Thinking Anglicans

Lambeth Conference 2022 closes

The Lambeth Conference closed yesterday with a Eucharist in Canterbury Cathedral.

Here is our final roundup of news from the Conference. There is earlier news here, here, herehere, here and here.

Lambeth Conference website
The Fifteenth Lambeth Conference closes in song at Canterbury Cathedral
The Closing Service of the Lambeth Conference – Service Programme [There is a recording of the service on YouTube.]
Church must learn to ‘speak confidently and courageously’ on science in changing world – Lambeth conference told
Bishops observe silence for Hiroshima Day as Lambeth Conference remembers violence and conflict around the world

Archbishop of Canterbury
Archbishop Justin’s sermon at the Lambeth Conference closing service
Archbishop of Canterbury gives final Keynote Address at the Lambeth Conference

Episcopal News Service
In final Lambeth address, Archbishop of Canterbury calls the church to tell, teach and transform
Bishops wrap Lambeth Conference with look ahead to unity, despite persistent divisions
As Lambeth Conference winds down, bishops show solidarity with regions facing crises, from gun violence to climate change

Church Times
Lambeth 2022: Now is time to deepen relationships across Communion, urges Welby
Lambeth 2022: The way ahead, guided by scripture
Lambeth 2022: Global South leaders talk of impaired communion
Lambeth 2022: Revolution is our calling, declares Welby
Lambeth 2022: Bishops pledge support for places in crisis and conflict
Lambeth 2022: New Science Commission launched
Lambeth 2022: everything you need to know about the sexuality row

Vatican News
Cardinal Tagle at Lambeth Conference: ‘Let us dream together’

Lambeth ’22 Resource Group
GSFA Official Communique following Lambeth Conference 2022
Orthodox Bishops at the Lambeth Conference reaffirm Lambeth I.10 as Anglican teaching on marriage & sexuality

Subscribe
Notify of
guest

63 Comments
Oldest
Newest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Charles Clapham
1 year ago

Anybody have a good explanation or comment as to why the GSFA declaration has been set up so as to ensure anonymity by bishops who signed? Genuine question. I’d have thought those bishops who signed would have wanted to do so publicly.

Pat ONeill
Pat ONeill
1 year ago

The Anglican Communion cannot “speak confidently and courageously” on science if the bishops claiming to speak for a majority of Anglicans ignore and disparage the findings of science (psychology, psychiatry, sociology, etc.) on the reality of human sexuality.

Graham Watts
Graham Watts
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

As if sexuality was difficult enough. Is the Anglican Communion about to dispense with ‘In the beginning God created….’ in favour of the science which has a more plausible suggestion?

Pat ONeill
Pat ONeill
Reply to  Graham Watts
1 year ago

I certainly hope so. Or else teaching science in a “church school” will become incredibly difficult.

Tim Chesterton
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

I’m a bit confused as to why ‘In the beginning God created…’ is seen as in contradiction with science. Intelligent Christian scientists like Francis Collins and John Polkinghorne have been affirming the truth of both for a long time now.

Pat ONeill
Pat ONeill
Reply to  Tim Chesterton
1 year ago

It’s a question of how you mean “God created….” and how literally you take what was once referred to as “the pleasant poetry of Genesis” (see Inherit the Wind). If you insist on the exact order of things in Genesis and spontaneous creation of all things, then no, you cannot reconcile that insistence with the scientific record or current understanding of cosmology.

If you mean, however, that God ordained a universe that works the way we have discovered and determined it does, then there is no contradiction.

Tim Chesterton
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

I mean that ‘by the word of the Lord were the heavens made’ (Psalm 33.6). I take Genesis 1 to be a poetic elaboration of that verse. And I find no contradiction between that affirmation and anything I have learned from science.

