"..I continue to see a negotiated “orderly separation” as the best and most fruitful way forward for the Anglican Communion. The experience of this Lambeth Conference… has again convinced me that the Anglican Communion cannot hold in tension convictions and practices that are incompatible…without continuing seriously to damage the life and witness of Anglican Churches as much in “the Global South” as in North America and in other provinces that have followed the lead of TEC. The experience of this Conference cannot have encouraged any participant to imagine that the latter are about to turn their backs on a generation or more of development in directions foreign to the life and convictions of the vast majority of Anglicans, let alone of other Christians, across the world. I cannot see that the members of an “international family of Churches” can thrive and grow and offer a clear witness to Jesus Christ as Lord while offering contradictory teaching, on a matter as central as the character of the Holy Life… " We have said these past few weeks that it is in the nature of man to give the mundane centrestage, while the fundamentals are studiously ignored. This, we said, explains the scant attention paid in the media, in particular, to happenings in the Anglican Church in the past several years culminating in the founding of the Global Anglican Future Conference, the boycott by more than 200 bishops of the once-a-decade Lambeth Conference, and the import of all of these on the entire Church of Jesus Christ.
Let me say, in passing, that the media in particular need a rethink of our attitude to religious events. The iron-cast position that Christianity, for instance, is a Sunday subject, is simply untenable. Christianity, in its true essence, is a way of life; an every second of life reality and needs to be so treated as such; given as much priority as we currently give to politics and governance; business and economy, sports and whatever else we’ve been committing tonnes of newsprint, ink and airtime to. True Christianity influences all other aspects of life and is influenced by none. That is why to get our religion right is to get everything else right. And as always, the media’s role is pivotal.
Please forgive the digression. But as we said, the formation of GAFCON and the subsequent Jerusalem Declaration should be seen as of such significance as the publication in 1517 of the late Rev Martin Luther’s 95 Theses, which led eventually to the Reformation and the birth of the Protestantism.
There might have been readers who thought that was alarmist, but as subsequent events demonstrated, the impact of GAFCON is such that at least one influential bishop is beginning to suggest an orderly separation within the Anglican Church as the way forward!
We have noted, in the course of this serial, that Archbishop Rowan Williams is a man in the eye of a storm; with his potential place in history oscillating between that of the man who presided over the disintegration of the Anglican “empire” or, the one who pulled her away from the brink. We had said that this deeply spiritual man didn’t have a minute to stand and stare since taking the see of Canterbury and the headship of the Communion. He had been there only a few months when the crisis over the ordination of openly gay bishops blew open. We have stated that his handling of the situation opened him to criticism particularly in the appointment of Canon Jeffrey John as Bishop of Reading. Quotes attributed to him then suggested he was either pro-gay bishop ordination or indifferent. But so strong was the opposition to that appointment, that he was never consecrated. Canon John, a vocal gay, resigned the appointment obviously on the Archbishop’s advice.
The appointment and subsequent consecration of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire by the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (ECUSA) didn’t lend itself to the same treatment. Robinson has since become the symbol of the Anglican crisis. That was five years ago. While the Archbishop seemed unwilling or unable to take a firm position on the issue, the so-called conservative wing of the church was unequivocal. They severed all relationship with ECUSA and demanded the enforcement of Lambeth 1998 Resolution1:10 (on Human Sexuality) which clearly forbids the ordination of openly gay bishops while the issue was still being considered through what it called the “listening” process. In this group were bishops from what is known as the Global South where a vast majority of Anglicans live. Several meetings of several organs, or what the Church calls ”Instruments of unity” yielded very little. ECUSA and her allies in the Liberal West including Canada where homosexuality has been elevated to a human right dug in. The opponents who insist that it is a sin also stood their ground.
That was the situation when preparations began for Lambeth Conference 2008, the once-a-decade gathering of Anglican bishops. It was a meeting which, for some, held the potential of resolving the issue; while for others, it would just be a talkshop designed to attempt to weary and possibly overwhelm the anti-gay group. To the latter group, the only way they would attend was if bishops whose provinces had violated Resolution 1:10 from the last conference were not invited. The Archbishop thought otherwise; he wanted a full house where things could be resolved in the Holy Spirit-filled atmosphere he hoped could be created by the way the Conference was designed.
