The Governing Body of the Church in Wales has been meeting in Aberystwyth. This is the Welsh equivalent of a General Synod.
The agenda for the meeting can be found here.
The Archbishop of Wales, Barry Morgan, delivered a presidential address which can be read in full here and there is a press release giving highlights here:
In his Presidential Address to the Governing Body of the Church in Wales, presently meeting in Aberystwyth (University of Wales Aberystwyth Arts Centre, Penglais Campus, 6 th and 7 th April) , Most Rev Dr Barry Morgan , Archbishop of Wales has warned his fellow Anglicans about the dangers inherent in the present harsh tone of the debate being conducted within the Anglican Communion.
In his address, delivered today (Wednesday, 6th April), Archbishop Barry makes reference to many of the key events which make 2005 an important year in the life of the UK – the UK holding the Presidency of the both the G8 and the EU, the 20 th anniversary of Live Aid and 10 th Anniversary of Comic Relief, the publication of the Commission for Africa’s report later this month, World Environment day in June, and of course the UK General Election called yesterday for May 5 th .
However, the key point he makes is that while Anglican Christians, should have much to say on many of these key issues, it is difficult for us to be taken seriously when the present debate within the Anglican Communion has been couched in harsh, confrontational tones. In his address the Archbishop says:
If the church of God can’t conduct a debate in a civilised way when it claims to be a reconciled and reconciling community – what message does that give to the world? We cannot as a church call for compassion, peace and justice in our nation and in our world, if we as Christians do not exemplify those virtues in our own lives and in our dealings with one another.
… Referring to the forthcoming meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council, due to meet in Nottingham in June, Archbishop Barry says
What is needed at the ACC is not a theological rant or a throwing of verbal grenades at people who happen to disagree with our own particular positions, but a reasoned, balanced, discourse of some of the issues involved and the giving of space and time to every kind of viewpoint. It would be better not to have a hearing at all in June if it is going to degenerate into some kind of verbal slanging match… What we need is not confrontation but a willingness to engage in discussion.
Earlier, the Church in Wales issued its Response to the Windsor Report. You can read this press release or you can read the full response here.
From the press release, in answering one of the four questions posed to the provinces:
What in the description of the life of the Communion in Sections A (The purpose and benefits of communion) & B (Fundamental Principles) can you recognise as consistent, or not, with your understanding of the Anglican Communion?
the Welsh response says:
0 Commentsa) The Anglican Communion is one that witnesses to the Kingdom of God … The Windsor report is a document which is in our opinion is a milestone in Anglican ecclesiology. It seeks to develop an understanding of the Church as an embodiment of God’s purpose. It is not simply a human construction. Instead it is how God seeks to heal and restore the world for his kingdom.
b) the dynamic nature of the Anglican Communion – Windsor report paragraph 9 expresses the care of Anglicans for each other, and we would want to add for the world … There have been many challenges to injustice, in ways which combine an ecclesiological reality of our common life with a challenge to oppressive political or social practices. It is not at all as though we are confronted with a static institution which has suddenly been destabilised by the actions of a few of its member churches. One of the ways in which that dynamism is expressed is the existence of inter cultural dialogue. One member of our working party who has worked in Uganda said – ‘It is important to recognise that these cultural factors of themselves neither validate nor invalidate traditions of Scriptural interpretation. None of us can or should offer a reading of Scripture free from cultural values. What is important is that the willingness to acknowledge these values.’
c) the authority of scripture in the Anglican Communion – we are glad to recognise in the report and affirmation of the importance of authority of scripture for Anglicans. However we felt that WR 61 in its description of shortcomings in Scriptural interpretation becomes a caricature of itself. We do not believe that those who have pressed for change have sought “to sweep away sections of the New Testament as irrelevant”. There is also the important issue of inculturation (discussed briefly at WR 85) when considering the interpretation of Scripture. Traditionally the Western church has set the theological agenda. That this is being challenged is a welcome sign of Anglican vitality. It is clearly important within the Anglican Communion that both African and Asian readings are heard respectfully and accorded the dignity of being received as valid contributions to theological discussion.
d) The Anglican Communion is one bound together by bonds of affection – we felt especially that that autonomy-in-communion was a fruitful concept for future discussion. Nevertheless there are times when we feel that the report feel that the Report tends to equate diversity with opinions, rather than a diversity of people, forgetting how the Report addresses this issue when discussing inculturation.
Updated thrice – see below
First, two items concerning the story reported earlier here about the Ugandan diocese of South Rwenzori.
The Church Times covered it in Ugandan diocese rejects US funds. This includes a reference to the Washington Post column reported earlier here, and discussed at some length by Andrew Brown in this week’s Press column, not yet online, but here are two quotes:
NO ONE seems to have reported Dr Williams’s complaint in Holy Week that the press was ignoring important things the Anglican Communion was up to. A story in the Washington Post should entirely justify the press’s bias…
IT IS IMPOSSIBLE to over-estimate the damage that these stories do. One indicator is Stephen Bates’s largely hostile profile in The Guardian of Dr Williams, whose reputation on the paper seems never to have recovered from a lunch he attended there, where, every time he attempted to say something interesting, he allowed himself to be shushed by an aide. Versions of this story have come to me from several of the people present, on whom it made a lasting impression.