Hebrew specialists tell us, however, that ‘in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth’ is a dodgy translation. I forget who it was who told me that a better translation would be ‘By way of beginning…’

peterpi - Peter Gross
peterpi - Peter Gross
Reply to  Tim Chesterton
1 year ago

I’ve also read that “When, in the beginning, God created …” is more accurate.
Either way, while “in the beginning, God created …” makes for a dramatic opening, apparently, the Hebrew is more subtle than that.

peterpi - Peter Gross
peterpi - Peter Gross
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

I’ve never read in detail the Garden of Eden story in Genesis, which for some reason seems to begin with the end of chapter 1, But I love Genesis chapter 1. At least in English, it is a logical, elegant, and orderly process of Creation, in terms of the society it was written for and in, generally going from simpler to more complex. The fact that the Earth is not flat, nor floating on water that doesn’t extend infinitely downward in all directions, and is without a firmament that shields it from water that does not extend infinitely upward in… Read more »

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

The findings of science (in which I don’t include psychiatry or sociology, by the way) are almost invariably statements about how the natural world works: they don’t speak of what people ought to do, or why the world is the way it is, or what is the right or wrong choice of lifestyle is, or whether any course of action takes us closer to or further from God. So it’s hard to know what findings of science the bishops with whom you disagree are ignoring or disparaging. It would also be interesting to know what you think modern science has… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Unreliable Narrator
Pat ONeill
Pat ONeill
Reply to  Unreliable Narrator
1 year ago

Modern science has made it pretty clear (to those who are willing to accept it) that same-sex attraction is either innate or developed so early in a human’s life as to be practically the same thing. There is nothing “unnatural” about loving someone of the same gender.

Oh, and because of the things I just pointed out, calling same-sex attraction a “lifestyle” is about on the same level as calling an allergy to seafood or lactose intolerance a “lifestyle”.

William
William
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

No, I’m afraid modern science has not made this clear.
A ‘gay gene’ has never been found.

peterpi - Peter Gross
peterpi - Peter Gross
Reply to  William
1 year ago

There is no one gene for a lot of factors in the gestation of a human embryo/fetus, and in that person’s (once it is born) physical, sexual, and other development. Studies of the sexuality of human twins indicate that the chance of the both twins being of GLBT orientation if one is, is greater than 50%. There’s evidence that the chemical or hormonal environment in the mother’s womb affects a host of factors. Yes, the following sentence is anecdotal, but too many GLBT people I’ve talked to or read their experience or heard it knew their orientation or gender variance… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by peterpi - Peter Gross
William
William
Reply to  peterpi - Peter Gross
1 year ago

I was responding to a scientific assertion that I disagreed with. I realize that GLBT people don’t have to prove anything to me or anyone else.
If human sexuality is innate, as many people suggest, then the evidence of identical twins who share the same DNA code should be 100% in agreement not just greater than 50% as you suggest.

Pat ONeill
Pat ONeill
Reply to  William
1 year ago

“Innate” doesn’t necessarily mean “genetic”. I have had, since my early years, an innate desire and ability to create through writing and art. Is it genetic? I doubt it, as neither of my parents nor any of my siblings share it, even a little bit. But I’ve been aware of it since before kindergarten.

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

These statements, whether or not they are supported by “modern science” (*), are statements about the natural world. As I said, they do not and cannot any anything about whether those things are right or wrong. Oh, and I didn’t call same-sex attraction a lifestyle, and I agree that it isn’t. Attraction isn’t the same as action. (*) Less than 50 years ago, “modern science” described same-sex attraction as a mental disorder (DSM-I, removed 1973), and that was regarded as enlightened by comparison with the popular view of it as a consciously vicious choice. I wonder what our current “modern… Read more »

Kate
Kate
Reply to  Unreliable Narrator
1 year ago

“I wonder what our current “modern science” will look like in another few decades.”

That’s a very relevant observation for the whole of this discussion.

Pat ONeill
Pat ONeill
Reply to  Unreliable Narrator
1 year ago

Again, I have great difficulty believing that a just and loving God would give some people an innate desire and then forbid them from acting upon it.

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

What are your views on Original Sin?

Susannah Clark
Reply to  Unreliable Narrator
1 year ago

Oh-oh…

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Susannah Clark
1 year ago

Why so? It’s a perfectly serious question. Apart from being historical Anglican doctrine (Article 9) I was under the impression that it was still what people generally believed. Did I miss an important memo?