In the event, about 250 Bishops gathered in Jerusalem for GAFCON, drew up the Jerusalem Declaration and urged their leaders to establish what could be seen as parallel structures to those of the Communion. Most of them also stayed away from Lambeth.
Canterbury hosted about 650 Bishops at Lambeth 2008. From the archbishop’s presidential addresses, it was clear that Dr Williams saw the problem as partly structural. His office was just one of the Instruments of Unity without executive powers of any kind. So, he canvassed an Anglican Covenant and a new council with powers to take certain decisions. The meeting ended without approving either. The Conference however would seem to have approved that discussions and negotiations continue towards these goals. The meeting also saw nothing wrong with the continued moratoria on the appointment of gay priests, the blessing of same-sex unions in Church and the creation of cross-border dioceses and provinces.
As we saw last week, the conference didn’t even have a resolution. In its place is a 161-paragraph document styled “Lambeth Indaba, Capturing Conversations and Reflections from the Lambeth Conference 2008,“ otherwise known as the “Reflections,” document. It was simply a narrative of what transpired at the Conference; the arguments for and against as well as a long list of “possible ways forward”.
So what is the import of all of these? Did Lambeth 2008 fail? Did it succeed in staving off the threat of disintegration permanently or just for a while? What is the place of GAFCON in the future of the Anglican Communion?
To answer the last question first, it is my opinion that GAFCON has a major role to play in how things shape in the coming days. First, if there was no GAFCON and no Jerusalem Declaration, it is possible that Lambeth 2008 might have ended differently. It is possible that condemnation of bigotry and intolerance may have found its way into a resolution that would have watered down Resolution 1:10 of 1998.
Let me say, in passing, that the media in particular need a rethink of our attitude to religious events. The iron-cast position that Christianity, for instance, is a Sunday subject, is simply untenable. Christianity, in its true essence, is a way of life; an every second of life reality and needs to be so treated as such; given as much priority as we currently give to politics and governance; business and economy, sports and whatever else we’ve been committing tonnes of newsprint, ink and airtime to. True Christianity influences all other aspects of life and is influenced by none. That is why to get our religion right is to get everything else right. And as always, the media’s role is pivotal.
Please forgive the digression. But as we said, the formation of GAFCON and the subsequent Jerusalem Declaration should be seen as of such significance as the publication in 1517 of the late Rev Martin Luther’s 95 Theses, which led eventually to the Reformation and the birth of the Protestantism.
There might have been readers who thought that was alarmist, but as subsequent events demonstrated, the impact of GAFCON is such that at least one influential bishop is beginning to suggest an orderly separation within the Anglican Church as the way forward!
We have noted, in the course of this serial, that Archbishop Rowan Williams is a man in the eye of a storm; with his potential place in history oscillating between that of the man who presided over the disintegration of the Anglican “empire” or, the one who pulled her away from the brink. We had said that this deeply spiritual man didn’t have a minute to stand and stare since taking the see of Canterbury and the headship of the Communion. He had been there only a few months when the crisis over the ordination of openly gay bishops blew open. We have stated that his handling of the situation opened him to criticism particularly in the appointment of Canon Jeffrey John as Bishop of Reading. Quotes attributed to him then suggested he was either pro-gay bishop ordination or indifferent. But so strong was the opposition to that appointment, that he was never consecrated. Canon John, a vocal gay, resigned the appointment obviously on the Archbishop’s advice.
The appointment and subsequent consecration of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire by the Episcopal Church of the United States of America (ECUSA) didn’t lend itself to the same treatment. Robinson has since become the symbol of the Anglican crisis. That was five years ago. While the Archbishop seemed unwilling or unable to take a firm position on the issue, the so-called conservative wing of the church was unequivocal. They severed all relationship with ECUSA and demanded the enforcement of Lambeth 1998 Resolution1:10 (on Human Sexuality) which clearly forbids the ordination of openly gay bishops while the issue was still being considered through what it called the “listening” process. In this group were bishops from what is known as the Global South where a vast majority of Anglicans live. Several meetings of several organs, or what the Church calls ”Instruments of unity” yielded very little. ECUSA and her allies in the Liberal West including Canada where homosexuality has been elevated to a human right dug in. The opponents who insist that it is a sin also stood their ground.
