. It is a direct result of the Fall, and as such it is sinful. None of us should be doing it. If I make my brother my enemy, how can I love him?

I also resent the labeling of people I know in my parish to be loving, warm-hearted, committed Christians as "pew potatoes." That robroy is so keenly looking forward to the literal death of these wonderful, older people says a lot about him.

And none of it is admirable. Or Christian.

Excellent point, Padre Wayne. The "vast majority of Anglicans" argument might be valid if we were a unitary, worldwide Church. As it is, we are (at present - who knows what we'll be by teatime?) a fellowship of independent, equal Churches.

Did the liberals and revisionists really believe they could mount a hostile takeover of The Church and no one would do anything about it? Even the most ardent liberal would have to admit that TEC and ACoC have been involved in massive theological, ethical, and doctrinal innovations. What's more, while all these innovations were in the process of formation and implementation TEC and ACoC heard from the world that they were tearing the fabric of the communion. Of course, their only response was to flip the world the bird and say, "You have no voice here, we are not accountable to you!" (A very catholic sentiment, btw.)

And now there is surprise? Please. The real shocker, of course, is that TEC and ACoC are dying on the vine and they know it. The end game is in sight and desperation is the last cry we'll hear.

Well I take a slightly different view (on my blog) and it is that to become 'a province of GAFCON' is an admission of walking off, that there are Canterbury provinces carrying on. There is a separation here, the Primates Council being other than the other institutions, and the province has no imperial claim into Anglicanism as such. Legally perhaps there is a need to maintain a division, a separation. My view is let them get on with it.

"Did the liberals and revisionists really believe they could mount a hostile takeover of The Church and no one would do anything about it?"

No, but since this "massive takeover" exists only in the minds of fear governed conservatives, why even ask the question? You can live with the mentality of the besieged faithful remnant if you want to, but God is calling you away from that. Confident faith does not see the need to revile those who disagree.

"The end game is in sight and desperation is the last cry we'll hear."

You do realize that your evident glee at the impending (metaphorical) destruction of your fellow Christians, while it has long history in Christian practice, is in fact the opposite of the Gospel, right? By not recognizing this as sin and instead revelling in it, you are doing your soul great damage, as much as is being done by your insistence on being in some kind of "war mode".

All I can say to you, robroy and Joe, is that I will continue to pray for you---that you will express more of the Spirit of Christ that you claim to follow (and God-willing, that I will do so, too. Lord have mercy!)

BTW, I later learned that Duncan also announced he IS about to leave Lambeth (if he has not done so already): my bad (re my earlier prediction).

'The intention of the CCP Executive Committee is to petition the Primates Council for recognition of the CCP as the North American Province of GAFCON.'

So is GAFCON being recognised as a church by the Common Cause Partnership?

This is a very serious question. The above petition implies that it is.

How can you have a province of GAFCON, if GAFCON is not a 'church' or a 'communion'?

A ‘fellowship’ does not have ‘provinces’. A ‘communion’ or a ‘church’ does. It seems that a ‘church within a church’ does too…

The serious questions raised by the Archbishop of Canterbury and by Tom Wright, about the authority which GAFCON claims for itself, are well founded.

"The next ABC will go with the numbers." The next ABC will be appointed under the watchful eye of a British Government which, regardless of political colour, will ensure that it is not embarrassed in the eyes of the substantially agnostic, increasingly gay-tolerant British public by the appointment to Lambeth of a backer of the GAFCON homophobe agenda, Robroy. In any case, the "numbers" game, as we both know, is a smoke and mirrors business. Claims for the size of the numerous secessionist N American groups are routinely inflated. Until such time as I see even part-way verifiable membership figures for certain GAFCON provinces I will not believe that they remotely approach the numbers claimed. There is a distinctly Stalinist whiff ("Life is getting better, comrades. Life is becoming more joyful") to GAFCON's membership statistics - with the exception, of course, of the of the 20 to 30,000 members of PB Venables' Southern Cone Province, a statistic seldom, for some reason, quoted.

I think Pluralist has got it right.

The "Primates' Council" to which Common Cause will submit its petition is the GAFCON Primates' Council, not the Instrument of Unity within the Anglican Communion.

