Support the Café

Search our Site

Anglican Covenant: Don’t Panic

Anglican Covenant: Don’t Panic

Helpful reflection on the Anglican Covenant, entitled, “Don’t Panic”…posted at No Anglican Covenant:

In his recent defence of the controversial fourth section of the proposed Anglican Covenant, Andrew Goddard said that there were some reforms of the Instruments of Communion in process:

Numerous resignations from the standing committee, concerns about the ACC’s new constitution, and the principled refusal of many to attend both Lambeth 2008 and the Primates’ Meeting in Dublin indicate that major reforms of the instruments are now urgent, not just for their own sake but for the sake of the Covenant. The Inter-Anglican Standing Commission for Unity, Faith and Order is considering such reforms. Unless these reforms come soon there is the real danger that Section 4 will simply plant this new promising seed of the Covenant in shallow soil or among thorns.

Mark Harris, a thoughtful and reliable Episcopalian blogger took this to imply that there were some changes to the Covenant being considered. This is a reasonable inference if Goddard is correct. Naturally, we at No Anglican Covenant Central were concerned, so we decided to check at the source.

Here is the response from the Revd Canon Alyson Barnett-Cowan, the Anglican Communion’s Unity Faith and Order Officer.

ACC 14 gave the following task to IASCUFO:

Resolution 14.08 (g) “IASCUFO to undertake a study of the role and responsibilities in the Communion of the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lambeth Conference, the Anglican Consultative Council and the Primates’ Meeting; the ecclesiological rationale of each, and the relationships between them, in line with the Windsor Continuation Group Report, and to report back to ACC-15”.

This work is being taken forward by a working group of IASCUFO which is looking at the history of the Instruments and writings about them, consulting within the Communion, and developing a discussion paper.

The mandate for IASCUFO taking this on came before most of the the concerns listed in the Living Church article occured, and they are not (so far as I can tell) part of IASCUFO’s consideration. The work is primarily one of ecclesiology – not, of course, without political ramifications, but politics are not the focus of the task.

The Covenant simply lists the Instruments and does not speak to their interrelationship. Thus there is work to be done here, not least because many Anglicans have different ideas as to how they should best be interconnected to strengthen the Communion. It is not envisaged that this work would lead to amendments to the Covenant.

IASCUFO has no power of its own. Any recommendations it would make would go to the Instruments themselves. Were there to be any concrete proposals for substantial changes that touched the Constitution they would have to go to the Provinces for consideration. But I doubt we’ll be very far down that road soon. There will be a progress report, and probably some questions for discussion, at ACC-15.

In other words, Don’t Panic. Yes, there’s some work being done on the Instruments of Communion, but not for the reasons cited by Goddard. And there are no foreseen implications for the proposed Anglican Covenant.


Café Comments?

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 be counter to our mission of fostering respectful dialogue will not be posted.

1 Comment
Oldest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Michael Russell

Barnett-Cowan’s+ reply just highlights again what a total mess the Anglican Covenant it and what a meaningless farce it is to pass it in this form.

The supposedly “final draft” is not final so we are being asked to endorse a framework that is being tinkered with even as we are forbidden from proposing alterations ourselves.

Most damning is the admission that the Covenant fails to lay out the interrelationship among the 4 IU. Any high school civics student would have noted that absence, and it was pointed out to the framers at the time. Indeed all we have seen so far is the battle between the Primates and the ACC for supremacy. The ACC apparently won leading a group of Global South Primates to go off in a sulk.

No one should sign such a document when it is unfinished, not even to make ++ Rowan feel better. It should either be withdrawn until it is fully framed, or rebooted into a process that includes everyone and veers away from the singular purpose of punishing TEC or creating some Instrument of Discipline.

Support the Café
Past Posts

The Episcopal Café seeks to be an independent voice, reporting and reflecting on the Episcopal Church and the Anglican tradition.  The Café is not a platform of advocacy, but it does aim to tell the story of the church from the perspective of Progressive Christianity.  Our collective sympathy, as the Café, lies with the project of widening the circle of inclusion within the church and empowering all the baptized for the role to which they have been called as followers of Christ.

The opinions expressed at the Café are those of individual contributors, and, unless otherwise noted, should not be interpreted as official statements of a parish, diocese or other organization. The art and articles that appear here remain the property of their creators.

All Content  © 2017 Episcopal Café