That was the situation when preparations began for Lambeth Conference 2008, the once-a-decade gathering of Anglican bishops. It was a meeting which, for some, held the potential of resolving the issue; while for others, it would just be a talkshop designed to attempt to weary and possibly overwhelm the anti-gay group. To the latter group, the only way they would attend was if bishops whose provinces had violated Resolution 1:10 from the last conference were not invited. The Archbishop thought otherwise; he wanted a full house where things could be resolved in the Holy Spirit-filled atmosphere he hoped could be created by the way the Conference was designed.
In the event, about 250 Bishops gathered in Jerusalem for GAFCON, drew up the Jerusalem Declaration and urged their leaders to establish what could be seen as parallel structures to those of the Communion. Most of them also stayed away from Lambeth.
Canterbury hosted about 650 Bishops at Lambeth 2008. From the archbishop’s presidential addresses, it was clear that Dr Williams saw the problem as partly structural. His office was just one of the Instruments of Unity without executive powers of any kind. So, he canvassed an Anglican Covenant and a new council with powers to take certain decisions. The meeting ended without approving either. The Conference however would seem to have approved that discussions and negotiations continue towards these goals. The meeting also saw nothing wrong with the continued moratoria on the appointment of gay priests, the blessing of same-sex unions in Church and the creation of cross-border dioceses and provinces.
As we saw last week, the conference didn’t even have a resolution. In its place is a 161-paragraph document styled “Lambeth Indaba, Capturing Conversations and Reflections from the Lambeth Conference 2008,“ otherwise known as the “Reflections,” document. It was simply a narrative of what transpired at the Conference; the arguments for and against as well as a long list of “possible ways forward”.
So what is the import of all of these? Did Lambeth 2008 fail? Did it succeed in staving off the threat of disintegration permanently or just for a while? What is the place of GAFCON in the future of the Anglican Communion?
To answer the last question first, it is my opinion that GAFCON has a major role to play in how things shape in the coming days. First, if there was no GAFCON and no Jerusalem Declaration, it is possible that Lambeth 2008 might have ended differently. It is possible that condemnation of bigotry and intolerance may have found its way into a resolution that would have watered down Resolution 1:10 of 1998.
On the other hand, the absence of most of the opposing bishops contributed in no small measure to the lowering of temperature and pressure at the Conference, Had they attended and tried to get their viewpoints into the resolution, they certainly would have been resisted. Should that then lead to a walk out, the damage such a spectacle would have caused would have been devastating. So mercifully, Lambeth 2008 cannot be said to have failed, even if it wasn’t a roaring success. It enabled the Archbishop make the point that the Anglican Church has a position on homosexuality. It has been seen as a sin over the years, and it remains so until the Church decides otherwise. The onus is on those who think otherwise to continue to push their case with a view to getting others to see what new information or revelation or whatever makes a change imperative. This position should satisfy the Bishops of GAFCON. But will it please ECUSA and their allies? Will they refrain from ordaining any gay priest and stop conducting gay marriages till the matter is resolved as stated above? Will GAFCON, on the other hand stop establishing dioceses outside of their geographical boundaries? I certainly hope and pray so.
But there are informed opinions to the contrary. For instance, The Rt Revd Michael Scott-Joynt, Bishop of Winchester had this to say: "...I continue to see a negotiated “orderly separation” as the best and most fruitful way forward for the Anglican Communion. The experience of this Lambeth Conference… has again convinced me that the Anglican Communion cannot hold in tension convictions and practices that are incompatible…without continuing seriously to damage the life and witness of Anglican Churches as much in “the Global South” as in North America and in other provinces that have followed the lead of TEC. The experience of this Conference cannot have encouraged any participant to imagine that the latter are about to turn their backs on a generation or more of development in directions foreign to the life and convictions of the vast majority of Anglicans, let alone of other Christians, across the world. I cannot see that the members of an “international family of Churches” can thrive and grow and offer a clear witness to Jesus Christ as Lord while offering contradictory teaching, on a matter as central as the character of the Holy Life… “
How all of these affect the Church as one body? Simple, we have to face and deal with all intra- and inter- doctrinal and other conflicts; even if it brings us to the brink. For we can rest assured that the gates of hell will not prevail. The time to begin is now. (Concluded)
*Pix:The Rt Revd Michael Scott-Joynt, Bishop of Winchester , Church of England
No comments:
Post a Comment