Thinking Anglicans

Standing Committee meeting in London

Updated again Thursday evening

ACNS announces that the Joint Standing Committee (JSC) of the Primates and Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) Meeting is being held in London this week.

The report lists those who are attending and includes a picture of them.

Ruth Gledhill reports for The Times that Conservative Anglicans face “punishment” for helping US rebels.

And there is more on her blog under the heading Southern Cone heading south.

Looks like action is about to be taken against Greg Venables and the Southern Cone for sheltering no fewer than four TEC conservative bishops and their flocks, the latest being Jack Iker and Forth Worth. See our news report summing up the latest. I understand that the Joint Standing Committee meeting in London this week, from which significantly Egypt’s Mouneer Anis and Uganda’s Henry Orombi are absent, is to discuss suspending Southern Cone’s voting rights from the upcoming Anglican Consultative Council meeting in Jamaica next May. As long-standing readers will recall, this is what happened to TEC, then Ecusa, at the last ACC meeting in Nottingham in 2005. This is not so much a ‘booting out’ but should be regarded as a punishment, I am told. Meanwhile, it seems highly probable that TEC and Canada are to be rewarded for their restraint by being given a full seat back at the table again in May.

Episcopal Café notes these reports with a question: Southern Cone “suspension”: Sabre rattling? Trial balloon?

Wednesday evening update

Matt Davies of Episcopal News Service reports on the meeting, in Joint Standing Committee plans for 2009 ACC meeting.

The Joint Standing Committee of the Primates and Anglican Consultative Council (ACC) has devoted much of its November 24-26 meeting to discussing budgetary issues and planning the next meeting of the ACC — the communion’s main policy-making body — set for May 1-12, 2009 in Kingston, Jamaica.

Presiding Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori was among those attending the JSC meeting, which was held behind closed doors at the Anglican Communion Office and Lambeth Palace in London. She noted that a November 26 report in The Times of London newspaper, that suggested the JSC had discussed plans to discipline the Anglican Province of the Southern Cone for its recent incursions into other provinces, was untrue. “The subject has not come up,” she told Episcopal News Service…

Thursday evening update

The Living Church has an article by George Conger titled Analysis: Recognition of Third Province Likely to Take Years, and there is a longer version of this piece over here.

67
Leave a Reply

avatar
3000
67 Comment threads
0 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
36 Comment authors
rick allenFord Elmsrick allenFather Ron SmithGeoff McLarney Recent comment authors
  Subscribe  
newest oldest
Notify of
JCF
Guest
JCF

“this is what happened to TEC, then Ecusa, at the last ACC meeting in Nottingham in 2005”

What IS Ruth’s problem here? Just because SHE has changed her abbreviation in that time, doesn’t mean the Episcopal Church has changed. Then, as now, the Episcopal Church includes member provinces apart from the US of A (ergo, “ECUSA” is not an appropriate abbreviation).

On-topic: that the Southern Cone DESERVES this slap-on-the-wrist (or worse) is inarguable. But that they’ll actually receive? Especially w/ the Primates lurking about? I’ll believe it when I see it! ;-/

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

“A conservative province in the Anglican Church faces ‘punishment’ this week for offering a safe haven to conservatives” – Ruth Gledhill, article in ‘The Times’ – Whoever gave Ruth this news may be under the same impression that she has always had; about the actions of Gregory Venables in nurturing the puritanical element of the Communion under his wing. Her enthusiastic brand of journalism – considering her own obvious bias towards the likes of Venables – has here enabled her to take a dim view of what she believes might be one of the results of the meeting, this week,… Read more »

Robert Ian williams
Guest
Robert Ian williams

If you are going to “punish” Southern Cone, what about Nigeria, Rwanda and Uganda?

Fred Schwartz
Guest
Fred Schwartz

Which ECUSA: The one ain New York or the one Bishop Wantland and Crew devised?

