Church of England responds to the draft Anglican Covenant

(Updated)

Thinking Anglicans provides news of the Church of England response to the draft Anglican Covenant:

Press Release

The Archbishops of Canterbury and York, as Presidents of the General Synod, have submitted a Church of England Response to the draft Anglican Covenant published last year for discussion around the Anglican Communion.

All Anglican Provinces were invited to comment on the text prepared by the Covenant Design Group chaired by the Archbishop of the West Indies, the Most Revd Drexel Gomez.
...
The text of the response has been overseen by the House of Bishops’ Theological Group and builds on the earlier work of the Faith and Order Advisory Group. The draft response was discussed by the House of Bishops in October and by the Archbishops’ Council in November.

The Covenant Design Group will be meeting at the end of January to consider all Provincial responses. A ‘take note’ debate on the Church of England response to the Anglican Covenant is planned for the General Synod in February 2008.

Here's the text of response (rtf format). The response is an extensive examination of the covenant. One comment of many:
An important question that is raised by this Preamble is what is meant by the phrase ‘the Churches of the Anglican Communion.’ Are the churches of the Anglican communion, properly so called, the thirty eight national bodies that belong to the Communion or are they the dioceses of the Communion gathered round their diocesan bishops? This is not just a theoretical ecclesiological question, but also a practical one since it raises the question of whether the bodies that should subscribe to the Covenant are the national bodies or the dioceses.

Update at 5pm. The BBC has a story. An excerpt:

The Church of England has made clear its disapproval of Anglican provinces which intervene in the affairs of other churches without authorisation.
In a document it said such interventions should not take place except as part of "properly authorised schemes of pastoral oversight".

Update at 8pm. Tobias Haller has a reading here.

Posted by John B. Chilton on January 2, 2008 1:59 PM | |
Comments (4)

"It would be unlawful for the General Synod to delegate its decision making powers to the Primates. This therefore means that it could not sign up to a Covenant which purported to give the Primates of the Communion the ability to give ‘direction’ about the course of action that the Church of England should take."

That sounds like fairly stiff pushback towards those who assert the Primates have authority beyond their own provinces.

Posted by John B. Chilton [TypeKey Profile Page] | January 2, 2008 2:41 PM

I agree with you John. There are comments made in this document that range from stylistic and punctuation suggestions to ones like you mention here which call into question the basic premise of the structures being proposed.

I'm wondering who is responsible for providing the American church's response to the Covenant design group.

Posted by Nicholas Knisely [TypeKey Profile Page] | January 2, 2008 3:42 PM

This is an extensive response, and it will take some analysis. Some things are helpful. For example, I completely agree that the illustrative Scripture references are much more problematic than helpful.

At the same time, this seems to subtly centralize authority - authority that it at one point suggests is not only "moral," but "spiritual, pastoral and doctrinal" - in the Instruments. The reference to our supposed unclarity about the relationships of dioceses and national churches to the Communion only highlights this.

In my opinion Archbishop Williams has an interest in something not far short of Roman ecclesiology. This seems to approach this. Perhaps our English siblings think that the way to structure the Communion so that issues can be resolved (or safely forestalled) is to reestablish in all but name the Church of England in its various provinces, as before the separation of we troublesome Americans.

Marshall Scott

Posted by mscottsail [TypeKey Profile Page] | January 2, 2008 4:32 PM

"Are the churches of the Anglican communion...the thirty eight national bodies that belong to the Communion or are they the dioceses of the Communion gathered round their diocesan bishops? This ...raises the question of whether the bodies that should subscribe to the Covenant are the national bodies or the dioceses."

Well, the "Schedule of Membership" managed by the Anglican Consultative Council, one of our Instruments of Communion, lists provincial - not diocesan - representatives as members:

http://www.anglicancommunion.org/communion/acc/resources/docs/constitution.cfm#s3

Indeed, the logic of the entire ACC, at work since 1969, seems built on the very notion that council members are representing provinces. Too, as the AC website relates, "the constitution of the Council was accepted by the general synods or conventions of all the Member Churches of the Anglican Communion," meaning that provinces - not individual dioceses - are the Communion's "Member Churches" and take decisions as such.

Or, to look at it another way closer to Canterbury's backyard, is the established Church of England a church, or is it simply a collection of individual dioceses, any of which, for example, may choose at will to leave the C of E and/or the Anglican Communion?

Posted by Christopher Worthley [TypeKey Profile Page] | January 2, 2008 6:49 PM

Add your comments

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)

Reminder: At Episcopal Café, we hope to establish an ethic of transparency by requiring all contributors and commentators to make submissions under their real names. For more details see our Feedback Policy.

Advertising Space