Thinking Anglicans

Inclusive Church and LGCM press releases

Inclusive Church Press Release
Wednesday 22nd June 2005

Inclusive Church welcomes the reinstatement of the Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada within the bodies of the Anglican Communion.

The grassroots network of Anglican Christians and various church interest groups and bodies regrets that the Anglican Consultative Council meeting in Nottingham today was not able to include the North American churches unconditionally. However, that the vote taken failed to achieve a clear majority is an affirmation of the diversity of the communion and a powerful reminder of our identity as Anglicans. Now, we can move forward to the listening process called for by the 1998 Lambeth Conference and begun at the Anglican Consultative Council.

The Revd Giles Goddard, Executive Secretary of Inclusive Church said: “The landscape has changed. The Church is not polarised in the way people have assumed. The simplistic characterisation of the Global South and the West has been shown to be false. Inclusive Church looks forward to building on these creative dialogues formally and informally to combat the many forms of exclusion within and beyond our Church.”

LGCM – see below the fold.

Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement – Media Release – 22nd June 2005

The meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council being held in Nottingham was pressed to discipline the American and Canadian Anglican Provinces following a surprise resolution laid on the table at the beginning of the gathering this week.

The motion passed in a much reduced form with 30 votes for and 28 against with 4 registered abstentions. The meeting was closed to outsiders and the ballot was secret.

Speaking from Nottingham the General Secretary of the Lesbian and Gay Christian Movement, the Revd Richard Kirker said today:

“This is a very significant vote. The narrowness of its success and the fact the Americans and Canadians decided not to attend as voting delegations shows the Communion does not have the heart for the agenda inspired by American conservatives and led by the Archbishop of Nigeria.

“My hope is that they will stand back now and rethink. They may have forced this humiliation on their American and Canadian sister churches, but they can now see that they have not won the hearts of most Anglican Provinces.

“We had been led to believe that the views of the conservatives were practically universal, that is patently not the case. After the presentations from Canada and America justifying their positive stance towards homosexuals, I talked to three delegates from Asia, Africa and South America, each said they had changed their view
and were reconsidering their position.

“There has been far too little open debate outside North America and Europe – hearts can still be changed.”

41
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
41 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
31 Comment authors
vscolesJakeKurtJ. C. Fishervcoles Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
Steven
Guest
Steven

Do these folks inhabit the same universe with the rest of us? There seems to be a very serious disconnect with the facts here–or, perhaps this is just an example of that most political of virtues–the ability to “spin” the facts to suit the needs of the moment.

Matt Kennedy+
Guest

Wow, talk about denial. Yes, we lost the vote and the primates communique was affirmed in every detail…but because the vote was so close, we have been reinstated?????

These guys are desperate.

Gerald Hastings
Guest
Gerald Hastings

I am a thinking anglican (two graduate degrees) and I think you need to repent and return to the Lord, for the sake of your own soul to say nothing of the souls of those you claim to minister to.

DGus
Guest
DGus

What a hoot! Can you imagine what their press release would have said if the vote had been ever so slightly the other way, and they had really (but barely) been reinstated? This is way, way beyond spin.

Andy
Guest
Andy

This press release reminds me of George Bernard Shaw’s comment “England and America are two countries divided by a common language.” There is no other explanation for IC/LGCM to have reached their cheery conclusion based on the lambasting E”c”USA has foisted upon itself, as evidenced by the day’s events.

J. C. Fisher
Guest

Well, at last this sounds like the faintest inklings of sanity.

“To Set Our Hope on CHRIST”: that’s what ECUSA does (and, come what may, will continue to do). Shall I continue to hope that millions of other Anglicans—all around the world—will join us in this?

“Christ beneath me,
Christ above me,
Christ in quiet,
Christ in danger,
Christ in hearts of all that love me,
Christ in mouth of friend and stranger.”

Peter O
Guest

OK – run the first line of the Inclusive Church statement by me again.

“Reinstatement”? Perleeeez….

Come on Inclusive Church. Read Ruth Gledhill or listen to Piggott (BBC) this morning. They understand what happened yesterday.

