Thursday, September 2, 2010

Welcome to Stand Firm!

Want to advertise on Stand Firm? Click here for rates and info

Breaking: GAFCON Communique and letter from North American bishops to GAFCON primates

Friday, August 29, 2008 • 8:16 am


GAFCON Communiqué on establishment of Primates Council and Fellowship

Communiqué (via email)
Setting up the Council and the Fellowship

The first meeting of the GAFCON Primates' Council has taken place in London on Wednesday 20th to Friday 22nd August. The twofold task of the Council is 'to authenticate and recognise confessing Anglican jurisdictions, clergy and congregations and to encourage all Anglicans to promote the gospel and defend the faith.' The Primates have therefore laid the basis for the future work of both the Council and the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans (FCA). The GAFCON movement continues its advance.

The Council will consist of Primates assisted by an Advisory Board which will work with them on fulfilling the aims of the movement. In addition, a Secretariat has been created. We are very grateful to God for his guidance and blessing on the Jerusalem Conference. We believe that the Jerusalem Declaration provides for a viable way of helping to deal with the crisis in the Anglican Communion brought about through the disobedience to Scripture by some in North America and elsewhere.

The present reality

We maintain that three new facts of the Anglican Communion must be faced. We are past the time when they can be reversed.

First, some Anglicans have sanctified sinful practices and will continue to do so whatever others may think. Second, churches and even dioceses affected by this disobedience have rightly withdrawn fellowship while wishing to remain authentic Anglicans. So-called 'border-crossing' is another way of describing the provision of recognition and care for those who have been faithful to the teachings of Holy Scripture. Third, there is widespread impaired and broken sacramental communion amongst Anglicans with far-reaching global implications. The hope that we may somehow return to the state of affairs before 2003 is an illusion.

Any sound strategy must accommodate itself to these facts.

Developing the GAFCON movement

GAFCON remains a gospel movement. It is far from saying that its membership are the only true Anglicans or the only gospel people in the Anglican Communion. We thank God that this is not the case. But the movement recognises the acute spiritual dangers of a compromised theology and aims to be a resource and inspiration for those who wish to defend and promote the biblical gospel.

The Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans will function as a means of sharing in this great task. We invite individuals, churches, dioceses, provinces and parachurch organisations who assent to the Jerusalem Declaration to signify their desire to become members of the Fellowship via the GAFCON web-site or written communication with the Secretariat. The Fellowship will develop networks, commissions and publications intended to defend and promote the biblical gospel in ways which support one another.

At the same time, the Council and its Advisory Board will seek to deal with the problems of those who have confessed the biblical faith in the face of hostility and found the need on grounds of conscience and in matters of great significance to break the normal bonds of fellowship in the name of the gospel. For the sake of the Anglican Communion this is an effort to bring order out of the chaos of the present time and to make sure as far as possible that some of the most faithful Anglican Christians are not lost to the Communion. It is expected that priority will be given to the possible formation of a province in North America for the Common Cause Partnership.

Lambeth 2008

Noting the reference to building bridges with GAFCON in the Archbishop of Canterbury's concluding Presidential Address at Lambeth, and that the Lambeth Conference itself made no decisions about the future of the Communion, we are grateful that there is an acknowledgement that Lambeth 1.10 of 1998 remains an authentic expression of the mind of the Communion. We also note the renewed call for moratoria on the consecration of bishops who are homosexually partnered and the blessing of same-sex unions as well so-called 'border-crossing'. Likewise there is mention of the creation of a 'Pastoral Forum' to look after disaffected parishes or dioceses and continued work on an Anglican Covenant.

We hope in due course to offer a longer response to Lambeth. Meanwhile we are saddened that the Conference did not offer a more effective way forward than what is proposed. Our immediate difficulty is that the voice of Lambeth 2008 is seriously weakened because it merely repeated what has been said by the Primates' Meeting (in Gramada early 2003, Lambeth October 2003, Dromantine, February 2005 and Dar es Salaam, February 2007) and which has proved to change nothing. Indeed the Windsor Continuation Group itself made the same point, 'The three moratoria have been requested several times: Windsor (2004); Dromantine (2005); Dar es Salaam (2007) and the requests have been less than wholeheartedly embraced on all sides… The failure to respond presents us with a situation where if the three moratoria are not observed the Communion is likely to fracture.'