Meanwhile, the Living Church reports the response of Michael Creighton Bishop of Central Pennsylvania to all this in Bishop laments break with Ugandan companion diocese
In an interview with The Living Church, Bishop Creighton said “It felt like a Good Friday nail in the compassion of Christ.”…
Bishop Creighton said he was perplexed by the decision to break relations as the Windsor Report had encouraged “consultation” and not confrontation. “Our Gospel understanding,” he said, is “when people were labeled as ‘sinners and wrong doers,’ Jesus invited himself into relationship, not out of relationship.”
Bishop Creighton said he had written to Bishop Tembo noting “our dismay that our consent to the election of a bishop in New Hampshire appears to be more important than the compassionate ministry we have shown with his own people who are struggling with and dying of AIDS.”
Since the diocese began its companion relationship with South Rwenzori in 2001, Central Pennsylvania purchased a truck for the diocese and provided tuition for medical students, medicines, and other funds to assist the diocese and the Bishop Masereka Foundation—a Ugandan NGO—to combat the spread of HIV/AIDS, Bishop Creighton told The Living Church.
“The total of this support exceeds $65,000,” Bishop Creighton said, but he disputed that the Ugandan diocese had requested $352,941 as was stated in Bishop Tembo’s letter.
Update This further Statement from Bishop Jackson Nzerebende Tembo on the relationship of South Rwenzori Diocese, Uganda, to the Diocese of Central Pennsylvania, USA has just appeared on titusonenine.
Further Update And shortly after that, two letters to the editor of the Washington Post, one of them from David Anderson of the AAC, also appeared on the web.
Another Update
This article in the Lancaster Sunday News Local, African churches split over gay issue contains further detail.
The same Church Times page also contains (scroll down) two other Communion stories: Bill Bowder on Griswold rounds on ‘evil’ detractors and a brief report on Scottish statement. The first of these includes:
3 CommentsTACTICS used by conservatives to influence the Primates’ Meeting in Newry in February have been branded as “evil” by the Presiding Bishop of the Episcopal Church in the United States (ECUSA), the Most Revd Frank Griswold.
At the US House of Bishops meeting before Easter ( News, 18 March), Bishop Griswold is reported to have named a group of US clergy, including the Bishop of Pittsburgh, the Rt Revd Robert Duncan, accusing them of misrepresenting what was happening in ECUSA.
In an interview with Deborah Caldwell for Beliefnet website, the Presiding Bishop said that evil had been “pressing” on the meeting of the Primates in February.
“There were notices put on the tables in Ireland describing ‘acts of oppression’ within the Episcopal Church that were highly inaccurate. . . I said my sense is – and I don’t assign it to any particular people – I feel that there is evil pressing on this meeting.”
Bishop Griswold argued that overseas Primates had been recruited into ECUSA’ s internal struggles. “Various groups related to the Episcopal Church – well-funded, to be sure – have engaged the disapproval of the Primates around homosexuality in order to portray the Episcopal Church as grossly unfaithful and unbiblical, and in every way reprehensible…”
David McCarthy has been quoted as saying:
“We see ourselves as being in the long-standing tradition of Scottish Episcopalianism…”
Today’s Glasgow Herald has this letter to the editor hidden away (see next page link at the bottom, go to page 3):
The congregation of St Silas Church, Glasgow, are in dispute with their Scottish Episcopal Bishops. It would appear history repeats itself. St Silas was opened in November, 1864, by a group of dissenters: Mr George Burns, Mr William Frederick Burnley and Sir Archibald Campbell – ”all being men of peace, though prepared, at considerable self-sacrifice, to contend for the maintenance of the Protestant and Evangelical principles of the Church of England, felt it better to set aside their interest in St Jude’s and built St Silas Church”.
At that time the bishops of the Scottish Episcopal Church were intent on changing the protestant nature of the
3639 articles of religion of the Church of England, to embrace Tractarianism and the Oxford Anglo-Catholic movement.St Silas was readmitted to the fold under the concordat of 1906. In 1987, St Silas became a private chapel within the Scottish Episcopal Church.
John McPhail, 23 Lochlibo Crescent, Barrhead.
You can read about the history of the English Episcopal Church in Scotland in Gavin White’s book The Scottish Episcopal Church, A New History.
By the way, as the link is currently broken on the official SEC site, here is the correct URL for the 24 Feb news item on that site: The Primus of the Scottish Episcopal Church, the Most Rev Bruce Cameron, shares his initial reflection on the meeting of the Primates of the Anglican Communion.
5 CommentsDavid McCarthy of St Silas Church in Glasgow is indefatigible in his efforts to make a big issue of all this.
He has created a website at www.scottishanglican.org.uk to promote the conservative cause. This contains the text of a press release, and also the text of an email sent to the bishops. Both are in PDF format on that site, but can be found in accessible format below the fold here.
The following further press coverage has resulted:
Scotsman Backing for gay priests could split Scottish Episcopals
Glasgow Evening Times Church split threat over gay priests
Glasgow Herald Retract gay minister stance, church urged
BBC Scotland Church divides over gay priests
Guardian Gay issue divides Scottish Anglicans
Meanwhile, over at www.changingattitudescotland.org.uk a press release says:
Members of Changing Attitude Scotland are surprised that the small, new grouping calling itself the “Scottish Anglican Network” have spent so much time on Easter Day debating homosexuality. Most of the Scottish Episcopal Church spent the day rejoicing in the news of Christ’s Resurrection.
The statement of the Scottish Episcopal Church’s bishops of 4 March 2005 does not represent a new innovation – it simply states what has always been the case.