Matt Kennedy+
Guest

The only thing I can figure out is that the Inclusive church read the quite badly reported AP report by Jill Lawless, entitled, “Conservative Anglicans fail in bid to censure North American churches over gay issue” posted on this site and published in the Globe and Mail. This article misunderstands clauses 4 and 5 to mean that the N. Americans are excluded from only the finance and standing committees (when actually clause 5 simply says that the voluntary withdrawal from the ACC stipulated in clause 4 is to INCLUDE the standing and finance committees as well as the general administrative… Read more »

Judith Maltby
Guest
Judith Maltby

Why is it that conservatives never seem to need a two thirds majority on important matters? Do remember that the *overwhelming* vote in favour of the ordination of women as priests in England in 1992 is still often described as a ‘narrow’ victory because the 2/3rds majority was just attained in one house of synod, the other two having passed it with even greater majorities. Nonetheless opposition to women priests is no bar to ordination in the Church of England. Clearly in Anglicanism, the maths are never straight forward.

Martin Reynolds
Guest

I quite like the view of this coming from some quarters which reminds us of how the Windsor Report set a new standard for Anglicans – “What touches all should be decided by all”. In part this also covers my serious concern over the decision to significantly change the structure of the ACC by the admission of the Primates at a time when two Provinces were not in a position to cast a vote This matter is of such consideable structural significance that it should have been postponed to a later date. I am one who believes the current disaster… Read more »

Sean
Guest

It was a narrow victory even though it was an overwhelming majority since victory is surely relative to the amount needed to win. Since it was only just over the amount needed to win in one house of synod, it was a narrow victory since if it had not been over 2/3rds, the whole vote would have been lost. I am wholly in favour of the ordination of women, but there is no point pretending that the vote was not narrowly won, demonstrating the depth of opposition in some quarters, even though the majority of the CofE wanted it. More… Read more »

Tuck
Guest
Tuck

The two resolutions are actually very good news for lesbian and gay men in the Global South, and in particular for this former Anglican. Twice we have written to provincial officials (South East Asia) to dialogue with lesbian and gay people. West Malaysia returned the courtesy of a private conversation. Singapore ignored us completely. The polarisation of the issue makes it difficult for decent conversation to happen without any event being manipulated for political ends. Listening is a good way to start, if we go beyond talking about listening! It was called for since the last Lambeth Conference and nothing… Read more »

Derek
Guest
Derek

I had to read that first sentence several times. The only way that a “plain-sense” reading can make any sense of it is that it is a wish–not yet come to fruition–expressed as a statement. All in all, a poor choice of words, I’m afraid. It either looks potentally misleading or clueless.

vscoles
Guest
vscoles

How strange to see ECUSA taking an interest in democracy! It not only ordained women without the consent of the Anglican Communion, or even of the majority of its own dioceses, but illegally – according to its own canon law, which has become rather precious of late to bishops seeking to depose and dispossess the surviving orthodox Anglicans in their midst.

Now that we have seen the gay issue being sorted out, it is time to turn some attention to the other unilateral actions of ECUSA and Canada – the purported consecration of women as bishops.

Mark
Guest
Mark

Matt said, “The only thing I can figure out is that the Inclusive church read the quite badly reported AP report by Jill Lawless, entitled, “Conservative Anglicans fail in bid to censure North American churches over gay issue” posted on this site and published in the Globe and Mail. This article misunderstands clauses 4 and 5 to mean that the N. Americans are excluded from only the finance and standing committees (when actually clause 5 simply says that the voluntary withdrawal from the ACC stipulated in clause 4 is to INCLUDE the standing and finance committees as well as the… Read more »

tessa
Guest
tessa

The divide is bigger than I realized.This spin is just incredible

Christopher Shell
Guest
Christopher Shell

Is this especially a characteristic of ‘conservatives’, Judith?

Wade Bond
Guest
Wade Bond

Well, I agree that this press release is a bit more than spin. Perhaps we could call it “playing twister.” ;o) But I do think that this outcome is a positive one for North America. Akinola and company proposed a resolution that would have asked the ECUSA and Canada to withdraw from all instruments of unity. Apparently, it was soundly defeated. What did pass was a request to continue to withdraw from the ACC including the two sub-committees. This is not a big deal because they may not have been on those committees anyway and the ACC will not meet… Read more »

Greg Jones
Guest
Greg Jones

Ummm…as a moderate Anglican deeply saddened by the decision to exclude ECUSA and Canada even more from the Communion — I’m confused by the LSD inspired spin on this press release. Here’s my question: who wrote this, and what drugs is he on?