But the Communion fractured in 2003, when our fellowship was 'torn at its deepest level.' It seems that the facts which we have identified as the new reality have not yet been recognised as such, and we are therefore continually offered the same strategies which mean further delay and unlikely results. Indeed, delay itself seems to be a strategy employed by some in order to resolve the issue through weariness. The Anglican Covenant will take a long time to be widely accepted and may have no particular force when it does. The idea of 'moratoria' has never dealt with the underlying problem as is shown by the equivalence of cross-border care and protection with the sexual sins which have caused the problems.

In any case, some North American Bishops appear to have indicated already that they will not keep to them. It appears that people living in a homosexual unions continue to be ordained in some dioceses in contravention to Lambeth 1.10. In principle, this is no different from consecrating a bishop who adopts the same pattern of life, or indeed, of blessing same-sex unions. The idea of the Pastoral Forum has only now emerged but has never been discussed with those actually affected by the innovations which have created the problems with which we are trying to deal (see appended letter). If the Panel of Reference did not work, it is unclear how the Pastoral Forum will succeed.

Given that some esteemed colleagues from the Global South have strongly commended the Windsor Process to us, we are reluctant to say that it cannot work. But there is nothing new here such as to make us hesitate from the course we are taking, given the urgency of the situations with which we are dealing and the realities already on the ground. As they themselves remark, 'the Anglican Communion as a communion of ordered churches is at the probable brink of collapse'. We warmly appreciate the good words which they have written about GAFCON and look forward to co-operation with them in the future as we ourselves try to avoid that collapse and renew the Communion.

The Most Rev Peter Akinola, Primate of Nigeria
The Most Rev Gregory Venables, Primate of The Southern Cone
The Most Rev Emmanuel Kolini, Primate of Rwanda
The Most Rev Valentino Mokiwa, Primate of Tanzania
The Most Rev Benjamin Nzmibi, Primate of Kenya
The Most Rev Henry Orombi, Primate of Uganda


Letter from US bishops to GAFCON

Tuesday, August 19th, 2008

The Most Rev'd Peter J. Akinola
Primate of the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion)
Chairman of the GAFCON Primates Council

Your Grace:

These reflections are presented to you for the consideration of the Primates Council.

We are bishops who serve in North America, under the canonical authority of the Primates of the Anglican Church of Kenya, the Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion), the Anglican Church of Rwanda, the Province of the Southern Cone and the Anglican Church of Uganda. We represent approximately 300 congregations, with more than 450 clergy and an Average Sunday Attendance of 50,000.

We are profoundly grateful for the privilege of serving as Bishops during this critical time in the life of the Anglican Communion. We have been blessed by the encouragement that we have each received from our Primates and the House of Bishops of our respective Provinces. We have experienced God's favor through their prayers and fellowship.

As requested we have carefully studied the Reflections of the Windsor Continuation Group – in particular the section that refers to our ministry within the North America. We offer these comments:

1. While we appreciate the sincerity and work of those who took part in the Windsor Continuation Group, we were grieved to note that the carefully balanced recommendations proposed by the Primates at their meetings in Dromantine and Dar es Salaam have been abandoned in favor of these new proposals without acknowledgement that the primary reason for their failure was their unilateral rejection by The Episcopal Church.

2. We note that the Pastoral Forum proposal has been developed without any consultation with those most directly affected in North America. This had led to a number of serious misunderstandings with regard to the situation at the local level and the relationship between the bishops, clergy and congregations and their sponsoring provinces.

3. We would also observe that the various analogies offered, for example, that we are disaffected children being reunited with our parents or that we are being placed in a holding bay before being restored to our "proper province" are both demeaning and unacceptable.

4. As was also the case with the statements from Dromantine and Dar es Salaam we reject the moral equivalence that is now explicitly asserted between those who continue to support the blessing of same sex unions and the ordination of persons involved in same gender unions in deliberate violation of the teaching of the Communion and those who are offering pastoral oversight for those alienated by these actions.