Referring to the Bishops’ Statement, the Convener of Changing Attitude Scotland, the Rev Kelvin Holdsworth said,
“There has been a huge expression of support for the Scottish Bishops from within Scotland and all around the world. It is a joy and a delight that the Bishops have spoken warmly of their gay clergy colleagues. In making their statement, the Bishops have witnessed to a generous orthodoxy which is the norm for the Scottish Episcopal Church. The good news of Easter is for everyone in the church – gay or straight.”
“The Bishops of the Scottish Episcopal Church have called for discussion amongst those with different views. Those who are calling for the Bishops to withdraw their statement appear to be frightened of that discussion taking place. Members of Changing Attitude Scotland are looking forward to engaging in the dialogue which the bishops propose. We particularly enjoy discussing the authority of scripture and the ways in which we understand the Bible to be consonant with the view that gay people in relationships can live open godly lives within the Christian faith.”
Anyone moved to write to any of the Scottish bishops about all this will find all their contact details here.
37 CommentsThe Guardian published this Rowan Williams profile by Stephen Bates on Good Friday.
…With the American and Canadian churches invited to withdraw from international meetings last month until they had repented of their liberal line in appointing an openly gay bishop and blessing same-sex partnerships (and they may yet decline to do this); with the Scottish Episcopal Church saying it is happy with its gay clergy; and with internecine fighting breaking out again in the Church of England, there is little fellowship, brotherhood or charity to go round.
When 35 of the 38 Anglican primates – archbishops and presiding bishops – met in Northern Ireland a month ago under Dr Williams’s chairmanship to deal with the fissures caused by the gay issue, the Archbishop of Canterbury struggled to win respect.
When he mildly remonstrated with some of his colleagues for leaving the meeting to confer with American conservative episcopalians lobbying outside, he was essentially told to mind his own business. When he pleaded with the primates to attend a communion service that he was conducting at the end of the meeting, 14 did not turn up.
One fellow primate heard others saying that the Archbishop of Canterbury would “do what we tell him to”…
Saturday’s Washington Post carried A Tainted Easter Message by Colbert King.
…Last week Bishop Tembo suspended all activities with the Episcopal Diocese of Central Pennsylvania. He withdrew his request for $352,941 to support his HIV-AIDS program, including money for orphans’ education, and he postponed the visit of the medical team. What, pray tell, could have led the bishop to refuse this help for people in need?
In every large organization, there’s always that 5 percent who never get the word. The Anglican Communion is no exception. In a March 8 “Dear Friends” letter, Bishop Tembo said he had just learned the week before that the Diocese of Central Pennsylvania had voted “yes” to the election of openly gay Gene Robinson as bishop of New Hampshire. The election, by the way, took place two years ago.
Asserting that the South Rwenzori Diocese “upholds the Holy Scriptures as the true word of God,” and implying that the Pennsylvanian diocese — by supporting a gay bishop — does not, Bishop Tembo proclaimed the two dioceses to be in “theological conflict,” thus leading him to reject all ties to his brothers and sisters in Christ living in and around Harrisburg.
Apparently it matters less to the good Bishop Tembo — who does not have AIDS — that it is the suffering men, women and children in his diocese who may pay with their lives for his action, not the Central Pennsylvania Diocese. What’s more, Bishop Tembo and his wife, Dorothy Nzerebende, are the proud parents of five children who don’t have to fend for themselves. So when he turns down money for the education of orphans, it’s no skin off the teeth of his kids.
Yes, Kasese has only 15 trained physicians to treat more than 500,000 residents. Which, however, is better? Thumbing one’s nose at Episcopalians in the United States or bringing more doctors into the midst of Kasese’s human suffering? Bishop Tembo made it known where he stands.
All this he did in the name of God.
Sadly, Bishop Tembo is being cheered by conservative Episcopalians in this country. Some of them believe that the Episcopal Church of the United States, by consecrating a gay bishop, is, as one of them put it on a conservative Web site, “sending people to hell by the boatload, by presenting a false gospel.” Thus, the Diocese of Central Pennsylvania’s money is tainted.
So here we are this Easter, the day that Bishop Michael Creighton of the Diocese of Central Pennsylvania described in this month’s message as representing “the victory of God’s love and life.” What a victory. What an Easter moment.
Sunday’s Telegraph had Traditional songs beat the ‘happy clappers’ hands down in search for Britain’s best hymns.
6 Comments
We carried our own correspondent’s account of a recent Toronto meeting. Now the Diocese of Toronto has published this account by Carolyn Purden. Here’s a portion:
The Primate painted a picture of deep division at the gathering in Northern Ireland. Among the 38 Primates attending the gathering, a group of about a dozen from the global South shunned the North Americans (Archbishop Hutchison and Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold of the Episcopal Church of the U.S.A.).
These Primates, who were primarily from Africa and Latin America (the Southern Cone), petitioned the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, not to hold a daily eucharist at the gathering. When the eucharist was held with a chaplain presiding, they would not attend. When the Archbishop of Canterbury invited all to attend the final eucharist at which he would preside, they refused to attend.
The same group was also involved in leaking information from the Primates’ sessions, which are held “in camera,” to the media. The final report of the meeting was released a day early because an earlier and erroneous version had appeared in the press.
Archbishop Hutchison spoke with anger and passion about these same bishops who, without notice, suddenly abandoned the Primates’ meeting for an afternoon and evening. “The Archbishop of Canterbury left the chair,” he said. “The Africans had decided to meet off site and had taken others with them.” The 16 bishops remaining had received no prior notice from Archbishop Williams or the General Secretary of the Anglican Communion that this was taking place. “It seemed our agenda was hijacked and put in the hands of others,” the Primate said.
