Support the Café
Search our site

Covenant: The Unfriendliness and Place-at-the Table Arguments

Covenant: The Unfriendliness and Place-at-the Table Arguments

The Revd. Dr. Marilyn McCord Adams refutes the arguments that The Episcopal Church should sign up to the proposed Anglican Covenant or at least continue the discussion of the document and not refuse it outright. Shared with permission:

Some who wouldn’t have proposed the idea of the covenant in the first place, are inclined to feel that–now that the covenant is put before us–it would be unfriendly to other Anglican Communion members to reject it outright, rather than greeting it with some kind of muffled acceptance.

Our reply is that when it comes to the Gospel agenda, it is not unfriendly to disagree vigorously. Disagreement and debate is one tool the Holy Spirit uses to bring all of us fallible human beings closer to the truth. Fog and stalling does not.

Some argue that it is important not to reject the covenant outright, because we need to keep a place at the Anglican Communion table–a place that would be forfeited by voting the covenant down.

We reply with a question: who sets the table? Here the Windsor Report muddied the waters by asserting its presumptive legitimacy. Even before anyone had agreed to anything the Primates were moving to enforce its punitive consequences on TEC and New Westminster.

If the majority of provinces had signed on to the covenant, then it would be reasonable to suppose that only covenanters have a place at the table. But it is not the case that most provinces have signed on. Not even the Church of England has signed on. So it cannot be right to think that TEC will have a place at the table only if it accords the covenant some measure of acceptance. In advance of a covenant landslide, the criteria for Anglican Communion membership should be what they were before.

Perhaps +Ian Douglas will say that in fact the powers-that-be will deny TEC a place at the table if we reject the covenant outright. This hypothesis presupposes that the powers-that-be will apply exclusionary procedures unevenly. The Church of England’s refusal yet to accept has not excluded it. The Church of Scotland’s rejection has not denied it a place at the table.

But if the powers-that-be would do that, why would TEC want to collude with such unjust procedures? Why shouldn’t TEC rather join the Church of Scotland in rejecting the covenant and roll up its sleeves to work for fresh expressions of Anglican Communion around the globe?

McCord Adams is a Patron of the No Anglican Covenant Coalition. Find more information here.

Dislike (0)
0 0 vote
Article Rating
Facebooktwitterpinterestlinkedinmail

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.

2 Comments
Newest
Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Leslie Scoopmire

Listen, even if we agree withe the Covenant we will be denied a seat at the table. That's the whole point of the Covenant. And why should we approve it if the CoE has voted it down?

Like (0)
Dislike (0)
Bill Moorhead

The other day a visiting priest from the Scottish Episcopal Church referred to the Anglican Covenant as "90% sugar and 10% strychnine."

Would we feed our families such a concoction on the grounds that it is, after all, 90% sugar?

Like (0)
Dislike (0)
Facebooktwitterrss
Support the Café
Past Posts
2020_001

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