Susannah Clark
Reply to  Unreliable Narrator
1 year ago

No objections to the subject, but introducing this theme could cause fun, when it’s asked in the context of gay sexuality. People might even suggest that gay sexuality is a result of this hypothetical construct called ‘original sin’… with all the gnashing and wailing that could engender! It would be a particularly ‘nasty’ way of framing people’s sexuality, identity, precious love etc. I am not aiming that ‘nastiness’ at you – I think better of you, UN, and don’t even know where you were going with the question to Pat… but the association could open a can of worms (if… Read more »

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Susannah Clark
1 year ago

It’s not that Original Sin causes certain things to happen which are sinful, while other things are innocuous. It’s that Original Sin makes everything sinful, in the sense that everything we do is capable of getting in the way of our relationship with God, and indeed it does, and we experience that, and are distressed by it. Sex, of whatever kind, is particularly likely to do that. Fortunately we have a way of setting ourselves in the right relationship with God, but it isn’t through our own efforts or entitlements. This is not an easy message, because it means that… Read more »

Cynthia Katsarelis
Cynthia Katsarelis
Reply to  Unreliable Narrator
1 year ago

John Philip Newell loves to tell the story of a panel of religious leaders, including a Rabbi, being asked what they thought of original sin. The Rabbi said it was one that surprised him, saying “now THAT was an original sin!” I’m with the Rabbi. And the Celtic Christians. And the church of my birth, the Greek Orthodox Church. And Jesus, the sins of the parents do not pass down to their children. I wouldn’t have thought that modern Anglicans were big believers in Original Sin, it’s an invention of Augustine. We don’t consider the Articles as doctrine in TEC.… Read more »

Simon Kershaw
Reply to  Cynthia Katsarelis
1 year ago

I don’t think that is what “original sin” is about — “the sins of the parents pass down to their children”. Maybe that’s not what you meant but it’s how I read your comment. Original Sin is about the innate human characteristic of screwing things up, of making the wrong decisions and getting things wrong. It’s part of being human, and in that sense it is precisely passed down from parents to children, because human parents have human children.

Cynthia Katsarelis
Cynthia Katsarelis
Reply to  Simon Kershaw
1 year ago

There’s a parable where Jesus says that children are not punished for the sins of their parents (I’m sure it says “fathers”). Your interpretation of “original sin” is a fine one, but it is an interpretation. I no longer remember all of the particulars of Augustine, but the concept of “original sin” is his, and it is more intense and innate then merely saying we’re all less than perfect and we regularly screw things up. As an outsider to the concept, I see that it’s caused a great deal of damage. Sadly, this twisted view of self has caused large… Read more »

Simon Kershaw
Reply to  Cynthia Katsarelis
1 year ago

I think my statement is broadly consistent with Article 9 of the 39 Articles, though I’d probably stop at before the end of the first sentence: “Original Sin standeth not in the following of Adam, (as the Pelagians do vainly talk); but it is the fault and corruption of the Nature of every man, that naturally is ingendered of the offspring of Adam; whereby man is very far gone from original righteousness, and is of his own nature inclined to evil, so that the flesh lusteth always contrary to the spirit; and therefore in every person born into this world,… Read more »

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Simon Kershaw
1 year ago

I agree. None of us can, even for a single second, claim to be innocent, or by our own merits to deserve the relationship with God that He desires for us — we are able to have that, but only by the undeserved gift of the death and resurrection of Jesus. That is the good news of the Gospel.

Cynthia Katsarelis
Cynthia Katsarelis
Reply to  Unreliable Narrator
1 year ago

Merits are up to God and no one else.

The Good News of the Gospel is exactly what the Gospel says “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to bring good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovery of sight to the blind, to let the oppressed go free,” etc.