5. We have consistently observed that the current leadership of The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada have embraced a theological and doctrinal stance that is diametrically opposed to the teaching of the Communion and more specifically that of our host provinces and our individual bishops, clergy and congregations. Consequently we can envision no way in which we could be part of Pastoral Forum in which either Church exercises any leadership role.

6. While we welcomed the comments of the Windsor Continuation Group that "ways of halting litigation must be explored," those of us who are the subject of pernicious litigation initiated by The Episcopal Church find these rather tentative comments fall far short of what is needed for us to even consider any serious engagement with the proposed structures. Until the litigation is halted and a settlement achieved there is no possibility that we can enter into any formal agreements with any representatives of The Episcopal Church.

We are grateful for the opportunity to respond to your request and are more than ready to

elaborate on these comments. We have discussed them with the leadership of the Common Cause Partnership and assure you that they come with their unanimous support.

In Christ's service:

The Rt. Rev'd Bill Atwood, Anglican Church of Kenya
The Rt. Rev'd John Guernsey, Anglican Church of Uganda
The Rt. Rev'd Don Harvey, Anglican Province of the Southern Cone
The Rt. Rev'd Martyn Minns, Church of Nigeria (Anglican Communion)
The Rt. Rev'd Chuck Murphy, Anglican Church of Rwanda

57 Comments • Print-friendlyPrint-friendly w/commentsShare on Facebook
Comments:

Wow!  Plain speaking.  Acknowledgement of the facts fo the case.  An apparent willingness to take action and not wait for the next William inspired talkathon.

I’m actually impressed.

BUt, then, hearing Christians stand up at all in the West especially in the UK, is impressive.  We’re so spiritually startved here and leadership starved too.  And I speak as a Catholic.

[1] Posted by jedinovice on 08-29-2008 at 07:26 AM • top

This is why I love Christianity- Love and Truth.  No hiding in the bushes or redefining words.  The true Church is well and well led.  Thanks be to God.

[2] Posted by Elizabeth on 08-29-2008 at 07:34 AM • top

The charm offensive doesn’t seem to be working.  They haven’t got one good thing to say about RWs plan to save the Communion. 

[W]e are therefore continually offered the same strategies which mean further delay and unlikely results. Indeed, delay itself seems to be a strategy employed by some in order to resolve the issue through weariness.

The Anglican Covenant will take a long time to be widely accepted and may have no particular force when it does.

If the Panel of Reference did not work, it is unclear how the Pastoral Forum will succeed.

And then of course there is this statement…

It is expected that priority will be given to the possible formation of a province in North America for the Common Cause Partnership.

The establishment of a parallel province in North America.  The exact thing RW has been trying to prevent now emerges as the light which heralds the dawn.  This is what happens when you dither through a crisis.  You lose the initiative, and important decisions get taken from your grasp.

carl

[3] Posted by carl on 08-29-2008 at 07:36 AM • top

It is worth reading the US Bishops’ Letter referred to in this as well.

[4] Posted by Pageantmaster on 08-29-2008 at 07:38 AM • top

Its good to see the an olive branch to the other Global South Primates.

[5] Posted by RLundy on 08-29-2008 at 07:47 AM • top

Clear, determined, gospel-based, action-oriented. Good on ‘em.

For me, this is like standing next to a heavy freight train starting from a stop on an upgrade. The big diesels roar, electricity is sent to the axle-motors, the wheels may slip a little, sand is applied, slack is taken up in the couplers, and the train moves—slowly at first, but it gains speed. Finally, it is blasting down the tracks, ready to take on the Rocky Mountains.

Roll on!

[6] Posted by Gator on 08-29-2008 at 08:13 AM • top

THANKS BE TO GOD!!! 

These are men of the light, which the darkness does not recognize or understand.  I’m sure TEC is “poo-pooing” GAFCON and these statements as I type this, but they are deceived…

As one who left TEC, I am so very grateful that these brave and bold men are our leaders.

THANKS BE TO GOD, WHO WAS AND IS AND IS TO COME!!

[7] Posted by B. Hunter on 08-29-2008 at 08:30 AM • top

....“the requests (to behave) have been less than wholeheartedly embraced….”

Now there is a polite understatement.

[8] Posted by rkreed on 08-29-2008 at 08:36 AM • top

Explain why the letter by the Gafcon Primates is not a stepping back from separation, showing a willingness to try and hold things together? It seems different in tone from that of Bishop Atwood, etc…What am I not catching?

