I would have thought official recognition of a new Province should come from the ACC-and surely it would require General Synod approval for the Church of England as a body to enter into full communion with this province since it would have legal implications if clergy from it wished to function within the C of E.I think these people have a curious view of the powers of the Abp of C.

"But he added it would make it more difficult if Mr. Williams did not give his blessing."

Like, maybe, impossible? The definition of the Anglican Communion is those churches in communion with the See of Canterbury. If this new "province" is not in communion with AoC, how can it be Anglican?

Isn't it funny how people lose "moral authority" whenever they disagree with us or fail to champion our own pet causes? What a coincidence that it should be so.

ABC has certainly not lost his authority, but he would surely lose it if he recognized a break-away group, regardless of what Akinola or Venables do.

"Dissident Anglican churches in Canada and the United States say they will form a new conservative jurisdiction in the next year, adding that the Archbishop of Canterbury has lost the moral authority to have any real say in blocking the radical move" - Pittsburg Dissidents

Perhaps it is as well that the authors of this statement have used the lower case "c" for the self-proclaimed 'dissident churches' they have described here as looking to form a conservative jurisdiction next year in the USA and Canada.

Their dismissive reference to the Archibshop of Canterbury, as having lost any moral authority to prevent rheir proposed move, now proclaims the obvious - that they are no longer acting under the historical primacy of Canterbury - thereby declaring their schismatic severance from the world-wide Anglican Communion as we now know it.

Let us hope and pray that the ABC and the ACC do not give in to their moral blackmail - by trying to accommodate this recent act of rebellion.

All that remains now is for the re-Asserters to admit they are no longer part of the Anglican Communion, having decided to declare their independence from us by proclaiming their own religious doctrine and fellowship.

Just do not let them claim the title of 'Anglican' - which carries with it a claim to a more broad theology and spirituality, in line with the call of Jesus and the Gospel.

"Just do not let them claim the title of 'Anglican' - which carries with it a claim to a more broad theology and spirituality, in line with the call of Jesus and the Gospel."

Too late. See the list of self-proclaimed "Anglican" churches on Anglicans On Line's web site.

If I wanted to declare my kitten, Peaches, and me The Newly Reformed and Ultra-Orthodox Anglican Church of the Holy Catnip, nobody could stop me.

A while ago I assisted at the burial office for a priest of High Church leanings, and Peaches was just enthralled by the odor of incense on me and my clothes. So said church would have to have smells and bells.

“So said church would have to have smells and bells.” Cynthia Gilliatt

Better than happy-clappy and sappy.

Kurt in Brooklyn, NY

The real waiting questions all involve whether not having to rub shoulders - with queer folks, progressive believers, and all the hot button modern remainder (real people, all) - will finally in the end make Realigned Anglican Pburghers as happy as them seem to preach?

And yes, the whole purpose of realignment is to shift the typical Anglican brand, from meaning big tent and broad church and distinctively balanced dispersed church life authority, to meaning small tent and conformed church and hierarchical policing plus punishing. An end that justifies many means, including theft. And false witness.

My predict? Even after successfull separation and gathering, such believers will still deeply need to target and diss and attack all their favorite bullseyes (real people, all). Their separation is indeed a wily means to that greater, great end. So justified.

As for the comment about the "conservative" view of the powers of the ABofC ... it rather seems to me they have little faith in him. Perhaps they plan on relying on their "friends" who sit on the ACC for some future recognition.

Do changes via the ACC require a simple majority vote? This is not, however, to suggest that the ultra-conservatives have the connections to attract a simple majority on a power-play of this magnitude.

If Canterbury is so irrelevant than why is Duncan always traveling to England and having meetings with the ABC? Why are these people still around if the CofE is no longer the leader of Anglicanism? These former Pittsburgh Episcopalians are really a strange lot.