Seven bishops report on their visit to Lambeth Palace

Thinking Anglicans reports that the seven Communion Partner bishops who met with the Archbishop of Canterbury last week have issued a statement. Thinking Anglicans notes:

It includes a recommendation to urge the adoption of the Anglican Covenant by the US General Convention. This would appear to be at odds with the views expressed recently by the ACI and the Bishop of Durham.

[The ACI and Durham recently wrote that The Episcopal Church has made itself ineligible to sign the Anglican Covenant.]

The seven Communion Partner bishops note that there are differences of opinion about ecclesiology and the meaning of interdependence in addition to these bishops’ opposition to full inclusion of gay and lesbian partnered clergy and marriage equality. They offer themselves as bishops for Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight.

Addendum, Sept 08: ELO has a link-rich report.

Click read more to read the whole report:

A Report of the meeting of the Bishops of Albany, Dallas, North Dakota, Northern Indiana, South Carolina, West Texas and Western Louisiana with the Archbishop of Canterbury on September 1, 2009.

As seven representatives of the Communion Partner Bishops, we are grateful to have met with the Archbishop of Canterbury to discuss our concern in light of the recent actions of the General Convention and the subsequent nomination of candidates “whose manner of life presents a challenge to the wider church and will lead to further strains on Communion” (General Convention 2006, B033).

At this meeting we expressed our appreciation for his post-convention reflections, “Communion, Covenant, and our Anglican Future,” and were especially interested in his statement about whether “elements” in Provinces not favorably disposed to adopt the Anglican Covenant “will be free … to adopt the Covenant as a sign of their wish to act in a certain level of mutuality with parts of the communion.”

Given our commitment to remain constituent members of both the Anglican Communion and The Episcopal Church, we are encouraged by our meeting with the Archbishop. We agree with him that our present situation is “an opportunity for clarity, renewal and deeper relation with one another – and also Our Lord and his Father in the power of the Spirit.” We, too, share a desire to “intensify existing relationships” by becoming part of a “Covenanted” global Anglican body in communion with the See of Canterbury. We also pray and hope that “in spite of the difficulties this may yet be the beginning of a new era of mission and spiritual growth for all who value the Anglican name and heritage.”

We understand the divisions before us, not merely differences of opinion on human sexuality, but also about differing understandings of ecclesiology and questions regarding the independence or interdependence of a global communion of churches in discerning the mind of Christ together. However, we also shared our concern that the actions of General Convention have essentially rejected the teaching of 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 as the mind of the Communion, and raise a serious question whether a Covenant will be adopted by both Houses at General Convention 2012.

At the same time we are mindful that General Convention Resolution D020 “commended the Anglican Covenant proposed in the most recent text of the Covenant Design Group (the “Ridley Cambridge Draft”) and any successive draft to dioceses for study during the coming triennium” and invited dioceses and congregations to “consider the Anglican Covenant proposed draft as a document to inform their understanding of and commitment to our common life in the Anglican Communion.”

Therefore, at this time we make the following requests of Communion minded members of the The Episcopal Church and the wider Anglican Communion:

1. We encourage dioceses, congregations and individuals of The Episcopal Church to pray and work for the adoption of an Anglican Communion Covenant.

2. We encourage dioceses and congregations to study and endorse the Anglican Communion Covenant when it is finally released and to urge its adoption by General Convention, or to endorse the first three sections of the Ridley Cambridge Draft and the Anaheim Statement, and to record such endorsements on the Communion Partners website.

3. We encourage bishops, priests, deacons and laypersons of The Episcopal Church who support the adoption of the Anglican Communion Covenant to record such endorsement on the Communion Partners website.

4. We encourage dioceses and congregations, in the spirit of GC2009 Resolution D030* [sic], to engage in “companion domestic mission relationships among dioceses and congregations within The Episcopal Church.”

5. We encourage Bishops exercising jurisdiction in The Episcopal Church to call upon us for service in needed cases of Delegated Episcopal Pastoral Oversight.

6. We encourage relationships between Communion Partners and primates, bishops, provinces and dioceses in other parts of the Communion, in order the enhance the ministry we share in the life of the Communion.

7. We invite primates and bishops of the Communion to offer their public support to these efforts.

+Mark J. Lawrence, South Carolina

+Gary R. Lillibridge, West Texas

+Edward S. Little, II, Northern Indiana

+William H. Love, Albany

+D. Bruce MacPherson, Western Louisiana

+Michael G. Smith, North Dakota

+James M. Stanton, Dallas

*ed. note: D030 refers to the Blockade of the Gaza Strip – we believe the bishop intended to refer to B030

Posted by
Category : The Lead

Comment Policy
Our comment policy requires that you use your real first and last names and provide an email address (your email will not be published). Comments that use non-PG rated language, include personal attacks, that are not provable as fact or that we deem in any way to to be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted. We also ask that you limit your comments to no more than four comments per story per day.

  1. Peter Pearson

    Once again, is our way of discerning God’s Will only valid when it comes to the conclusions that we want or like? If and when it is not, are we free to change the rules unilaterally? Is being part of the Anglican Communion, which we have not always been, of greater importance than being faithful to God’s Will for us? They didn’t go to see the pope for crying out loud.

  2. Where in the Gospel does it say we have to think alike? The Gospel is about knowing and loving God and being so filled with his love that it overflows the bounds of our being to embrace everyone in the world.

    Why are Anglicans wasting so much time, money and effort over this Anglican Covenant? We have the Creeds and our various Baptismal Covenants. They are sufficient were we to concentrate on them.

    Just think how many of the hungry could have been fed, naked clothed, ill cared for, helpless helped with the money that has so far been spent on this Covenant.

    If we assign a dollar value to every hour spent thinking, writing, traveling, staying in hotels, typing not to mention the obvious costs, how much money coul have been given to the poor?

  3. Sister GloriaMarie, my sentiments, exactly. Thank you. What a huge waste of money, time, and attention on this covenant, which has caused no end of controversy, and it’s not even in place. I’d like it to die a quick and merciful death, but that is not to be. We must go through the charade of of examining it, mulling it over, and, I hope, deciding against it in the end, unless we are fortunate, and the covenant dies before the TEC convention in GC12.

    June Butler

  4. Bruce Garner

    Is this to be just a “bishops and primates thing” that excludes other clergy and lay folks? These seven, of all people, should understand The Episcopal Church’s polity better than that. I still have not been convinced of the need of any covenant. The only purpose I see in what has been presented thusfar is a mechanism to insure that some folks are kept “under control” or at least on a tight leash. Again, where is the input of the laity and non-episcopal clergy?

    Bruce Garner

  5. Well said, Bruce. If other provinces get to keep TEC on a tight leash, do we get to keep Nigeria on a tight leash?

    (Come on, +Rowan, wake up and smell the coffee!)

Comments are closed.