[9] Posted by FrVan on 08-29-2008 at 08:45 AM • top

Gator:  Engineer Katie, wearing a funny looking railroader’s hat, has the throttle notched out to Run 8.

[10] Posted by Piedmont on 08-29-2008 at 08:47 AM • top

The crew and passengers are aboard, the plane is taxiing for takeoff, and the captain has been cleared to go.  The first of many, many, many flights is about to begin.  The flight plan has been filed.  The destination of the airlift?  The Way, the Truth, and the Light!

[11] Posted by Cennydd on 08-29-2008 at 08:48 AM • top

Thanks be to God.

[12] Posted by CanaAnglican on 08-29-2008 at 08:54 AM • top

I suppose this Communique with the accompanying letter will be taken as bad news by Canterbury and those who favoured the Pastoral Council idea. However, if they were to give up their own unilateral proposals and look at the facts on the ground, they might find something positive for the future of the Communion.

Clearly the GAFCON Primates and Common Cause Partners are moving toward the formation of an alternative Province in North America. This decision does addre

[13] Posted by Stephen Noll on 08-29-2008 at 08:56 AM • top

Piedmont—Actually, I was describing the start-up of GAFCON primates—powerful, some slips, but rolling now. I know that the KATY train (apologies to Missouri - Kansas - Texas (MKT) railfans) is rolling full throttle. The GAFCON train is on a different track and just getting underway, but I see myself on it some day.

[14] Posted by Gator on 08-29-2008 at 09:53 AM • top

“But there is nothing new here such as to make us hesitate from the course we are taking, given the urgency of the situations with which we are dealing and the realities already on the ground…” Oh, never mind…

[15] Posted by FrVan on 08-29-2008 at 09:58 AM • top

I must not have read the same letter as you Fr Van.

Given that some esteemed colleagues from the Global South have strongly commended the Windsor Process to us, we are reluctant to say that it cannot work. But there is nothing new here such as to make us hesitate from the course we are taking, given the urgency of the situations with which we are dealing and the realities already on the ground. As they themselves remark, ‘the Anglican Communion as a communion of ordered churches is at the probable brink of collapse’. We warmly appreciate the good words which they have written about GAFCON and look forward to co-operation with them in the future as we ourselves try to avoid that collapse and renew the Communion.

Seems pretty clear to me.  Are you referring to the last sentance?  I do not interpret that as stepping back.

[16] Posted by Nikolaus on 08-29-2008 at 10:02 AM • top

Hope for the orthodox faithful; weeping and gnashing of teeth for the Loon Left; perplexing ideations for the neo-cons.

-Jim+

[17] Posted by FrJim on 08-29-2008 at 11:03 AM • top

Marvelous.  Simply marvelous.  Both the statement by the GAFCON Primates’ Council, and that by the North American bishops who are part of foreign jurisdictions (on an emergency rescue basis) are very encouraging and heartening.  As far as I know, this is the very first public statement by these outstanding leaders of the New Reformation: +Atwood, +Guernsey, +Harvey, +Minns, and +Murphy.  What a stellar team, five real successors of the apostles.

So I guess it’s official now.  We have a new label for the movement represented by GAFCON, i.e., the Fellowship of Confessing Anglicans or FCA (not to be confused with the American para-church ministry known to many of us as FCA also, i.e., the Fellowship of Christian Athletes).  The lower case letters used in the Jerusalem Communique have now been converted into upper case letters.  And a general invitation has gone out for all the orthodox to jump on the bandwagon, while explicitly acknowledging that not all orthodox Anglicans are presumed to be affiliated with this new and still controversial movement (contra +Tom Wright’s vehement protests on that score). 

Modest steps, perhaps, but clear movement in the right direction.  The impasse and stalemate seen at Lambeth 2008 has been broken.  Let Canterbury dither and delay.  He will be rightly ignored and left behind in the dust.  A new Global (Post-Colonial) Anglican future is being forged in the fires of this conflict.  Thanks be to God.

carl, you nailed it with your #3.

David Handy+
A new day is dawning for Anglicanism.  I do believe “the best is yet to come.”

