March 23, 2017

July 10, 2012

TEC Presents Challenges for Church of England, Anglican Communion

Psst - ++Rowan.  See what happens when you fail to discipline a rebellious child?

They argued against the prospect of homosexual weddings in churches and even suggested that the issue could lead to the disestablishment of the Church of England. But many within the Church have questioned the document.

Yet in a vote at the Episcopal General Convention in Indianapolis, the American House of Bishops has voted by almost three to one to adopt a special rite called “The Witnessing and Blessing of a Lifelong Covenant.” Last night it was also expected to receive the full support of other delegates.

The Convention has also approved new guidelines making it easier to ordain transsexuals as clergy.

The US votes are bound to prompt a fresh challenge within the Church of England.


Share this story:

Recent Related Posts



Yes, now what is Rowan going to do? He seems to have been majorly dissed by TEC - he and the rest of the Anglican COmmunion.

[1] Posted by Nellie on 7-10-2012 at 08:51 PM · [top]

RowanRowan who?

[2] Posted by Jeffersonian on 7-10-2012 at 09:04 PM · [top]

Communion? What Communion?

[3] Posted by polycarp on 7-10-2012 at 09:16 PM · [top]

I think we have to accept the vote by CoE to decline the Covenant as ample evidence that they are on board with TEC and ACoC and have already abandoned the GS churches. What TEC did is a challenge only in that they remain 6 months or a year ahead of CoE in terms of innovations.

[4] Posted by tjmcmahon on 7-10-2012 at 09:28 PM · [top]

I think it would be a good idea to read Romans 1 tonight.

[5] Posted by Jeffersonian on 7-10-2012 at 09:36 PM · [top]

I’m sure RW is glad he’s retiring.  He’s been deliberately kicking the can down the road planning his exit strategy the past few years.

Just because he basically agrees with TEo, I’ve got to think he still views them as being the biggest self-indulgent weenies ever.

[6] Posted by Bill2 on 7-10-2012 at 10:34 PM · [top]

he still views them as being the biggest self-indulgent weenies ever.

Didn’t realize he was that perceptive.

[7] Posted by Jackie on 7-10-2012 at 10:40 PM · [top]

Really, to be fair to him, I think he’s pretty bent out of shape.  However much he may sympathize with TEC personally, he has to contend with a larger Anglican communion that is nowhere near ready to tolerate TEC’s mad dash to antinomianism.  What he, and the next Archbishop of Canterbury, are facing is an increasing chance of a split in the Communion.  Whatever he may think of what they’re doing, the fact that they are acting like a bull in a china shop cannot be endearing them to him…

[8] Posted by Father Wash-Ashore on 7-10-2012 at 11:48 PM · [top]

And judging by the votes this week TEO does not care what the rest of the communion thinks.

[9] Posted by bob+ on 7-11-2012 at 12:01 AM · [top]

“Robert Key, the former Tory MP for Salisbury and a member of the Synod, said: “I have no doubt that when we have drawn our conclusions about women bishops we will move on to the whole question of gay marriage because we have to come to a conclusion about that … it is certainly not going to go away.””

Excellent.  Usually liberals like Robert Key try to avoid publicly declaring their intentions ahead of time.  They would prefer that CofE pew-potatoes think that there is no connection between women bishops now, and gay marriage further along.

Many members of CofE General Synod like this.  They don’t want to think that there is a real conflict and that sooner or later they will be forced to choose sides.  So its great to see this public statement - its one small beneficial side-effect of TEC approving SSBs.

[10] Posted by MichaelA on 7-11-2012 at 04:03 AM · [top]

Sigh. The time for disciplining this rebellious child isLOOOOOONG past. No doubt, P/TECUSA should have taken more decisive action in disciplining bishops like Pike and Spong and clergy like Righter. I know Righter was brought to trial but no discipline was offered as “there is no core doctrine in TEC”. Well ain’t that lovely, no doctrine when it suits the *agenda* and pleased as punch when the doctrine is changed suit them.

[11] Posted by SC blu cat lady on 7-11-2012 at 05:56 AM · [top]

Bob+,  Many leaders in TEC stopped caring what the rest of the WWAC thinks years ago. Look at how many times they have made a promise not to do something then have gone home and turned right around and did what they were asked NOT to do. Lets not kid ourselves. They only care about pleasing themselves and pushing their agenda forward. Self-centered bunch of #@$$........  Truthfully, they need to get honest with themselves and become Unitarians.  That would be the truly honest thing to do.  Leave us Anglicans alone!