Merseymike
Guest

From a liberal perspective, I thought the spin was rather daft too.

Tha main problem, though, is that so many people are basically desperate to hold things together at all costs. So, what should be an opportunity – a new statrt, a progressive liberal Anglican denomination without the evil doctrine of Akinola and the premodern fundamentalists – ends up being a threat, and all sorts of guff about unity and listening takes pride of place.

As I am a tough rather than a wet liberal, I find it all quite frustrating.

Antony
Guest
Antony

I refuse to believe that homosexual, transsexual and bi-sexual Christians as well as heretical revisionists are, by their very being, any more brilliant or more stupid then the rest of us. How the …., can they have chosen the fools behind this press release to represent them!!??

Tom Cranley
Guest
Tom Cranley

What is going to happen now to our people in England? Are they going to be persecuted by the fundamentalists or will Inclusive Church stand up for them?

John Simmons
Guest
John Simmons

“The motion passed in a much reduced form” !!!

Indeed? According to Simon’s report four of the five clauses were passed completely untouched, and the fifth was amended in order to make it explicit and more clear which committees were included under the rather vague heading of “entities”.

If that is much reduced, friends at LGCM, then I’m a shadow of my former self.

Leonardo Ricardo
Guest
Leonardo Ricardo

Rev Nduka is worried about the ECUSA forcing ourselves on *others* like rejected lovers when in fact, +Uganda and those same *others* are gang raping/violating some of OUR Dioceses in the U.S. as we speak!

R. Parrish
Guest
R. Parrish

Much could be quickly decided if a professional poll were done of the people in the ECUSA pews as to whether they are for or against the ordination of female priests,the ordination of homosexual priests, the blessing of same sex unions, and the consecration of practicing homosexual bishops. Sadly, this will never get done as the controlling liberal faction is terrified of the poll resulting answer.

Leonardo Ricardo
Guest
Leonardo Ricardo

“Sadly, this will never get done as the controlling liberal faction is terrified of the poll resulting answer.” R. Parrish

This comment is absurd, feardriven and factless.

Matthew
Guest
Matthew

“in fact, +Uganda and those same *others* are gang raping/violating some of OUR Dioceses in the U.S. as we speak!” – Leonardo Ricardo

Ah, yes, the much vaunted, nuanced, tolerant love of our liberal brothers on display once more.

Jake
Guest

The original ACC resolution was amended for one simple reason; they do not have the authority to tell the North Americans that they are banned from all positions of leadership within the Communion. They can only address membership within the ACC, and its committees, which they did. Resolutions from Lambeth, the Primates, or the ACC, and statements from Canterbury, have the authority of recommendations for TEC. The only binding resolutions come from General Convention. This is how it has been from the beginning of TEC. I doubt if it will change, regardless of how many purple shirts from foreign parts… Read more »

vscoles
Guest
vscoles

For what it’s worth in this context, the ACC has never been a democratically-elected body. How do people come to be appointed? In many cases because they support the ECUSA line.

How many people from the global south have ever held senior office at the ACC?

It’s all too much like a client regime of an American agency – funded and staffed by ECUSA as a means of propagating its warped gospel around the Anglican Communion.

As of this week, all that is now at an end, and the future lies with majority Anglicanism.

Sean
Guest

“The sad new is the Primates being added to the only instrument of unity to include laity, priests and deacons. The Primates will call the shots now. For all intents and purposes, the ACC has ceased to exist, other than a sub-committee of the Primates’ meeting. Their grab for control has been successful. The laity now have no voice in the future of the Communion.” Apparently it would seem that the move to include the Primates came from John Paterson et al (see his speech earlier in the week where he called for a greater involvement of primates in the… Read more »

Antony
Guest
Antony

I agree with you Sean, there are plenty of Presbyterian (“liberal”) groups that Jake can join if he has misunderstood one of the fundamental identities of Anglicanism.