[18] Posted by New Reformation Advocate on 08-29-2008 at 11:03 AM • top

It’s VERY interesting who didn’t sign the reply. Not that I doubt for an instant their resolve. This is a VERY strange, yet wonderful example of those outside at this moment to use their position move this forward.

This is marvelous in its crafting and use of position, and the inclusion The Most Rev Valentino Mokiwa, Primate of Tanzania makes this more intriguing (actually, I’m also overjoyed to see his name in print, now I have it to pray for specifically).

Great letters, but I think there so much more going on here, but each of the faithful are playing their part in what they can do best in the position they are in.

[19] Posted by Hosea6:6 on 08-29-2008 at 11:45 AM • top

“Until the litigation is halted and a settlement achieved there is no possibility that we can enter into any formal agreements with any representatives of The Episcopal Church.”

ANY agreements with TEC - would be foolhardy.
One cannot enter into or be yoked together with proven liars and unbelievers.

[20] Posted by Theodora on 08-29-2008 at 11:51 AM • top

Floridian
They are saying halting litigation is required to before any agreement can be entered.  TEC won’t stop litigation, but if TEC did halt the litigation, I’m sure any agreement would require specific performance (FULL repentance, etc.) by TEC and protections for the conservatives (uncontested property rights and oversight options).  TEC would never AGREE to do what is necessary for reconciliation or agree to the necessary protections.  Again, assuming they stopped the litigation, AGREED to repent and provide protections, they would never ACTUALLY repent and provide the protections.

The only way any of this would happen would be a miracle transformation of TEC.  Since we are Christians, we should allow for this possibility of this happening (innocent as doves), while proceeding assuming it won’t (wise as serpents).

[21] Posted by JustOneVoice on 08-29-2008 at 01:38 PM • top

To me, this letter sounds like the GAFCON primatial council is saying to the ABC “you’ve got a very narrow window of opportunity to make the Pastoral Forum work” and what they mean by the PF “working” is not necessarily what Hanford meant.  GAFCON is not yet ready to move on the CCP Province (thank goodness).  The statement says:

It is expected that priority will be given to the possible formation of a province in North America for the Common Cause Partnership.

This sounds to me like a jazzed up version of “we might think about this possibility some time in the future.”

But the implicit threat of a new Province remains.  I think this is part of the message to RW.  And that message is that they will hold off on the Province provided that he steps up to the plate.

[22] Posted by jamesw on 08-29-2008 at 02:19 PM • top

I Thank God that pessimism isn’t part of my makeup, but I’m not going to hold my breath waiting for ++Rowan to “step up to the plate.”

[23] Posted by Cennydd on 08-29-2008 at 02:26 PM • top

The communique is now on the Gafcon website, which includes an interesting postal address for the secretariat in Sydney. There is also an important note in a Steve Waring piece on the Living Church website - comments from ++Venables about the signatories and the process of checking the approval and support of any who were not in attendance. They are playing this carefully, yet moving forward with resolve. I get the impression they have listened to criticisms about how they have proceeded in the past, sought to take on board concerns from others in the Global South about courtesies and respect for those who are putting their energies in other strategic directions. Yet the FCA leadership have stated their understanding of the issues in realistic terms, and their intended course of actions with clarity. As many of us have been saying we need to wait and see what the post-Jerusalem Gafcon movement looks like, and how it will be led, I am personally encouraged by the approach reflected here. It has a very compelling ‘ring of truth’ and considered resolve about it. I am closer to ‘signing up’...

[24] Posted by Tim Harris on 08-29-2008 at 03:20 PM • top

The Gafcon Primates could have announced the immediate formation of a new N. American Province, but they didn’t other than to state their intention to move forward.  They don’t seem to have closed off avenues that Lambeth is pushing, only expressed scepticism, but left the door open if by any chance something other than talk is on the cards.  Meanwhile they just seem to be where they are.

The Elephant in the Room is moving gently but firmly watching where it places its feet.  However it doesn’t have to do much, just its being there is having an impact, including making some people very uncomfortable.

