Thinking Anglicans

Archbishop Williams says "no ultimatum"

Episcopal News Service has published the Archbishop of Canterbury’s opening remarks at today’s news conference:

…It has been a valuable opportunity to listen carefully to the thinking of the bishops here on the problems that face the Communion; and also for us to share with the House some perspectives from elsewhere in the Communion. I think that in the light of the conversations we have come to a better understanding of the House in response to the questions and proposals of the Dar es Salaam Primates’ Meeting. I hope that the House, equally, has understood more fully what those questions and proposals were meant to achieve. The House will continue to reflect on them over the weekend.

Despite what has been claimed, there is no “ultimatum” involved. The Primates asked for a response by September 30 simply because we were aware that this was the meeting of the House likely to be formulating such a response. The ACC and Primates Joint Standing Committee will be reading and digesting what the bishops have to say, and will let me know their thoughts on it early next week. After this I shall be sharing what they say, along with my own assessments, with the Primates and others, inviting their advice in the next couple of weeks. I hope these days will result in a constructive and fresh way forward for all of us.

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
10 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Pat O'Neill
Pat O'Neill
14 years ago

“Despite what has been claimed, there is no “ultimatum” involved. The Primates asked for a response by September 30 simply because we were aware that this was the meeting of the House likely to be formulating such a response.”

NP? Do you disagree?

John Richardson
John Richardson
14 years ago

I would genuinely like someone – and I think this board is the place to ask – whether I have misunderstood the Dar es Salaam communique on this point of the 30th September. In the communique it says specifically that the answer OF the House of Bishops should be conveyed TO the Primates, BY the Presiding Bishop BY September 30th. After that, it says, “If the reassurances requested of the House of Bishops cannot in good conscience be given, the relationship between The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion as a whole remains damaged at best, and this has consequences… Read more »

L Roberts
L Roberts
14 years ago

‘The struggle to keep Anglican Communion intact was worth the effort, he said. Such a seemingly intractable problem of theological conscience would be a powerful witness of reconciliation to the world. “If we are able to get this right with integrity in some way, that would be helpful to Christians everywhere,” ‘ Rowan Williams said.

Good words, and hopeful ones. Unlikely to be heeded by some who care only for waht is hammered on their own anvil…..

dave p
14 years ago

I’m sure NP believes the Archbishop is mistaken.

Pluralist
14 years ago

Rowan Williams hopes that the meeting of the ACC and Primates will result in a constructive way forward. I rather think the pattern will be one again of an attempt to rough things up, as at previous such meetings. They then might try to force an ultimatum, but not enough of them to do it, and not the ACC. At this point Akinola will have to decide after all his huffing and puffing whether to put this fourth trumpet in the way of his huff and puff.

NP
NP
14 years ago

Hello Pat and Dave No, I do not disagree – the Primates asked for a response by 30th Sept. There was no ultimatum. The response TEC(USA) eventually gives will be evaluated as to its unambiguous acceptance or rejection of what the Primates asked for and then there will be a response to TEC from the Primates et al. I still wonder why TEC(USA) is not simply able to say, “We stand by VGR and our decisions in 2003 – we will not change our position as we believe we are right, even if this means we cannot be members of… Read more »

Pat O'Neill
Pat O'Neill
14 years ago

“The response TEC(USA) eventually gives will be evaluated as to its unambiguous acceptance or rejection of what the Primates asked for and then there will be a response to TEC from the Primates et al. I still wonder why TEC(USA) is not simply able to say, “We stand by VGR and our decisions in 2003 – we will not change our position as we believe we are right, even if this means we cannot be members of the AC.”” I think there are two reasons: The first is a question of internal polity–the HOB does not speak for TEC, General… Read more »

NP
NP
14 years ago

OK, Pat…but why not simply say, “We stand by VGR, we believe what we decided and did in 2003 was right, so, we cannot in all good conscience change our position.”

Seems simple to me….it is not too much to ask bishops simply speak the truth about what they believe – is it????

Pat O'Neill
Pat O'Neill
14 years ago

NP:

I think that is precisely what they have done.

NP
NP
14 years ago

Pat – I think you responded before we actually had the TEC HOB response….. you still think they have said “”We stand by VGR, we believe what we decided and did in 2003 was right, so, we cannot in all good conscience change our position.” I know they have not said that they have changed their minds….but the ABC has got them into a little fudge and they have not openly and honestly stood up for the VGR decision and defended it….have they?? If they really believe they are right, they should not be giving in to the ABC’s request… Read more »

10
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x