Rev. Lois Keen
Guest
Rev. Lois Keen

I asked this question at the end of another posting, the one on the vote to include the Primates as “ex officio” members of the ACC. I’ve had no reply. In my experience of bodies with ex officio members, they have seat and voice but no vote. Is this the case with the primates as ex officio members of the ACC? There was a concern voiced in one comment that for those provinces which have only one ACC member the primate would now be that member, eliminating all hope of there being lay membership from those provinces. If indeed ex… Read more »

Peter Owen
Admin

Lois Keen asks about ex officio members. My experience here in England is the opposite of hers: ex officio members are full members with seat, voice and vote. This is certainly true of our synods and parochial church councils.

Tony Somervell
Guest
Tony Somervell

Remember this one? “Committees meet for hours and hours, to write minutes”
Long live the local church!
😉

vcoles
Guest
vcoles

Lois Keen has a somewhat curious notion of the early history of PECUSA. The Church of England’s first mission there was in the 17th century, and it was well established, with many parishes, and a leading role in many aspects of public life by the time of American independence. Long and anguished efforts were made to obtain bishops for these colonies, but the English government, for various reasons, refused to allow the Church of England to consecrate anyone. There was a great deal of fear that once the Church in America had its own bishops, it would pass out of… Read more »

Jake
Guest

Some years ago, members of the house of bishops were asked, “Where do you get your authority?” The majority responded, “From the people.” If we are to be the Body of Christ, we listen to one another; we recognize that each of us may offer the word of God, not just those wearing purple. Thank God most ECUSA bishops understand this. Apparently, this is not thecase in other places. Of course we are persons “under authority.” The bishop’s judgement is the last word. But, at the same time, to exclude the other orders means that necessary perspectives will be missing,… Read more »

J. C. Fisher
Guest

“My experience here in England is the opposite of hers: ex officio members are full members with seat, voice and vote.”

Huh? Wha??? (Yanks and Brits, two peoples divided by a common tongue again?)

All I can say is, if (and God willing, *when*) ECUSA and the AngChCanada are back (voting!) on the ACC, the assinine decision to include the over-bearing Primates *better* get re-visited!

Jake
Guest

vcoles, That is a rather unusual reading of history. Of course there were some (primarily Tories) who wanted bishops. But the majority of Yankees despised the aristocracy, and still do. Call no man Lord. No King, and no Archbishop. To miss this point is to continue to misunderstand some of the underlying principles that steer the Episcopal Church. We don’t appoint; we vote. We’re into the democracy thing, you see; giving the people a voice and all of that. The best way to lose the respect of the people is to start acting like a prince, as many bishops and… Read more »

Kurt
Guest
Kurt

Jake is right, vcoles. Yes, there were a number of attempts to obtain bishops during the Colonial Period. But the opposition on this end of the pond came from lay people, not aristocrats. Lay people didn’t want the Lords Bishops lording it over the people of the parish like they did in England. In that respect, American Episcopalians are quite positively influenced by Congregationalism. On the other hand, High Churchmen, like Seabury, finally convinced people that bishops should be PART of the picture. And so, we first received the Episcopate from the Scots in 1784,–NOT from the English! Seabury, by… Read more »

Jake
Guest

Seabury was also a Tory. The difference being those Anglican clergy who continued to pray for the King during the revolution were identified as Tories, and most of them hightailed it to Canada fearing for their lives. Those Anglican clergy who prayed for the Continental Congress were considered patriots. The first house of bishops consisted of Samuel Seabury, a Tory, Samuel Provoost, a patriot, and William White. Since Provoost would not speak to Seabury, White spent most of his time trying to mediate a peace between the two of them. The consecration of Bp. Bass, our fourth bishop, was held… Read more »

vscoles
Guest
vscoles

Jake, I think you need to understand that the Scottish Church was outlawed and persecuted for many years following the arrival of William on the English throne. It had supported the Jacobite cause and continued to recognise the descendants of the exiled monarchy as lawful monarchs, rather than the protestant usurpers in London. It was NOT a case of the colonies refusing to have bishops, but the King refusing to permit an independent episcopate and a new province to develop, which would have been the case if the jurisdiction of the Bishop of London were to be replaced by bishops… Read more »