Spirit of Vatican II
Guest

If the breakaway churches ask to be received back into the Anglican Communion in their new formation, how can they be rejected? And would their acceptance as a new entity within the Communion no amount to a healing of the split, and an agreement to live together amicably? In short, a happy ending. The culture wars will continue to chug along within Anglicanism as they do, more mutedly, within Roman Catholicism. So will the progress of mature hermeneutics of bible and tradition, putting the bitter clashes of recent years into perspective. If the new entity asks to remain in the… Read more »

Ruth Gledhill
Guest

‘What IS Ruth’s problem here? Just because SHE has changed her abbreviation in that time, doesn’t mean the Episcopal Church has changed. Then, as now, the Episcopal Church includes member provinces apart from the US of A (ergo, “ECUSA” is not an appropriate abbreviation).’

RG responds: Ecusa changed the way it wished to be referred to at the last GenCon. In referring to it as TEC I am simply respecting the wishes of GenCon as I understand them.

ettu
Guest
ettu

re Spirit of Vatican II’s comment. my observations of the dissenters is that they will not tolerate being in the same room with those they have branded as heretics- I believe it is quite clear by now that their goal in staying within traditional Anglicanism is to “purify” it by expelling those who disagree with them. They are the antithesis of the welcome and generosity of spirit that I treasure in Anglicanism.

Geoff McLarney
Guest
Geoff McLarney

And “TEC” is inappropriate because there are Episcopal Churches in Scotland, the Philippines, etc, etc. So there’s a choice between two equally inappropriate initialisms. She has to call it something!

Jim Naughton
Guest

Ruth and Geoff are both right about the name of the Episcopal Church. When it was ECUSA, we were shortchanging the fourteen other countries within the Church. Now that we are TEC, we are open to Geoff’s objection. Anybody got any bright ideas?

bobinswpa
Guest
bobinswpa

I don’t have a problem with TEC or ECUSA. I think we’re now calling our diocese “The Episcopal Diocese of Pittsburgh of the Episcopal Church, USA,” or something to that due effect.
Symantic Gymnastics!

I did think that TEC and the ACofC ‘s withdraw from the last ACC session was voluntary? It might have been suggested, and rather strongly but it was asked of us, not handed down. Maybe my memory is a bit soggy.

Simon Sarmiento
Guest

At the Nottingham meeting of the ACC there was an actual vote taken about the issue of US and Canadian participation in the proceedings and the vote was very narrowly in favour of exclusion. Had the North Americans all been voting, which they were not, the vote would presumably have gone the other way. As to the naming issue, it seems to me that the unilateral adoption of TEC by the US-headquarted body without any qualification was an insensitive move. My Scottish friends certainly think so. Note that although I now do refer to TEC at times in TA articles,… Read more »

BillyD
Guest

For the umpteenth time, the name of the church has not been changed. An alternative name (The Episcopal Church) was adopted as the equivalent of its official name (Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of America). Check out the Church’s Constitution, folks.

Michael Merriman
Guest
Michael Merriman

The official constitutional name is still “The Protestant Episcopal Church in the United States of American, also known as The Episcopal Church.” The alternate designation was in sensitivity to our missions in dominantly RC countries where “protestant” was an issue, and our missions in any places that are not part of the USA. It marks no change in the doctrine, discipline, or worship of this constituent member of the Anglican Communion.

Marshall Scott
Guest

So, Simon, we voluntarily held back, which then allowed for us to be voted out. So, whether directly or indirectly (since both happened) our voluntary restraint was the reason for our nonparticipation. Thus, one wonders what would come of such encouragement to the delegate from Southern Cone to withdraw, especially with regard to voting on a new parallel province within North America. It’s only one vote, and yet…. Brother Williams, I share your concern about the African provinces and the institutions they support. At the same time, none of those has yet tried to absorb an existing diocesan structure. They’ve… Read more »

Davis d'Ambly
Guest
Davis d'Ambly

Thanks BillyD for clarifying that!

Tobias Haller
Guest

Thank you, BillyD. And that change in the Constitution goes back to 1964/67, not the most recent General Convention. It was not meant as an act of insensitivity towards Scotland, etc., nor even primarily in the interests of recognizing the non-USA dioceses, but rather to allow for an official name that didn’t contain the word “Protestant” — which is what led to the unofficial though common ECUSA, in which people took advantage of the change with attention to rationale but not detail. (The change was made in the BCP in 1976/79). Dean Werner, then President of the House of Deputies,… Read more »

bobinswpa
Guest
bobinswpa

Thank you Simon. I remembered something about us not voting and we were excluded. Here is the particular wording: “consequently endorses the Primates’ request that “in order to recognise the integrity of all parties, the Episcopal Church (USA) and the Anglican Church of Canada voluntarily withdraw their members from the Anglican Consultative Council for the period leading up to the next Lambeth Conference.”