Today Bill Bowder in the Church Times reports that English can’t throw stones – Hutchison:
THE CANADIAN PRIMATE, the Most Revd Andrew Hutchison, has suggested that the blessing of same-sex relationships is much more prevalent in England than in Canada.
Speaking on Tuesday afternoon, Archbishop Hutchison said: “There are many priests conducting same-sex blessings sub rosa with the full knowledge of the bishops, but without any sanctions. This is going on in the Church of England, unannounced, all the time.
“I know of one report from one bishop in England that this is now done in 14 dioceses. From a report by the English House of Bishops, it is quite clear that they know this.
“For the Church of England to do any posturing about Canada being out of order is frankly ridiculous.”
By contrast, he said, “In Canada, if a priest gives an informal blessing, and I know of two instances, that priest is disciplined by his bishop immediately. That does not happen in England, where you have a much bigger problem. A little transparency would be helpful.”
This story also reports the opinions of Nigel McCulloch on the ECUSA HoB:
16 CommentsThe Bishop of Manchester, the Rt Revd Nigel McCulloch, attended the US House of Bishops’ meeting in Texas ( News, 18 March). He said this week that he was “realistically optimistic” about the chances that the Anglican Communion would hold together.
He said that the US bishops had been “stunned” by the Primates’ reaction in February. He said he had received a standing ovation, after telling the bishops of the seriousness of the issue. “I said that this decision would have its knock-on effect on other churches, including the Church of England.”
Bishop McCulloch felt that the US bishops at their meeting had a very deep sense of communion with Anglicans across the world. “They also valued their sense of personal communion with the Archbishop of Canterbury.”
The bishops’ agreement not to consecrate any more bishops for 18 months was “a costly thing”, he said.

There’s a flurry of reports about the Scottish Episcopal Church. These relate to a statement by its College of Bishops that was published on 4 March. It was belatedly reported here on 16 March.
Yesterday, the first newspaper report was in the Herald and late last night the Scottish Press Association caught up.
Today we have all these:
BBC Scottish church backs gay priests and Can Anglican rift be resolved? (public comments invited) and Church risks censure over gay priests by Robert Pigott
The Times Scottish bishops back gay clergy and Timeline: gay clergy row and Ruth Gledhill on Analysis: Anglican disarray.
Telegraph Scottish church gives backing to gay priests
Press Association via the Independent Gays can be priests, say Scottish bishops (this is a fuller report than earlier versions by Jude Sheerin)
Reuters Scottish church backs gay priests
And here is the radio segment ( 7.5 minutes Real Audio required) from the BBC Today Programme in which
The Bishop of Aberdeen, Bruce Cameron, and the Rector of St Silas, Glasgow, Reverend David McCarthy, discuss homosexuals becoming priests.
Here also is an earlier radio report on the same programme by Robert Pigott (2 minutes)
Update
Here is a later Scottish Press Association report Scottish Stance on Gay Priests Divides Church
Archbishop Andrew Hutchison Primate of Canada spoke in Toronto about the primates meeting in Dromantine. Below the fold is a first-hand account of the event held on Wednesday evening in Toronto, as sent by a local correspondent.
This meeting has also caused Anglican Essentials to issue J.I. Packer Comments on Recent Developments as well as this earlier report.
Also, Reuters apparently didn’t attend the meeting but did file this report after speaking to Hutchison by phone: Homosexuality Could Split Church-Canadian Anglican.
6 CommentsUpdated Friday evening see below
The Church Times reports the story as US dons sackcloth and bans all new bishops
and also has a sidebar (though not yet on the public website) Canadians defiant on the committee report which was first reported here.
The BBC published US Church moves to avoid splits. This story starts:
The US Anglican Church says it will not appoint new bishops or bless same-sex relationships for at least one year.
But other reports from the USA indicate that when the House of Bishops said (emphasis added):
Nevertheless, we pledge not to authorize any public rites for the blessing of same sex unions, and we will not bless any such unions, at least until the General Convention of 2006
some of them were making a personal commitment not to bless such unions and were not speaking for all their clergy.
Episcopal News Service has a further report on the meeting, Episcopal bishops begin ‘new day’ of collegiality. Kendall Harmon says the information about the Diocese of South Carolina in this report is inaccurate.
Another news report was Episcopal leaders to hold up bishop ordinations—gay or not from the Chicago Tribune.
The Times website has No gay bishops? Then no bishops at all by Ruth Gledhill who concludes the article with:
My question is why they could not, for the sake of peace, simply go as far as the primates and Windsor requested, and no further. If, as Dr Williams has posited, unity is inseparable from truth, then for the sake of unity surely even the lesbian and gay lobby could have put their purple ambitions on hold for a couple of years while everyone tries to sort out the mess.
The public is invited to comment.
The Church of England Newspaper has this report:
US Church puts moratorium on consecrating all bishops
The NACDAP has published a statement from Bishop Duncan and the AAC has published A Statement from the President of the American Anglican Council on Communications Issued by the Episcopal Church House of Bishops. This claims that:
The Covenant Statement and the Word to the Church issued by the Episcopal Church’s House of Bishops is insulting to the Primates of the Anglican Communion. While it aims at specific requests of the 2004 Windsor Report and the 2005 Primates Communiqué, it fails to fulfill clear expectations outlined therein. The House claimed to affirm the Chicago-Lambeth Quadrilateral 1888, and yet they failed to repent of their decisions and subsequent actions contrary to Scripture as well as Anglican faith and order. Note there is no affirmation of the authority of Scripture or Lambeth 1.10, which were upheld by the primates. Are there not two mutually exclusive views presented in this covenant?