[12] Posted by SC blu cat lady on 7-11-2012 at 06:56 AM · [top]

The one possible positive I could see coming out of this would be if the GS Churches come together (conference call would be fine) and plan a takeover of the ACC this fall.  Walk in, suspend the ACO-TEC agenda, vote TEC off the island, replace the Standing Committee, install one delegate-one vote (get rid of the regional voting nonsense that gives 5 million westerners control of 3/5 of the voting power), and then get about the business of the Communion.  If Wales, NZ, Canada, CoE don’t like it, they are free to leave too.
I doubt it will happen, but it would address a lot of Communion issues in about 2 hours.

[13] Posted by tjmcmahon on 7-11-2012 at 06:59 AM · [top]

TJ, I have had similar day dreams. If only…......

[14] Posted by SC blu cat lady on 7-11-2012 at 07:23 AM · [top]

I suspect we will be hearing from the African Bishops on this topic soon.  And they won’t mince words…

[15] Posted by B. Hunter on 7-11-2012 at 07:33 AM · [top]

Trouble is, TJ, the GS folks seem to have taken their ball and gone home, having withdrawn from seat on the various councils of the church.

[16] Posted by evan miller on 7-11-2012 at 08:49 AM · [top]

Its not really trouble.  When they were on the various councils, their voice was muted or twisted by the machinations of ABC and the ACO bureaucracy.  Now the GS can speak clearly.

[17] Posted by MichaelA on 7-11-2012 at 09:48 AM · [top]

On the contrary, now the revisionists can simply say, “well look, now they complain about every decision the official organs of the AC makes, but they voluntarily left the decision making bodies of the Communion, so they have no right to complain.”  It’s like the old, “If you don’t vote, don’t complain about who gets elected.”  We all know that the machinations of the ABC and the various organs of the Communion had undermined any influence the orthodox had, but to the watching world, it doesn’t play well.

[18] Posted by evan miller on 7-11-2012 at 10:10 AM · [top]

“On the contrary, now the revisionists can simply say,...”

And what is the problem with that?

It is surely far better than the Revisionists being able to say: “Look, the ____ committee of the Anglican Communion has investigated TEC actions and have said that further discernment is needed so we mustn’t condemn TEC until that process is finalised.  And look, Archbishop __ is a member of that committee and he is conservative, so that shows the committee is representative of the whole Communion”.

The wider world doesn’t care one way or another if the orthodox are members of this or that committee, but it takes notice when Christian leaders speak out clearly.

[19] Posted by MichaelA on 7-11-2012 at 06:03 PM · [top]

Evan- I am perfectly content if the GS just sets up legitimate separate structures and lets TEC and CoE and the other revisionist members of the Communion collapse under the weight of their own folly.  I imagine that Kearon and RW and KJS have all manner of plans and maneuvers in hand to deal with any attempt to instill democracy into the ACC, in any case.  RW and Kearon have had 6 months warning on this, so we can assume they have indabas planned, torn the pages out of Roberts Rules, all that sort of thing.  No doubt a statement has been prepared that the actions of GC2012 “are not helpful.”  This statement will be adopted by a 51-49 majority at ACC, and then rewritten by the Standing Committee to say that TEC’s prophetic actions should not impede the Indaba process.

I will not be at all surprised if most of the GS doesn’t bother to attend ACC at all.  But hopefully, they will be sufficiently organized that they either ALL show up, or no one does.  If I had my druthers, just from a documentary point of view, I would like to see a formal statement of broken communion along the lines of the SE Asia Synod statement from 2003, only this time signed by the Primates and HoBs or Synods of all the GS churches. But, obviously, it is ultimately up to the GS Churches as to how they deal with this, and our duty is to do what we can to support them.

[20] Posted by tjmcmahon on 7-11-2012 at 06:45 PM · [top]

I suspect we will be seeing things emerge post GC from the global south, ACNA and evangelical wing of the CoE.  Probably more formal walking apart.  I’m quite sure they’ve been anticipating this as well.  And I also tend to think that, by this time, they can rightly claim that all of the so-called instruments of unity have failed, so no one can plausibly argue that they should go back to the primates meeting, ACC, AoC or who or whatever for another round of indaba.  Williams has blown them all up.  We are at the point where there are now essentially two Anglican communions.  In fact, I wonder who will show up at the next enthronment of the next AoC, depending on who it is.

[21] Posted by pendennis88 on 7-12-2012 at 09:35 AM · [top]

Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.

Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.