JCF
Guest
JCF

“If the breakaway churches ask to be received back into the Anglican Communion in their new formation, how can they be rejected? And would their acceptance as a new entity within the Communion no amount to a healing of the split, and an agreement to live together amicably? In short, a happy ending.” Whatever “Holiday Cheer” you’ve been imbibing, SpiritV2, I think I’d like some, please. ;-/ But is not the phrase “Breakaway Church” something of an oxymoron? (at least when the word “Church” is intended to mean “Body of Christ”, in Communion) The Southern Cone “dioceses” of San Joaquin,… Read more »

Lapinbizarre
Guest
Lapinbizarre

TEC? PECUSA? Fiddling while Rome burns, anybody?

drdanfee
Guest
drdanfee

Name, smame. Confusions about particular references are fairly readily clear up in specific conversations. Meanwhile, RGs brand of partisan conservative journalism – rather too close to Fox News USA, methinks, for comfort, or mayB GConger? – deserves critical comment. Anybody else tired of conservative believers like RG or GC trying deliberately to stir up clangy senses of alarm, pitting us against one another? If this were ordinary family life, we would all have learned by now to take auntie Ruth’s dudgeon with more than a grain of restraint – as her agenda has been clearly acted out over time, and… Read more »

Dan
Guest
Dan

For Jim Naughton:

How about The General Convention Church?

Prior Aelred
Guest

FWIW, IIRC, BillyD is correct — legally it is PECUSA (aka TEC) without ever officially being ECUSA along the way (so many people objecting to the use of the word “Protestant” with its current associations — OCICBW)

Simon, I believe the point is that the agreement of the Canadians & Americans (isn’t Canada in North America as well? & then there is South America — it seems that Humpty Dumpty was right about names) to refrain from that initial vote was voluntary.

JPM
Guest
JPM

Billy, people who still cannot grasp that we do not “appoint” our bishops can’t really be expected to read our constitution.

Viriato da Silva
Guest
Viriato da Silva

>> Ruth and Geoff are both right about the name of the Episcopal Church. When it was ECUSA, we were shortchanging the fourteen other countries within the Church. Now that we are TEC, we are open to Geoff’s objection. Anybody got any bright ideas? << Yes — To respect the sensiticities, change the definite article into the indefinite article: “An Episcopal Church.” 😉 Seriously, I’d suggest “the United Episcopal Church” to reflect the overseas dioceses, but there’s already an Anglican Continuum denomination called the United Episcopal Church of North America. So how about “the [I hate the capitalized “The”; looks… Read more »

Chip
Guest
Chip

Prior Aelred: FWIW, IIRC, BillyD is correct — legally it is PECUSA (aka TEC) without ever officially being ECUSA along the way (so many people objecting to the use of the word “Protestant” with its current associations — OCICBW) Lay the blame, not at the feet of General Convention, but where it belongs: the Library of Congress. C. 1979 the Library of Congress changed its subject heading for the Episcopal Church from PECUSA to ECUSA (when I arrived at Virginia Seminary in the fall of ’81 the librarians were busily changing all the subject heading file cards from the former… Read more »

Prior Aelred
Guest

How about the official incorporated name, “The Foreign and Domestic Missionary Society” — that ought to offend practically everybody.

But surely the rub has been that everything has been set up to include new churches & nothing about excluding people has been part of the planning — the fact is that people who don’t want to part of the group have simply left …

Pluralist
Guest

I read the article and blog splash of Ruth Gledhill and thought: ‘Ooh, something to blog on’, but realising there was nothing there and it would only feed the hungry monster machine I decided to follow up instead a comment that was attached to my Episcopal Cafe piece that said how I’d missed how transformative Alpha has been and relating directly to GAFCON.

Robert Ian Williams
Guest
Robert Ian Williams

Why are Protestants ashamed of the word Protestant?