Reuters published Conservative U.S. Anglicans Attack Bishops’ Move.
Update
GetReligion has Everybody loves to see justice done — on somebody else
Fr Jake has A Closer Look at the Attempted Coup
Further Update
Ruth Gledhill has this report in The Times ‘These are apostolic leaders behaving like lawyers’
George Conger has this report in the Living Church Bishops’ Support of Covenant Statement Not Unanimous
Telegraph Jonathan Petre Liberals delay appointing new bishops
Washington Post Alan Cooperman Episcopalians Halt Ordaining of Bishops
New York Times Laurie Goodstein Episcopal Dispute Over Gay Policies Halts All U.S. Bishop Appointments
Religion News Service via Beliefnet Episcopal Church to Freeze Same-Sex Blessings, Elections of All Bishops
Houston Chronicle Episcopalians ban consecration of new bishops
and the latest writethrough of the Associated Press report by Rachel Zoll Episcopalians ban OK of new bishops
From Canada, so focused on Dromatine rather than Camp Allen:
Canadian Press Anglican Church ‘broken’ over same-sex debate
The Windsor Report/Primates’ Communiqué: A response from the College of Bishops has been published on the official SEC website.
Part of the response discusses homosexuality. The bishops say:
2 CommentsOn the matters of sexuality which occasioned the Report we are conscious that, like any province within the Anglican Communion, there is in our life significant diversity of view on both the matter of the consecration of Gene Robinson and the authorisation of liturgies for the blessing of same sex unions.
The Scottish Episcopal Church has never regarded the fact that someone was in a close relationship with a member of the same sex as in itself constituting a bar to the exercise of an ordained ministry. Indeed, the Windsor Report itself in suggesting that a moratorium be placed on such persons being consecrated bishops, itself acknowledges the existence of many such relationships within the Church.
The Scottish Episcopal Church has, even before the 1998 Lambeth Conference, sought to be welcoming and open to persons of homosexual orientation in our congregations, and to listen to their experiences. This has on occasion led clergy to respond to requests to give a blessing to persons who were struggling with elements in their relationship, and who asked for such a prayer. We were glad to note that the concern of the Windsor Report and the Primates’ Communiqué was not with such informal pastoral responses to individual situations, and was about the official authorisation of a liturgical text for the blessing of such unions.
We do agree that the whole area of debate in this matter is of such a fluidity, within which many different understandings exist, that it would certainly be premature to move formally to authorise such a liturgy.
The College of Bishops is conscious that the pressures within the debate on matters of sexuality vary from one province to another. Within our Province the debate tends to focus on matters to do with scriptural authority and human rights and justice. We sense that we are privileged in that we are a small province, and discussion across differences may be more easily achieved in our life than in other parts of the Communion. We hope that as a result of the publication of the report discussion across difference will take place, rather than a consolidation of opinion among the like minded. We welcome therefore the commitment of the Communiqué “to take positive steps to initiate the listening and study process” and each of us will seek to facilitate discussion across differences within his diocese as recommended in Lambeth 1:10.
Members of the College indicated to the Primus that while acknowledging the significant pressures the Primates were under to arrive at a statement that would preserve the Communion, they personally regret the decision in the Communiqué to request the voluntary withdrawal of ACC members of ECUSA and the Anglican Church of Canada for the period leading up to the next Lambeth Conference.
We are conscious that as a Church we are much indebted in our life both to a significant presence of persons of homosexual (lesbian and gay) orientation, and also to those whose theology and stance would be critical of attitudes to sexuality other than abstinence outside marriage. We rejoice in both, and it must be our prayer that discussion following the Windsor Report and the Primates’ Meeting will enable the energy of both to be harnessed to serve the Church and the proclamation of the gospel.
The motion shown below was passed unanimously by the Faith, Worship and Ministry Committee (a Standing Committee of the Anglican Church of Canada) at its recent meeting. It goes now as a recommendation to the governing body of the Canadian church – the Council of General Synod – that will meet in May to determine Canada’s response to the Primates’ communique.
Motion FWM 03.05.#6
Moved by Patricia Bays
Seconded by Richard Leggett
That, while acknowledging the sincere concern of Anglicans throughout the world for the unity of the Communion and recognizing the pain of Anglicans of all persuasions caused by recent events, this Faith, Worship and Ministry Committee reluctantly but firmly recommends to the Council of General Synod the following resolution:
1. That the Council of General Synod confirm the membership of the Anglican Church of Canada in the Anglican Consultative Council with the expectation that the duly elected members attend and participate in the June 2005 meeting of the Council in the UK.
2. That the Council of General Synod welcome the invitation to explain at the June 2005 meeting of the Anglican Consultative Council the current situation, the steps that were taken by Dioceses of the Anglican Church of Canada and the General Synod and the underlying theological and biblical rationale with respect to the decision to bless committed same sex unions.
3. That the Council of General Synod, in response to the second part of Paragraph 14 of the Primates’ Statement of February 24 2005, commend the Windsor Report to the Anglican Church of Canada for study.
Explanatory Notes
Part 1 of the Motion
Part 2 of the Motion
Part 3 of the Motion
Carried unanimously
10 CommentsTwo very helpful lists of responses to the Dromantine communiqué are these:
Episcopal News Service Primates Meeting 2005 – News & Resources
which includes, among much else, links to statements by a number of American bishops.
Stand Firm Various Responses to the Primates’ Dromantine Meeting Communique which includes links to very many people, bishops and otherwise, who have written responses.