There’s nothing in there about ticking the right morality boxes and much to say about creating a just society where the hungry are fed, the stranger welcome, the sick healed…

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Cynthia Katsarelis
1 year ago

That’s from Isaiah, of course, and in Luke Jesus reads this text, including the “etc” which is “that the time of the Lord’s favour has come”. So the “me” in that text is Isaiah, not Jesus. Jesus then tells his audience “Today this Scripture is fulfilled in your hearing” If you think that this quoted text, and this alone, is the the good news of the Gospel, then I can only describe that as a highly personal selection.

Cynthia Katsarelis
Cynthia Katsarelis
Reply to  Simon Kershaw
1 year ago

Like I said, in TEC, the Articles are relegated to “Historical Documents,” they are not tenets of belief. John Philip Newell makes a compelling case that Pelagius unfairly gets a bad rap. Despite the use of Greek, we Greeks don’t subscribe to original sin in the way Augustine defined it and passed down to the Roman Church and some strains of Anglicanism, but not all.

Susannah Clark
Reply to  Simon Kershaw
1 year ago

“It’s part of being human.” I think this is the pivotal statement. It’s *part* of being human, but only one part. The problems arise, I suspect, if a disproportionate emphasis is placed on this theological structure. Then religious communities can veer towards a kind of dark, dismal view of how ghastly everyone is. To me that then becomes out of perspective. I agree in recognising selfishness as sin. I agree we all need God to make us whole. BUT… we are also created in the image of God, and my view is that from everlasting to everlasting – in eternity,… Read more »

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Susannah Clark
1 year ago

I quite agree that we should each attend to the beams in our own eyes before the motes in others’. But we still need to know what constitutes the mote and the beam. Pelagianism leads to the notion that actually there’s nothing wrong with us that can’t be cured by being a bit nicer, recycling more, and voting for the right party. (You read it a lot in these columns). And that leads to precisely the converse of the thing you diagnose, namely, comparing ourselves, who have achieved this laudable state by (as we think) our own merits, with those… Read more »

Susannah Clark
Reply to  Unreliable Narrator
1 year ago

I’m not sure I was advocating comparing ourselves with anyone. Speaking personally, I know full well there are sins I bear responsibility for, which I cannot erase and will always regret… and daily sins of selfishness or neglect. So I’m certainly not trying to say “Hey, we Christians are better than other people.” I was trying to state universals about the human condition, in response to the ‘universal’ of the theology of Original Sin. To me, there is good in everyone as well as the sinful and selfish, and – more fundamentally and universally – I believe ALL humans are… Read more »

Susannah Clark
1 year ago

The GSFA announcement does look like the beginning of an attempt to change the way the Anglican Communion operates (they want to impose uniform doctrine on all full members, with the help of a ‘Faith and Order Commission). Of course, this attempted ‘take over’ depends on how willing the Anglican Provinces are to go down this road. Whereas the original support in 1998 for 1998 I:10 was 526 for 70 against, this week the GSFA only mustered 125 bishops willing to back their ‘re-affirmation’ (verified by Debbie Buggs, who worships at St Helens Bishopgate). Note that if you take South… Read more »

Richard Grand
Richard Grand
Reply to  Susannah Clark
1 year ago

South Sudan has 51 bishops? In Canada, a large country, we have 30 dioceses, some with suffragans or assistant bishops. But we could not muster 51. The numbers of bishops in some Global South churches continues to be of great interest. No one seems to mention the fact that we see no actual explanation of how the number is determined and how and why new dioceses are formed.

Pat ONeill
Pat ONeill
Reply to  Richard Grand
1 year ago

TEC has 124 in the United States…including one for the armed services and one for Puerto Rico.

Richard Grand
Richard Grand
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

Not sure what you’re saying. The US has a population of something like 350 Million people in over 50 states and territories. Canada has 10 provinces and a population of about 35 Million.

Pat ONeill
Pat ONeill
Reply to  Richard Grand
1 year ago

Just noting that the ratio of bishops to population in the US is somewhat different from that in South Sudan as well.

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Pat ONeill
1 year ago

Is there some specific ratio of bishops to population, or to church membership, which is considered optimal?