[25] Posted by Pageantmaster on 08-29-2008 at 03:34 PM • top

What is really interesting in the Living Church piece (really deserves a thread of its own) are a number of quotes from ++Venables about the proposed Primates’ meeting. The Gafcon Primates will be there, and they mean business. They are clearly in no mood for any form of Indaba groups! This was obviously discussed at the London meeting, and in essence they plan to ask some vital and important questions about what has happened since the last PM. As quoted in the Living Church piece, ++Venables has signalled to the ABC: “what happened to the pastoral scheme that the primates proposed in their communiqué following the previous meeting of the primates in Dar es Salaam, Tanzania in February 2007? Is that proposal dead and if so who made that decision?”

In other words, the ABC is being held to account for the failure of the Primates Mtg as an Instrument of Unity. ++RW has been saying the PM has been ineffective and needs to be reinvented (as an Indaba Grp!). The FCA Primates are saying ‘if it has been so ineffective, it has more to do with the leadership responsible for following through on the determinations of this Instrument of Unity.

As someone who prides himself on collegial approaches to episcopal leadership, ++RW has some hard questions to face. I suspect the attendance and active engagement of the FCA Primates in the PM is the last thing the Anglican Communion Office really want.

All of which poses some significant questions and challenges to the non-FCA Global South primates. Where will they sit with all this? They have a strong sense of the importance of the Instruments of Unity and due process, and the importance of discipline and accountability to the AC and the integrity of the Instruments of Unity. They have been urging the FCA Primates to attend and participate in Communion gatherings and processes. Will the now discuss with their FCA colleagues how to approach the Primates Mtg?

The really positive thing to my mind is that this FCA Primates’ Communique doesn’t close the door on the ABC’s declared intentions post-Lambeth. It expresses doubt (and who hasn’t?), but rightly notes that actions need to speak from this point on. The ball really is in the ABC’s court, and further talk will not really cut it. If something with teeth and resolve does emerge, well and good and is to be supported. But if not (and don’t hold your breath), the path of the FCA has been well and truly signalled.

The FCA leadership haven’t shut the door on the Lambeth/ComCon approach, but the hand is on the door handle.

[26] Posted by Tim Harris on 08-29-2008 at 04:26 PM • top

The GAFCON commission has spelled out in pretty explicit terms that it doesn’t want to commune with the Episcopal Church or the Canadian Episcopal church because of their continual defiance of the Windor agreement. From all the recent activity and meetings, it would appear that what Akinola and the others are doing is telling the Archbishop of Canterbury, either get TEC to conform to the Windsor agreement or they (we) will separate ourselves from the WWC. 

If that is indeed the case, my guess is that TEC will give in because telling the pew sitters they (TEC) either dropped out or were kicked out of the WWC because they wanted to marry homosexuals, ordain partnered homosexuals, and modernize their faith, is not going to go over very well by members regardless of how liberal they are.

So it would seem that the ABC has only two choices; 1) tell TEC to conform to the Windsor agreement or risk expulsion from the communion, or 2) go down in history with a legacy of incompetence for allowing the WWC to fall apart on his watch.

While American money is certainly a factor in ABCs reluctance to deal with the TEC with a firmer hand, I can’t see him risking his legacy for the sake of money and the wrath of the Queen of England who is reported to have told him in a meeting before Lambeth; “Don’t harm my church.” Seems the whole issue has come down to “either put up or shut up.”

[27] Posted by The Templar on 08-29-2008 at 06:51 PM • top

The Templar, first, I would say that they are quite explicit that they do not want to commune with TEC or ACoC because of their continued defiance of God.  The Windsor recommendations are a secondary issue.

Second, GAFCON is not going to withdraw from the Anglican Communion because it has no reason to.  The question is whether or not the Archbishop of Canterbury has the stomach to actually kick anyone out.  I don’t think he does.

Third, given the choose between loosing North America and loosing Africa, the Anglocentric Church will no doubt go with loosing the Africans.

[28] Posted by AndrewA on 08-29-2008 at 07:08 PM • top

Let me call attention to a significant point that hasn’t received any comments yet.  The letter to the GAFCON Primates’ Council from the North American bishops under foreign jurisdiction cites figures that show the continued growth of their networks.  +Atwood, +Guernsey, +Harvery, +Minns, and +Murphy celebrate the fact that around 300 (yes, three hundred) congregations have now realinged themselves with an orthodox province, and the total ASA of those 300 churches is about 50,000 people.