The Protestant Episcopal Church should not just be the legal name , but the official name. It was so for the first 180 years.

poppy tupper
Guest
poppy tupper

Is there any truth in a story I heard many years ago? When American PECUSA missionaries went to Japan they tried to translate ‘protestant episcopal’ into Japanese to form the Protestant Episcopal Church of Japan. Protestant was tricky, because of the argumentative element, ‘episcopal’ was traced back to ‘elder’. The nearest Japanese they came up with was ‘Church of old men who fall out with each other of Japan’. This seemed to be a non-starter, so the Japanese outpost of PECUSA became ‘The Holy Catholic Church of Japan’. I’d love this to be true, not least because of what is… Read more »

BillyD
Guest

“Why are Protestants ashamed of the word Protestant?”

I don’t know. Go ask a Protestant. Most Anglicans I know don’t consider themselves Protestants in the same way that Baptists and Methodists are. I know you’ll insist that we are, but then again you don’t get to choose.

You might as well ask “Why are Roman Catholics ashamed of the word Roman?” There is an active subset of RC’s who object strenuously to being called anything but just plain Catholic (and no, I’m not talking about Eastern Catholics).

Ford Elms
Guest
Ford Elms

“Why are Roman Catholics ashamed of the word Roman?”

LOL. I was going to say the same thing! Thing is, I get the feeling that for RIW, as for many RCs, Protestant simply means “doesn’t accept the authority of the Pope.” In that case, I am a Protestant, I guess, but so is the Patriarch of Constantinople.

Jim Naughton
Guest

Dan, I would have no problem with that. The representation of all orders in our governance is the glory of the Episcopal Church.

Martin Reynolds
Guest
Martin Reynolds

That was an interesting story, even if he best thing to come out of it was Poppy Tupper’s lovely piece on Japan!! I guess we are not going to be told who gave Ruth this “lead” – to know this would give some useful insight into the tale – and we have to guess that the old maxim of two separate sources giving the story just the chance that its true was not in operation here. Still, it gave Ruth the opportunity to say some interesting things and I’ll just pick up two things she said: “If the Primates agree… Read more »

Martin Reynolds
Guest
Martin Reynolds

Secondly she says: “In a further indication that the liberals are winning the Anglican wars,” Ruth and I must have been watching a different Church developing over the last few years. I am very much under the impression that the “liberals” have lost all the way down the line on the presenting issue – we may have a gay bishop – but in truth he has been isolated, cut off – even by his own Church. While on the broader issues gay people are now deeper in the closets than ever in the West and their lot is likely worse… Read more »

Martin Reynolds
Guest
Martin Reynolds

Finally Jim Naughton says this at Episcopal café
“This isn’t quite right. The Episcopal Church voluntarily refrained from voting at the Nottingham meeting at the request of the Primates. Had the Episcopal Church not voluntarily refrained, there is nothing anyone could have done to prohibit it from exercising its franchise.”

I’m not quite sure this is the full story.

My understanding was that Rowan Williams made it clear that he would not call the ACC if America attended as a voting delegation – makes the “voluntary” nature of what he says a little moot?

Ford Elms
Guest
Ford Elms

‘Church of old men who fall out with each other of Japan’.

Ya know, when you think about the last 2000 years of Church history, everything that comes after the word “Church” in that phrase is pretty much redundant.

Robert Ian Williams
Guest
Robert Ian Williams

You chose the name Protestant Episcopal in 1787. Roman joined to Catholic was an invention of Protestants to belittle the Catholic Church. It was a term of abuse that stuck, like Mormon and Quaker.

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

So, Ruth has been, yet again, rather too enthusiastic in her doom-talk about what might happen at the Joint Standing Committee meeting of the ACC this week. It would appear that her fear of some sort of statement against the activities of Bp Venables and his crew – in inaugurating a new ‘province’ of the Anglican Communion in North America – has not eventuated. Whether this is good for the Communion as a whole, or good for the USA and Canada, may prove to be a moot point. But the fact remains, Ruth, again, has been proved to be a… Read more »

BillyD
Guest

“Roman joined to Catholic was an invention of Protestants to belittle the Catholic Church. It was a term of abuse that stuck, like Mormon and Quaker.”

Interesting theory. It doesn’t explain, however, why “Roman” should be a popular part of the Church’s name in languages whose cultures have never had much Protestant influence at all, such as Spanish or Portuguese. Or why the phrase exists in Latin.