A further ENS resource on another page contains An interview with Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane of Cape Town and Presiding Bishop Frank Griswold which is an audio recording of an interview conducted by Kevin Eckstrom of RNS.
0 CommentsStarting close to home, Christopher Rowland has written a column in today’s Guardian The best of enemies which starts:
The issue of the Anglican Church and homosexuality has brought home to me how central it has become to the identity of Christianity for Christians to vilify their enemies, especially those who profess the same faith but hold to different expressions of “the truth of the gospel”.
In many ways, church history is a tale of intolerance and lack of charity. The difficult thing is that such attitudes are not some aberration, but are deeply rooted in the primary sources of orthodox Christianity and, at times, in the Bible itself.
From Ireland, ‘Church needs to celebrate, not just tolerate, all human sexuality’ says Church of Ireland minister
In his new book, The Right True End of Love: Sexuality and the Contemporary Church, the Dean of Killaloe, Very Rev Stephen R. White looks at the issue of sexuality, especially homosexuality, and maintains that the time has now come for the church to change its attitude from one of toleration to one of celebration. He says ‘the Church’s efforts to address issues of sexuality are ‘eminently ignorable’, ‘unimaginative’ and ‘un-theologically based’.
The book is particularly timely given recent controversies over homosexual clergy in the Anglican Communion. The Anglican primates, who met recently at Newry, discussed and broadly welcomed the Windsor Report on the matter.
Dean White looks at the church’s inherently negative attitudes towards sexuality, exemplified in the wording of the marriage vows in the Church of Ireland, where marriage first and foremost exists ‘for the due ordering of families and households’ and secondly for the hallowing of the union betwixt man and woman, and for the avoidance of sin’. He looks at the contentious issue of homosexuality and how the most charitable response from within the church is toleration. This, he says, is not acceptable. Toleration of difference is not a celebration of difference, and such an attitude is inclined to become ‘a favour graciously conferred by the “normal” majority on a somehow “inadequate” minority’.
As the American House of Bishops is currently meeting, several American newspapers have columns about them:
Chicago Tribune Episcopal bishops seeking to avoid schism on gay issues
Houston Chronicle A house of cards
Dallas Fort Worth Star-Telegram For Episcopalians, this might be the big one
0 CommentsToday’s Church Times editorial Who wants to be an Anglican now? expresses the views of many who seriously doubt the sincerity of our supposedly Christian leaders:
…The communiqué, with its assurance that the Primates met “with Christian charity and abundant goodwill”, already looks fanciful. In the past week, the Primates of Uganda and Rwanda have made statements to the effect that no new debate is needed on the subject of homosexuality. The Primate of the Southern Cone flew straight to a rally of dissenting parishes in New Westminster, Canada. Another Primate reported that conservative colleagues had been boasting of their ability to make Dr Williams do as they wanted.
What continues to shock churchpeople most, however, is the account of how the Primates from the global South were unwilling to attend eucharistic celebrations with the North Americans. Their stance was consistent with having announced themselves out of communion with the US and Canadian provinces after the consecration of an openly gay bishop and the blessing of same-sex unions. Nevertheless, their decision calls into question the very use of the term “Communion” for the Anglican Churches.
Eucharistic hospitality is at the core of Anglicanism. The Thirty-Nine Articles tell us not to be perturbed by the unworthiness of the ministers. If, as the Primates seem to have done, we start to calculate the unworthiness of our fellow communicants, altar rails around the world would be empty (unless, of course, we also calculate our own unworthiness). When we consider the Primates’ representative function, and their task of uniting the Church, the implications seem graver still.
All this has had a profoundly depressing effect on those committed to the Anglican enterprise…
The Church Times news columns proceed to report various related developments, including the actions of two Global South primates, in this article: My trip was ill-timed, Venables admits. Scroll down the article for yet another copy of the text of Henry Orombi’s own words as reported in the New Vision newspaper of Kampala, here headlined as Ugandan: ‘Repent or depart’.
The feature articles from last week’s Church Times have become available to non-subscribers earlier than expected:
Suddenly, an end to Western arrogance by Gregory Venables
Still together, thanks to a generous spirit by Barry Morgan
The need for restraint by Stephen Sykes
Here also are some letters to the editor.
Meanwhile the Church of England Newspaper has Liberals turn on Williams and US Church considers action.
4 CommentsFirst, the The Rt Revd John Paterson, former primate of New Zealand, has issued a Statement from the Chair of the Anglican Consultative Council:
As Chairman of the Anglican Consultative Council, I have received the requests of the Primates Meeting to the ACC. Inevitably such requests raise questions about the inter-relationship between the various Instruments of Unity which will need to be examined in the light of the Windsor Report at our next meeting.
The Primates Meeting asked the ACC to provide at its next meeting in June an opportunity for the Episcopal Church USA and the Anglican Church of Canada to set out the thinking behind the recent actions of their Provinces in accordance with paragraph 141 of the Windsor Report; and also to take positive steps to initiate the listening and study process which has been the subject of resolutions not only at the Lambeth Conference in 1998, but in earlier Conferences as well.
Accordingly I have asked the Design Group to include in our programme an opportunity for a Consultation at which the major input will come from members of ECUSA and the Anglican Church of Canada, and it is hoped that delegates from other parts of the Communion will contribute also. We will also continue to work on the request from Lambeth Conference 1998 Resolution 1.10 which the ACC began at its meeting in Dundee Scotland in 1999. The aim will be to initiate a listening and study process which will review what has already taken place and co-ordinate further work in this area.
Meanwhile, the Anglican Journal reports that Canterbury snubs North American churches:
The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, has rejected an invitation to attend a joint meeting in April of U.S. and Canadian bishops next month in a move that the Canadian primate, Archbishop Andrew Hutchison, said is clearly linked to the turmoil over homosexuality.
This follows close on the heels of the following press release from the Canadian primate: A statement by the Most Rev. Andrew S. Hutchison:
Now that several days have passed since the end of the Primates’ Meeting in Belfast and the issuance of a communiqué that has received wide publicity, I thought that Canadian Anglicans might want to hear a bit more about the meeting, about the decisions that were made and about what those decisions will mean for the Canadian church in both the short and the long term. Where, in short, do we now find ourselves and where do we go from here?
Let’s start by looking at where we are and where we are not. We still, today, have an Anglican Communion of which the Canadian and American churches are a part, and I have to say that prior to going to Belfast, I did not for a moment take this outcome for granted. There was, I believe, a real possibility that the Primates might disagree to such an extent that I would not be able to say today that we still have a communion. The fact that this did not happen is something we can be grateful for. It is also evidence that there may yet be truth to the notion that despite our difficulties in the Anglican Communion there is still more that unites us than there is that separates us. This is not to minimize the difficulties of the meeting nor the deep divisions that clearly exist in the Communion. But it is certainly worth noting that after these very difficult five days, the will emerged to find a way for us to stay together.
Meanwhile in Kansas, Church, Episcopal diocese split:
Worldwide divisions over homosexuality in the Anglican Church burst open in Kansas on Sunday, as the Episcopal diocese announced a separation with a large Overland Park church.
The Rev. Dean Wolfe, Episcopal bishop of eastern Kansas, said that Christ Church Episcopal at 91st Street and Nall Avenue had agreed in principal to sever ties with the diocese and the national Episcopal Church.
Full details are on the diocesan website.
3 CommentsA number of comment items that should really have been posted here earlier.
Last Saturday in the Telegraph the regular Christopher Howse column was titled Wilder shores of Anglicanism.
Several recent articles in GetReligion are of interest, in particular Reporting vs. fear-mongering
and earlier items can be found via the Anglicanism archive page.
Reverting to the earlier report here concerning Henry Orombi, his press conference statement was thought worthy of reproducing in full on the NACDAP site and Peter Toon commented that Ugandan Archbishop commended the Communiqué but apparently had not carefully read it!
From the other end of the spectrum, Mark Harris has a blog on which he wrote about Why the so called crisis in the Anglican Communion is no crisis of mine.
And finally, this report, via Confessing Evangelical of what Private Eye had to say about Schismatic liturgy.
5 CommentsUpdate
related news story by Ruth Gledhill Break-away bishops could undermine truce on gays
One of the signatories, the Bishop of Ripon and Leeds, the Right Rev John Packer, said: “This is a strong statement of support for listening to the experience of lesbian and gay Christians.
“Many lesbian and gay Christians, rightly or wrongly, feel that the primates’ statement did not emphasise the need to emphasise them in the same way that the bishops of the Church of England did at our recent General Synod. We wanted to make it clear that we had in no way reneged on that promise. Sometimes I feel that people are saying they want to listen, when in fact they have already made their minds up.”
The following letter appears in Monday’s edition of The Times, signed by the bishops of Salisbury, Chelmsford, Leicester, Ripon & Leeds, St Albans and Truro.
10 CommentsSir, We are encouraged by the commitment of the primates of the Anglican Communion to “the underlying reality of our communion in God the Holy Trinity” whilst engaging in dialogue and listening, in relation to the issues which have “obscured” that communion. The communiqué issued at the end of their week-long meeting in Newry (report and leading article, February 26) recommends actions which will allow that dialogue to continue and articulates the deep bonds of affection which continue to unite us.
We do not believe that the different responses of our sister churches to lesbian and gay people are of such significance that we should break the bonds of communion. We welcome the positive steps which will now be taken to engage in dialogue with lesbian and gay people. This call has been repeated by successive Lambeth conferences and we will do all that we can to facilitate that mutual listening throughout the Communion. We assure lesbian and gay Christians of our commitment to the principle of the Lambeth conference that all baptised, believing and faithful persons, regardless of sexual orientation, are full members of the Body of Christ.
We remain in full sacramental fellowship with all the churches of the Anglican Communion, including those of Canada and the US, and we seek to remain in full communion with all of them. We also clearly state our continuing solidarity with our sisters and brothers in the global south.In a world ravaged by the effects of poverty, war and disease our communion must seek to serve the whole human family.
We assure the Archbishop of Canterbury of our support for him in the ministry with which he has been entrusted and we offer him our love, our fellowship and prayers.
Today, the Observer carries a report by Jamie Doward that fills page 3 of the paper:
Anti-gay millionaire bankrolls Caravaggio spectacular
This concerns a current special exhibition at the National Gallery in London, but is concerned not with the content of the exhibition but with the identity of the financial sponsor who is Howard Ahmanson. The illustrations for the article include a picture of him. An excerpt:
But it is clear Rushdoony’s influence – and the legacy bequeathed by Ahmanson’s generosity – lives on at the foundation which continues to argue homosexuality is sinful. Ortiz said: ‘I would categorise homosexuality, as the Bible does, with necrophilia and bestiality and bigamy and the rest of it. It’s obviously not the way, physically, things were designed to work and morally it’s not what God has permitted.’
