Thinking Anglicans

General Synod – detailed Church Times reports

The Church Times publishes detailed reports on Synod debates. They are normally only available to subscribers for the first week. So far the ones below are generally available; there will be more next Friday.

WOMEN BISHOPS: Go extra mile, bishop pleads as Synod wrestles with women bishops

DR WILLIAMS’ ADDRESS: ‘Those who disagree won’t go away’

CONSTITUTION: New way of being Church House

BNP MEMBERSHIP: BNP support ‘incompatible’ with ordained ministry

CHURCH AS COMMUNION: Cardinal: ‘Division impoverishes us all’



  • Dennis says:

    Rowan preaches no exclusion of sections of the church! Now that is rich.

    What about Bishop Gene Robinson? He was excluded from Lambeth. And by his exclusion were many American Episcopalians excluded, too.

    Lambeth wasn’t some gathering of everyone who met together in spite of their differences. It was based on exclusion and because of that Lambeth was meaningless.

    I suppose that it is too bad for Rowan that gays and lesbians and the American and Canadian churches “won’t go away.”

  • Father Ron Smith says:

    I think that Dennis’s comment about the exclusion of Bishop Gene from the last Lambeth Conference is quite valid. His presence at the Conference would probably (by hindsight), though, have made no difference to the fact that his detractors were intent on snubbing the Conference. However, I/we am/are making this remark after the event. It must have been very difficult for the ABC to have agreed to his inclusion – without including also the faux bishops ordained by certain of the African bishops for the purpose of infiltrating the American and Canadian Anglican Churches. It was a dilemma at that time. The next Conference will surely be called on a different basis.

    Dennis is right when he echoes the thought that the GLBT community will not just ‘go away’. Nor should they. They are a part of the Household of God.

  • Mary Clara says:

    Gosh, is there video available of the Synod wrestling with the women bishops?

  • Jeremy says:

    As far as I can tell, all the Bishops consecrated within the Anglican Communion members in Rwanda, Nigeria, Uganda and Southern Cone have been correctly and orthodoxically consecrated. They should all have been invited to Lambeth. Bishops ministering to over half the communicant members of Churches within the Anglican Communion were excluded from the conference!

  • Rev L Roberts says:

    Dennis’ point is telling.

  • Father Ron Smith says:

    “Bishops ministering to over half the communicant members of Churches within the Anglican Communion were excluded from the conference!” – Jeremy –

    Jeremy, are you saying that the bishops ordained by the provinces of Rwanda, Nigeria, Uganda and Southern Cone – especially for infiltration into the provinces of USA and Canada – were, quote, -“Ministering to over half the communicant members of Church within the Anglican Communion” ?

    I’m sure that the USA and Canadian Anglican Churches would be amazed that they constituted,
    quote: “half the communicant members of the Anglican Communion”! No other bishops (than the ones here quoted) were actually ‘excluded from the Lambeth Conference’ – excepting, of course, Bishop Gene – they absented themselves!!!

  • Ford Elms says:

    “because of that Lambeth was meaningless.”

    Well, I recently had a conversation with a bishop who was at Lambeth who tells me otherwise. There were Africans there in defiance of their bosses, who said, only half jokingly, “Do you need any clergy? I might not have a job when I get home.” It allowed the divisions in the conservative monolith to be seen. It made people realize the difficulties others were working under, it gave lots of opportunity for the people being lied about, well most of them anyway, to be seen, not as evil pagans trying to destroy the Church, but real Christians trying to act on their faith. It also showed how extreme and spiteful the conservatives are, and gave a quite shocking image of how dictatorial some bishops are, especially in Africa. The person I was talking to expressed great surprise at how much power African bishops wield, and how accepted that is. Our bishops would never get away with it, indeed, it has been a very long time, very long, since Western Anglican bishops had that kind of power. So, no, not useless at all just because +Gene wasn’t there. From my limited knowledge, it sounds like it was quite an eye opener and quite beneficial.

    “all the Bishops consecrated…have been correctly and orthodoxically consecrated.”

    Jeremy, first of all , there is nothing “orthodox” about their consecrations, if there were, they would be in communion with the See of Constantinople, which they are not. Hatred of those who disagree with your position and fear of change do not define Orthodoxy, Christology does. Conservative Anglicans are NOT “orthodox”, and declared themselves so when the signed the Jerusalem Declaration. Besides, their consecrations were extraordinary, and DIDN’T follow the Catholic Tradition as passed down in the Anglican Church. +Gene WAS consecrated according to that Tradition, whether you agree with his suitability or not. Yet he wasn’t invited because his presence was felt to be too divisive. Same with those you mention. And where do you get your numbers?

  • Ford Elms says:

    “they absented themselves”

    Oh no, you have it all wrong. You see, the ABpofC did not keep out all the evil pagans from the West who really don’t believe anything at all and have allied with the uppity women and the fags to destroy all that is good and holy in the world. I mean, how could anyone expect these holy men of God to actually sit in the same room and listen to such people, much less share communion with them? No, they were forcibly excluded from Lambeth the minute +Rowan decided to allow the attendance of the apostate and the heterodox. I mean, he actually allowed people to attend who are so arrogant they actually define ‘orthodoxy’ based on how we understand the nature of Christ, and not, as we all know is proper, in terms of how much fear you have of change and the degree you allow that fear to fuel your hatred of anyone who disagrees with you. I mean, how could you expect any of these holy GAFCONites to have anything at all to say to people so misguided?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *