Total visitors right now: 87

Click here to check your private inbox.

Welcome to Stand Firm!

A Quick Analysis of the Lambeth Reflections Group That Is Writing the Statement

Saturday, July 26, 2008 • 5:00 am

Hopefully by now, all of us have learned that the naming of any committee, group, commission, council, or pretty much anything with more than one person is [drum roll] a political decision.

So I’m intrigued by the makeup of this group tasked with writing what is purportedly the mind of the Lambeth Conference’s discussions.  With 16 members, not all of the Communion’s 38 Provinces can be represented by a member.  So a look at the geography and theology of the 16 members if quite fruitful.

Of course, there is one province—one out of all 38 provinces—who gets more than one representative on this group.

One guess as to which province that is.

So we have 1/8 of the group made up of bishops of TEC—and of course those bishops are both revisionists.  Bishop Alexander is a quite radical revisionist, who attempts to obscure that radical theology behind a cloak of intellect—something that Presiding Bishop Jefferts Schori has been unable to do.  You will recall also that he ran for Presiding Bishop, and I suspect that had he won he would have maintained a far more, shall we say, Griswoldian ethos of civility and vague scholarship rather than the Schoria-esque ethos that we in TEC have all come to know and love.  In other words, though I have no idea of how someone like Bishop Lee voted, the “let’s-drop-anchor-here-until-they-all-fall-asleep” group of institutional revisionists would have wanted Alexander hands-down over Jefferts Schori, the choice of the full-steam-ahead-and-damn-the-torpedoes group of idealistic revisionists.  Thank God we got Bishop Jefferts Schori!

Bishop Wolf is quite easily our favorite revisionist bishop—favored because she is inexiplicably the only revisionist bishop that is capable of showing grace to her enemies, and because she has become a Windsor bishop, which means she’s willing to wave a hand at the notion of waiting for the Communion before Running Out And Being All Prophetic. 

So—we have two revisionist bishops, representing the Province that caused this Lambeth to lose one-quarter of its bishops, and both are on the “Reflections Group” tasked with writing the mind of the [remaining] bishops of the Communion.

Given this Anglican Communion, and given this Archbishop of Canterbury, and given this TEC, that is, I think, fitting.

But the acknowledgement that this is a political decision means that actions that are taken may be political by both sides.  So it will be interesting to see what the conservatives represented on the group will do. 

Although we can’t be certain, we can at least estimate that the representatives from Kenya, Central Africa, the Southern Cone, the Indian Ocean, Jerusalem and the Middle East, the Sudan, Tanzania, and the West Indies are traditional in theology.

That leaves Canada, the Church of England, Hong Kong, Ireland, Southern Africa, and South India unaccounted for.

There may be surprises in both of my estimates however, towards either end.  So I’m asking you to go to this Open Thread link and put in what you know about the players on this group

For your interest, below is a list of the provinces who are NOT represented on the Reflections Group [I’ve already deleted Nigeria, Uganda, and Rwanda from the list].

The Anglican Church in Aotearoa, New Zealand & Polynesia

The Anglican Church of Australia

The Church of Bangladesh

Igreja Episcopal Anglicana do Brasil

The Anglican Church of Burundi

Iglesia Anglicana de la Region Central de America

Province de L’Eglise Anglicane Du Congo

The Nippon Sei Ko Kai (The Anglican Communion in Japan)

The Anglican Church of Korea

The Church of the Province of Melanesia

La Iglesia Anglicana de Mexico

The Church of the Province of Myanmar (Burma)

The Church of North India (United)

The Church of Pakistan (United)

The Anglican Church of Papua New Guinea

The Episcopal Church in the Philippines

The Scottish Episcopal Church

Church of the Province of South East Asia

The Church in Wales

The Church of the Province of West Africa

8 Comments • Print-friendlyPrint-friendly w/commentsShare on Facebook

I believe Sue Moxley from Canada is revisionist through and through.  I don’t have any personal knowledge except what I have read.

[1] Posted by Canuck on 07-26-2008 at 05:49 AM • top

...she did take over from Red Fred so I think that is indicative in itself.

[2] Posted by Canuck on 07-26-2008 at 06:03 AM • top

The Anglican Church of Australia are in the most powerful position of all, chairing and probably in charge of minuting the Listeners’ Indaba reflections through the ABC appointed +Perth, a liberal by all accounts, presumably his is the casting vote if the rest are perfectly balanced.

[3] Posted by Pageantmaster ن on 07-26-2008 at 06:09 AM • top

Even though not officially, both Mexico and Brazil are represented by the 2 TEC representatives, since they are puppets.

[4] Posted by Henry on 07-26-2008 at 07:23 AM • top

I thought Peter Akinola was responsible for the absences from Lambeth. Gene Robinson has no authority to demand Nigerian bishops stay home. Akinola is a big boy—to big to whine “That American bishop made me do this.”

[5] Posted by TBWSantaFe on 07-26-2008 at 08:58 AM • top

#5 Is that a line from the TEC cheatsheet?

[6] Posted by Pageantmaster ن on 07-26-2008 at 09:25 AM • top

If you think Bishop Wolf is “revisionist,” you don’t know Bishop Wolf.

[7] Posted by Mark D. on 07-28-2008 at 06:35 AM • top

Are you kidding, Mark D.?
Have you ever read anything she’s written or said?

[8] Posted by heart on 07-28-2008 at 06:44 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 about the crisis in our church. 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. 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 that you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm, its board of directors, or its site administrators.