And though Ahmanson may distance himself from the foundation his money continues to fund anti-gay causes. In 2000, Ahmanson gave at least $310,000 to the Knight Initiative, for its campaign against the granting to homosexuals in California of the same legal rights as heterosexuals.
And he is a generous supporter of the conservative American Anglican Council (AAC) which has unleashed chaos upon the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, by threatening to break away from the 70-million strong Anglican Communion over the ordination of gay bishops.
Liberals in the Anglican church in Britain said there was an absurd paradox that the National Gallery had to seek funding for an exhibition of a painter, whose work scandalised the church, from the deeply religious Ahmansons.
‘It’s ironic that one of the major funders of the exhibition – about which there has been such interesting comment about Caravaggio’s realism, use of real life models and homo-erotic content – should also be one of the major funders of the AAC,’ said Reverend Nicholas Holtam, vicar at St Martin-in-the-Fields church next to the National Gallery.
History, suggested Holtam, was repeating itself. ‘Ahmanson’s support seems to be an example of Caravaggio drawing the contemporary conservative church into a reality they want officially to deny – just as he did in his own day.’
Sidebar to the article:
Howard F Ahmanson Jr: the man and the money
0 CommentsBorn: Los Angeles 1950. Inherited a fortune from his father’s savings and loans company.
Funds: a number of right wing causes and charities through his own private company Fieldstead and Company Inc, which describes itself as ‘a private philanthropy working in national and international relief and development, education, the arts, family and children’s concerns’. Gave financial backing to RJ Rushdoony, high priest of a religious movement known as ‘reconstructionism’ which calls for government based on the literal word of God. Has given millions to the Discovery Institute, the Seattle-based centre which attempts to prove Darwin’s theory of evolution was wrong and the Claremont Institute, a right wing think-tank which promotes family values. Has additionally given money to right-wing intellectual Marvin Olasky, credited by Newt Gingrich as the intellectual author of ‘compassionate conservatism’, the ideology espoused by George W Bush.
Updated 2 pm – new items at bottom
Stephen Bates reports in the Guardian what a “not normally noted as a liberal” primate told him, but only on condition of anonymity. Anglican leaders divided and defiant after gays pact
The primate, who is not normally noted as a liberal, was speaking on condition of anonymity. He said: “Some primates were personally offensive towards Rowan and gratuitously rude about him behind his back. They had no respect for him and said: ‘He’ll do what we tell him to.’ If I wasn’t a Christian, I would walk away from this right now. I believe a split in the church is inevitable.”
…The anonymous primate said that the conservative archbishops had ignored a direct appeal by the Archbishop of Canterbury for them to attend a service at which he was to preside at Dromantine. Twenty of the 35 attended a “celebration” dinner hosted by Nigeria’s Archbishop Peter Akinola but paid for by American Episcopalian traditionalists opposed to their liberal church leadership following the end of the meeting.
The Church Times also reports on the atmosphere in which the meeting was conducted:
Pat Ashworth Yes, they’re united, but only just: Primates’ response
Other Church Times reports:
Americans and Canadians face tough decisions
Primates’ meeting: the ACC response
Over at the Telegraph Jonathan Petre reports Primate attacked for stance over gays and refers to this letter.
George Conger in the Church of England Newspaper has the most detailed account of events at Dromatine, the article is in two parts:
Behind the scenes at the Primates’ Meeting, part 1
Behind the scenes at the Primates’ Meeting, part 2
Here is his account of the Thursday afternoon:
Matters took a quick turn when at 2pm when an independent journalist announced that he was getting ready to break the story of the agreement over the internet. The Primate of the Southern Cone, Archbishop Gregory Venables of Argentina, telephoned the journalist asking him not to proceed as the details had not been completed nor signed.
Though delayed, an incomplete story announcing the deal broke at approximately 4.30pm causing anger among the global south primates who were fearful that publication of the proposal would wreck negotiations.
As problems unfolded over the leak, Bishop Griswold became perturbed after witnessing the departure of a number of global south primates with their American supporters to dine off-campus.
Bishop Griswold spoke with Dr Williams, who then dressed down the Primates upon their return for sneaking away. In rebuking the Primates, Archbishop Williams committed his first gaffe of the meeting, as his infelicitous tone offended the African leaders.
In the midst of the turmoil over absent primates, exaggerated news reports, and bruised egos, the Primates voted to junk the evening’s agenda and finish the communiqué.
Sources at Lambeth Palace and the Anglican Consultative Council told us the next day that the determination to finish the report and regain control of the agenda from the press unified the Primates as nothing else had over the week.
The drafting committee presented its work to the Primates and after only a few readings the communiqué was adopted — breaking with past practice of arguing over each jot and tittle. At 10.22pm the communiqué was released to the press.
The expression of repentance from the Episcopal Church found in earlier drafts did not materialise due, in part, to the rush to finish. Archbishop Peter Carnley explained: “At the beginning of our meeting we did talk about an expression of regret”, however “I think we lost sight of that particular issue in the course of the meeting”.
The endorsement of the communiqué, however, did not return harmony to the Primates. After the deal was done, Archbishop Williams announced he was going to lead the noonday Eucharist on Friday and invited all the Primates to attend as a gesture of unity. The global south primates declined.
Other CEN report: North American Churches suspended from Communion
and editorial which will disappear next week, but another copy is here
An American report from yesterday, by David Steinmetz in the Orlando Sentinel Negotiating truce in Anglican civil war
Associated Press report by Richard Ostling
And for those who thought Orombi okays gay debate in Church was too good to be true, well, it isn’t: No debate on gays, says Orombi.
1 Comment