The Satirical Christian has written Ecclesiastical Dominos.
How do you get people to vote for something they don’t want?
In the Church of England, it’s easy. You employ the domino effect.
Take the Anglican Covenant, for instance. It is clear that many people in the Church of England are deeply suspicious of it. In the debate in General Synod last November many voices raised deep misgivings about it, even among the House of Bishops. In fact, enough people were sufficiently concerned to mean that if the vote was taken purely on what people thought, it would probably have been chucked out there and then…
Bosco Peters has written Anglican Covenant.
…I have tended towards the approach that if you have a problem because you lost something in the garden, to get a solution that’s where you should be looking – even if the light in the house is better! I do not think that the “Covenant” is the appropriate tool as a solution for the “problem”, just as I do not think that a sledgehammer is the appropriate tool as a solution for screwing two planks together.
The “problem” is the ethics of committed same sex relationships. Discussing that is IMO what should be happening. Of course, for some, there is nothing to discuss…
And he continues with
How to get a province to sign up to the “Covenant”
Lessons from/for the Church of England1) Make sure that the lowest voting percentage possible be required (2/3 or 3/4 in all houses would be just hopeless to get the “Covenant” through. And involving parliament in the state church’s significant signing away of its autonomy would just be a step too far.) How embarrassing if others signed up to the “Covenant” and the Church of England didn’t!
It would seem, from both items here, that there has been a little legerdemain practised within the courts of the Church of England. What next?
There is an important piece by Paul Avis, ‘Catholicity Outweighs Autonomy’ at The Living Church:
http://www.livingchurch.org/news/news-updates/2011/4/1/catholicity-outweighs-autonomy
“Catholicity Outweighs Autonomy”
Neither outweigh doing justice to others.
Avis’ argument, setting forth a lovely picture of communion, militates *against* the covenant, rather than for, for the covenant takes away the choices and responsibilities of communion, therefore does away with communion. In the end, if you feel the communion is unequivocally “worth it,” you must deplore the covenant.
Autonomy is absolutely necessary in order to have actual “catholicity” – which refers to “universal” in more than just a quantitative way.
“Catholicity Outweighs Autonomy.”
Tough argument to make in an ecclesiastical polity which exists precisely because of a rejection of Rome’s authority and an assertion of English autonomy.
Can’t quite imagine Cramner saying that.