The GAFCON Primates' Council may recognize +Duncan as a Primate of a Common Cause North American Province if it chooses, but such recognition will have no effect at all on the status of the Episcopal Church or Anglican Church of Canada within the Anglican Communion.

Some parallels:

Fr. Martyn Minns is already recognized as a Bishop by GAFCON, though his irregular consecration is not recognized by the Anglican Communion.

John-David Schofield, the deposed Bishop of San Joaquin, is still considered to be the Bishop of San Joaquin (Southern Cone) by GAFCON, but not by the Anglican Communion, which recognizes that such an arrangement is impossible within the Anglican tradition.

But, yes, recognition of Common Cause as the North American province by GAFCON does mean that GAFCON is separating from the Anglican Communion. There will be, by the next Lambeth Conference, a small group of "continuing churches" from many nations, possibly calling itself GAFCON, which has voluntarily separated itself from the Anglican Communion. In fact, there will no doubt be several such groups. And the Episcopal Church in the U.S. and the Anglican Church of Canada will still be full members of the Anglican Communion at Lambeth 2018.

Actually one of the roles of prophets is to act as messiahs, to bring forth new life, to level mountains and raise up highways, to break open stalls of captives, to throw off the yokes of oppression, to rise and thresh, to stand up and advocate for the poor, the widow, the broken, the homeless, the outcaste, the unloved.

Jesus imparts ALL the gifts of Spirit, including those of rebuking, healing and messianic heralding.

Further, the bible (both OT and new) make clear that there will be resistance from the oppressors and their sycophantic priests. The Pharoah and his sorcerers did not cooperate with Moses and the liberation of the Jews, Balaam was quite happy to attempt to thwart Judaism, Cain was prepared to murder his own brother in an attempt to garnish all God's attention for himself, Jesus was crucified on a cross, David had to behave like a mad man and lived most of his life in physical and/or emotional exile, John the Baptist was beheaded, Martin Luther King assassinated...

We know from both the book of Judges and Revelation that there will be times when only a few hundred souls will lead the way. God doesn't need the consent of the masses, nor approval from Pharoah's sorcerers. God knows they will resist, but God also knows that even a donkey can have more wisdom that a selfish scribe.

This planet is loved and healed for the benefit of all, including those who thwart and slander and vandalise. What does change is their credibility (or lack thereof) and evey so often God intervenes to re-emphasize why certain styles of thinking and organisational behaviour are so despicable.

Those who advocate harm against others and use strategies to attempt to starve, intimidate or bribe people into submission are contemptible. They are not worthy mates for they are wife bashers and child abusers.

The role of the ABC is primarily to head the CofE. And England is not about to accept Nigerian-style backwoods 'thinking'. Thankfully, we have progressed - and should not be afraid to say so, loud and clear.

Lapinbizarre wrote: 'The next ABC will be appointed under the watchful eye of a British Government which, regardless of political colour, will ensure that it is not embarrassed...' etc

Actually the next Abp of Canterbury will be nominated without government interference if we are to believe what the government has actually said. Gordon Brown has declared that he doesn't intend to exercise any prime ministerial discretion here, and the Synod is already in the midst of discussing replacement procedures.

"... if we are to believe what the government has actually said", Simon, and if Gordon Brown is still in a position to not exercise prime ministerial discretion. I suspect the mystical world of "soundings", which gave us Lord Home as PM, will still play its part, don't you?

The Instrument of Unity in the Anglican Communion is the Primates' Meeting, not the Primates' Council.

I am not sure why Graham Kings is asking the question he is. Surely it has been clear to all observers, ever since the Nottingham meeting of the ACC, that a small group of Primates, most from sub-Saharan Africa, intended to separate from the Anglican Communion and set up their own authority structures unless all their demands were met. As their demands were not met (and for the most part could not be met), they are now separating.

It is possible that this schismatic movement was encouraged and abetted by conservative Evangelicals within the Church of England, because they found it a useful way to threaten the rest of the Communion into going along with their demands.

There is a well-known political strategy by which a minority faction within an organization uses the threats of violence made by a group of outside extremists to bludgeon the rest of the organization into consenting to its own demands. (The shorthand for it is: "Do as we say, or those ----'s will overpower us all.") Was this the strategy of Conservative Evangelicals within the Church of England?

They should have remembered that it has always been considered a very dangerous strategy, for the outside extremists tend to forget that they are not the ones in charge.

It is a significant development.

It is also clear that there are a few more cards to fall yet.

The "conservative" strategy seems fairly odd. Persuade others by calling them names.

I rather doubt that any of the "potatoes" at my parish will have much interest in your schismatic bs, old boy, however skeptical some of them may be about same sex unions.

Lapinbizarre wrote on Friday, 25 July 2008 at 12:07pm BST: “For those nostalgic for a blast from the past, an individual posting as "NP" has surfaced at Ruth Gledhill's blog. Statements like "if someone was a thief and would not stop stealing but even asserted their behaviour was good and holy, I would not think him fit to be a vicar" have a familiar ring.”

But this “NP” writes in whole sentences ;=)

However Ruth addresses this NP as “Nersen” which was our NP’s name as you recall.

Derek wrote: “If CCP becomes a "North American Province" of Gafcon, this will give them legitimacy and sense of entitlement.”

If CCP becomes a "North American Province" of Gaffecon, it will give them NO legitimacy whatsoever!

The “sense of entitlement” is there already, apparently. But that appears to be mainly a psychiatric issue.

Lapinbizarre wrote: “Claims for the size of the numerous secessionist N American groups are routinely inflated.”

And in Africa…

; = )

Some Joe wrote: “The end game is in sight and desperation is the last cry we'll hear.”

Yeah… Wasn’t that desperate?

Question:

Gaffconers said they were not leaving. Okay... however, what they are doing is setting up a secondary illegitimate Primatial structure that would then set up another structure under their oversight, neither recognized by Canterbury.

So... 1) wouldn't that mean they are actually in two churches, essentially, and 2)wouldn't that suggest they may not choose to leave the Communion, but might be tossed?

Isn't this a Shofield kind of thing where he first said, I am in TEC and ALSO in the Southern Cone (then Venables spoke up and said, Lordy, no you are NOT in TEC). I mean really, how many versions of the church can one be in simultaneously?

This is starting to look a lot like the game, "Twister". Each dot is another province...

STILL NO LIST OF GAFCON SIGNATORIES TO THEIR SO-CALLED DECLARATION OF JERUSALEM.......which would if it existed reveal that over a third of the 291 bishops have never been Anglican communion bishops.

The new Province in North America will include the Reformed Episcopal Church, whose orders were rejected by the Lambeth Conference of 1888...and numerous spurious Anglo-catholic bodies who are already defying the GAFCON re-affirmation of the 39 articles.

Perhaps the new church of GAFCON will become just one more organisation of 'Separated Brethren' - to become known as yet another sect of what have been called 'Exclusive Brethren' - wherein all like-minded sycophants may continue their own fight against the world, the flesh and the devil, blindfolding themselves against any new revelation from God at work in Creation.

The 'faux' bishops of this new 'Assembly of God' can then be expected to recruit like-minded people into an 'Alice-in-Wonderland' of smoke and mirrors, where extreme end protestant and catholic can rejoice in a "Common Cause" which will gradually become less common as it fragments into the obscurity of the 'bland leading the bland'. Let them go, I say!

Now we know why Bob Duncan left Lambeth early--he had to be fitted for a stupendously tall and sparkly new mitre befitting The Patriarch of the Western Hemisphere.

One anagram of Global Anglican Future is:

Ungrateful Cabal Go Nil

Father Ron suggested "...'bland leading the bland'. Let them go, I say!"

Amen.

Revelation 3:15-17 "I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm—neither hot nor cold—I am about to spit you out of my mouth. You say, ‘I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing.’ But you do not realize that you are wretched, pitiful, poor, blind and naked."

Mark 9:50 “Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can you make it salty again? Have salt in yourselves, and be at peace with each other.”

Luke 14:31-35 "...suppose a king is about to go to war against another king. Will he not first sit down and consider whether he is able with ten thousand men to oppose the one coming against him with twenty thousand? If he is not able, he will send a delegation while the other is still a long way off and will ask for terms of peace. In the same way, any of you who does not give up everything he has cannot be my disciple. “Salt is good, but if it loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is fit neither for the soil nor for the manure pile; it is thrown out. “He who has ears to hear, let him hear.”"