Philip Groves
Philip Groves
Reply to  Unreliable Narrator
1 year ago

No. One Tanzanian bishop has between 700,000 and 1,000,000 worshipping Anglicans and the Nigerian church in the 1990s set up missionary dioceses with the bishop, his wife (usually) and one or two clergy, but no one else.

Tim Chesterton
Reply to  Richard Grand
1 year ago

Richard, ten provinces and three territories. Also, our governance system here in Canada leaves a lot to be desired: witness the fact that 81% of the members of our 2019 General Synod voted to amend the marriage canon, but the vote still failed because it fell short of a 2/3 majority in the House of Bishops – a house which one diocese had recently stacked by electing two additional suffragans who remained parish priests as well – thus giving their small (population-wise) diocese a larger voice in the HoB than any other diocese in the country. And here’s the problem.… Read more »

Last edited 1 year ago by Tim Chesterton
Richard Grand
Richard Grand
Reply to  Tim Chesterton
1 year ago

Very well explained. The “manufacture” of two more bishops from the Arctic just in time for General Synod to bolster the “no” vote had to be one of the most cynical and shameful actions ever. Yet it was possible because the canons of the Province made it possible-or impossible to prevent. I continue to be loyal to the ACC, but this was absurd.

Jim Pratt
Jim Pratt
Reply to  Richard Grand
1 year ago

The addition of further indigenous suffragans in several dioceses in the Province of Rupert’s Land has even further skewed the membership of the House of Bishops. Granted that these new suffragans are necessary, both for pastoral care in remote areas (many fly-in communities), and for the strengthening of the indigenous church. Barring some reform of the structure of General Synod, maybe the dioceses in Ontario could elect suffragans for the Six Nations (which are accepting of LGBT2S chiefs, clergy and marriages), and Eastern Newfoundland and Labrador could finally get around to creating a suffragan for Labrador (where the Metis Nation… Read more »

Richard
Richard
Reply to  Richard Grand
1 year ago

South Sudan has a Primate, plus 8 Metropolitan Archbishops. Each Internal Province (headed by an archbishop) has 5 – 8 dioceses.

https://southsudan.anglican.org/

Tim Cuthbertson
Tim Cuthbertson
Reply to  Richard
1 year ago

And a population of about 11 million

Jo B
Jo B
Reply to  Tim Cuthbertson
1 year ago

With as many as 2 million Anglicans. What that means in practical terms is hard to say. Presumably the proportion of nominal Anglicans in that figure is lower than in England. I suspect also that in a country with relatively poor infrastructure having a large number of bishops is a matter of practicality as much as anything else. Plus with a young and rapidly growing population even a relatively small population of practising Anglicans will involve a large number of confirmations and ordinations requiring the attendance of the bishop.

Richard Grand
Richard Grand
Reply to  Susannah Clark
1 year ago

I can’t see England, Canada, the US, Wales, Scotland, New Zealand and others all falling into line under a GSFA mandated “uniform doctrine.” It’s already impossible. Sadly, when they mean “doctrine,” they mean basically one thing. Well, perhaps also a fundamentalist, literalist reading of scripture-but that is already an impossibility. So they will make rules for their exclusive club and life will go on. What I notice most about all of this is that the various churches and usual suspects will continue to go about their business as before and there have been no real surprises in who has said… Read more »

Peter
Peter
Reply to  Susannah Clark
1 year ago

Why is the church which Debbie Buggs attends of any relevance ?

Susannah Clark
Reply to  Peter
1 year ago

I don’t think it needs to be, and I have high levels of confidence that what she verified is probably accurate, but if the GSFA wanted the verification to be ‘seen’ as impartial then in my opinion it would have been a better ‘look’ not to get the verification done by someone whose church shares the same views as the GSFA on the resolution that was being voted on. As I was saying about ISB on a separate thread, I think it’s important for ‘independent’ players not only to be impartial, but to be ‘seen’ as impartial. I just think… Read more »

Peter
Peter
Reply to  Susannah Clark
1 year ago

Thank you for the clarification.