Prior Aelred
Guest

“Roman” was officially added to the name of the RC Church at Vatican I.

If “Protestant” means not recognizing the papal claims, then indeed all of the Orthodox (including the non-Chalcedonians & the Great Church of the East [whom we are no longer allowed to call Nestorians]) are “Protestant”. The C of E was developing some interesting dialogue with the so-called Jansenists (see the Council of Fierenze) until the French Revolution upset the apple cart.

Martin — was Rowan really threatening not to call the ACC unless the Nordamericanos promised to abstain? Shame on him!

JCF
Guest
JCF

“You chose the name Protestant Episcopal in 1787.”

My looks may be failing me RIW, but nevertheless, I wasn’t even born until 1962. ;-/

Malcolm+
Guest

I’d heard a similar story, Poppy, except that in my version the translation worked out to “Assembly of Combative Overlords,” which also fits.

RIW, I call BS. Roman Catholic simply refers to a Catholic who adheres to Rome.

Fr Mark
Guest
Fr Mark

Robert I W: you’ll be telling us that the word “Wales” is an offensive word for Cwmryu devised by the English next…

mynsterpreost (=David Rowett)
Guest

“the word “Wales” is an offensive word for Cwmryu devised by the English next…”

If my A/S serves me correctly, isn’t it from ‘wealh’, ‘foreigner’? There are plenty of ‘welsh-‘ place names (usually small and local features) which are a long way east of Offa’s Dyke, and presumably refer to their being used by strangers or non-locals?

Completely irrelevant I know, but…

4 May 1535+
Guest
4 May 1535+

Two comments– As a footnote to the Prior, I think the corporate name is actually “The Domestic and Foreign Missionary Society” (that is, the adjectives come in the other order)–and in fact the 815 used http://www.dfms.org early on (and it still works, I believe). Mynsterpreost, “welsh” is certainly from “wealh,” which does mean foreigner, as in, for example, “walnut,” that is to say “the nut from south of the Alps,” as opposed to the native hazelnut. But once the A-S types were actually in Britain, I believe it became specific to the increasingly-displaced native Britons. (I think Tolkien has an… Read more »

Prior Aelred
Guest

4 May 1535+ is, of course correct — apologies for writing from memory (which is why most of my quotations are not quite right).

So the PB of whatever we are going to call the Episcopalians in the United States & the other churches still part of that parent organization which have not yet achieved independent status says that the possibility of saying or doing anything about the Southern Cone has not been part of the agenda of the meeting, what is going on?

Robert Ian Williams
Guest
Robert Ian Williams

The Catholic Church has always referred to its self as the catholic and Roman church, bur Roman Catholic is an invention of the English Protestants.

CYMRU is the name that Welsh prople prefer, as Welsh is a derivative of the Anglo-Saxon for foreigner. The Anglo-Saxons occupied eastern Britain, displaced the native people called them foreigners and the remnant fled westward to the hills and Brittany.

British derived languages survived in Cumbria and Cornwall. The original inhabitants of Scotland were British and displaced by the Saxons and the Scots from Ireland.

Malcolm+
Guest

I don’t know whether George Conger is guilty of wilful dishonesty or wishful thinking, but either way he’s passing off his own authoritarian vision of a curial Anglicanism as though it bore a resemblance to reality.

He claims, in his article, that the membership list of the ACC is “controlled” by the Primates.

Fact is that the ACC makes the change which requires the validation of 2/3 of the Primates. Thus, it is utterly false to claim that either body “controls” the list.

Anyone know George?

Anyone care to offer an opinion on whether he’s delusional or dishonest?

Father Ron Smith
Guest
Father Ron Smith

“The Catholic Church has always referred to its self as the catholic and Roman church, bur Roman Catholic is an invention of the English Protestants” – Robert I. Williams (R.C.) – Robert, don’t you think that this was rather clever of us: that we should put two and two together and call it the Roman Catholic Church? Which ever way one looks at it, that’s what we, and everyone else – even the Pope – calls it. It is the Church which is ruled from Rome – as opposed to the Churches that are ‘ruled from’ other places. e.g. Antioch,… Read more »