Richard Grand
Richard Grand
1 year ago

I saw “Orthodox bishops” and thought they were actual ecumenical partners from Orthodoxy. Has this term for “conservative” bishops now become standard for Anglicans? (One could apply other adjectives than “conservative.) The idea that their “orthodoxy” is based on one thing-rejecting gay people-is offensive in so many ways, given the fact that this is about something other than the (Orthodox/Ecumenical) Creeds of the Church. It is about a narrow (mis)reading of a few selected lines of scripture. How can they claim that all others are heterodox? It is an insult. Not to mention that it isn’t even what “orthodoxy” means,… Read more »

Richard
Richard
Reply to  Richard Grand
1 year ago

It’s the name they have given themselves. When we use it, we know what is meant. We could enclose it in quotes, i.e. “Orthodox”, but that is what they do when they refer to same-sex “marriage.” No one wins.

Everything about Global South and ACNA is defined by “who it excludes.”

Rod Gillis
Rod Gillis
1 year ago

Now that the Lambeth Conference is over the work of wider theological reflection on the products of the The Conference will begin, hopefully involving a wider cross section of The Communion. The issue of faith and science looks interesting and exciting, the involvement of ECLAS especially so. (link is embedded in the article). As noted, applied science presents the world with a number of ethical challenges ( nuclear weapons and AI are noted as examples). I would look forward to ethical reflection on the relationship between drug research and capital, including a just and ethically responsible return for medical research–one… Read more »

Tim Chesterton
Reply to  Rod Gillis
1 year ago

Oy, that’s a good link, Rod!

Rod Gillis
Rod Gillis
Reply to  Tim Chesterton
1 year ago

It is embedded in the ‘speak out confidently and courageously’ article above. Lots of info provided here by TA.

Unreliable Narrator
Unreliable Narrator
Reply to  Rod Gillis
1 year ago

It seems that ECLAS is for church leaders, not for the worshipper in the pew …

Rod Gillis
Rod Gillis
1 year ago

A former teacher of mine, a highly trained Irish Dominican with dry Irish wit once joked about one of his colleagues who at funerals “liked to take a crack at raising the deceased from the dead.” His wry observation was that ” the family usually are happy to dispense with that.” As is so often the case, I recall the joke; but I have forgotten the context which occasioned it. However, I think aspects of this thread on the subject of the difference between science and religion re-contextualizes it.

Rowland Wateridge
Rowland Wateridge
Reply to  Rod Gillis
1 year ago

Not sure whether the Irish comedy series ‘Father Ted’ was screened in Canada or USA, but there was one memorable episode in which Father Jack, lying in his open coffin, and surrounded by all the priests of Craggy Island and beyond, suddenly came alive and sat up! The explanation was that he had been drinking some chemical (might have been brass polish) so that everyone believed he had succumbed. To date this, it was quite a while ago, as just before Father Jack was ‘raised’, one of the bystander priests exclaimed “Jack should have been Pope, not this Polish fellow”!… Read more »

Rod Gillis
Rod Gillis
Reply to  Rowland Wateridge
1 year ago

Lol! The series is well known in Canada. My mother, a devout Catholic, loved it. A bit more ‘gregarious’ on the science/religion theme is the, ‘Mrs Brown and the Mormons sketch’. Last time I looked, it was still up on BBC You Tube.

Graham Watts
Graham Watts
1 year ago

Emma Ineson is taking a Twitter break ‘to do some reflecting and some writing. See you in the autumn’ The luxury of her position.
I hope that she doesn’t feel the need to rush back.

Stephen Griffiths
Stephen Griffiths
Reply to  Graham Watts
1 year ago

Perhaps an opening for an assistant Bishop to the Archbishops? Especially since Bp Tim Thornton must be clearing his desk at Lambeth Palace. I wonder which diocese will be receiving him as an honorary assistant bishop.

Tim Chesterton
Reply to  Graham Watts
1 year ago

I’ve taken Twitter breaks myself from time to time. Why is this a luxury? I’ve heard of studies that show that personal happiness decreases with increased use of social media. Why shouldn’t a person take a break from it if they want to?

63
0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x