Let that remarkable number sink in, folks: 50,000 is a nice start.  Remember the early Church in Jerusalem only started with 120 before the miraculous harvest began on Pentecost.

David Handy+

[29] Posted by New Reformation Advocate on 08-29-2008 at 08:02 PM • top

[My earlier attempt at #13 got cut off, perhaps by Sarah Palin. Anyway, here is a second try.]

I suppose this Communique with the accompanying letter will be taken as bad news by Canterbury and those who favoured the Pastoral Council idea. However, if they were to give up their own unilateral proposals and look at the facts on the ground, they might find something positive for the future of the Communion.

Clearly the GAFCON (now FCA) Primates and Common Cause Partners are moving toward the formation of an alternative Province in North America. This decision does address one concern of the WCG report: that an ongoing hodge-podge of clergy, churches and dioceses under the jurisdiction of various overseas Provinces is not in the best interests of all concerned. The overseas Primates agree and have always seen these arrangements as temporary “rescue operations.” Now the burden of proof is on the Common Cause Partners to prove that they are not an assembly of mavericks. Once this province is fully formed and recognized, oversight will return to the normal structure of bishop in a diocese and council of bishops in a province.

Given the breakdown in trust among the Communion Instruments, it was simply unrealistic to think that a Pastoral Forum appointed and governed by the Archbishop of Canterbury could effectively minister to the clergy, churches and dioceses in North America that have been persecuted by TEC and ACoC and neglected by the official Instruments over the past decade. Why not accept that the Common Cause clergy, churches and dioceses have, in the providence of God, found a safe haven with the GAFCON provinces and that they can provide the best care for the time being as the new Province is born?

The formation of a North American province recognized by a significant bloc of Anglicans will result in an anomaly of overlapping official jurisdictions. This is not ideal, but neither were the actions of TEC since Lambeth 1998 which precipitated it. There is no reason to think, whatever GAFCON does, that TEC and ACoC will uphold the moratoria, at best paying lip service to them. There is no sign that these churches intend to return to the “the unchangeable standard of Christian marriage between one man and one woman as the proper place for sexual intimacy and the basis of the family” (Jerusalem Declaration, clause 8). It is likely therefore that these churches will choose to walk apart along with others who hold a false gospel. As this separation happens, other orthodox provinces will grant recognition to the new province in North America.

One other positive development of the recognition of churches in the Common Cause Partnership is that many Anglicans who have been disenfranchised from the official Communion for years will now be restored to formal fellowship.

[30] Posted by Stephen Noll on 08-29-2008 at 08:24 PM • top

RE: “One other positive development of the recognition of churches in the Common Cause Partnership is that many Anglicans who have been disenfranchised from the official Communion for years will now be restored to formal fellowship.”

Well .  . . . formal fellowship with however many provinces of the Anglican Communion recognize them, yes, and informal fellowship with the folks they’ve been in informal fellowship with all along.

But how odd that that which the Continuing churches have claimed they do not want for many decades now—because the Anglican Communion is so ungodly—is construed now as their being “disenfranchised from the official Communion.”

My prediction—there will be three “provinces” in the US before it’s all over—the CCP province, TEC, and the one that the Anglican Communion ends up recognizing.

Not really a big deal I suppose, if that happens, given the past five years.

But what an adventurous time we all live in within Anglitania.

[31] Posted by Sarah on 08-29-2008 at 08:42 PM • top

I am unclear here.  Does the following mean that the authors of the communique are asserting a new level of prohibition respecting ordination of clergy in partnered homosexual relationships—- specifcally that ordination of deacons and priests as well as consecration of bishops be prohibited?

It appears that people living in a homosexual unions continue to be ordained in some dioceses in contravention to Lambeth 1.10. In principle, this is no different from consecrating a bishop who adopts the same pattern of life, or indeed, of blessing same-sex unions.

[32] Posted by EmilyH on 08-29-2008 at 09:29 PM • top

YES

[33] Posted by Cennydd on 08-29-2008 at 09:54 PM • top

Sarah, interesting that the GAFCON Communique appeared almost simultaneously with the bold if risky choice by John McCain in choosing his running mate (or perhaps that should be shooting-mate). Would you have any objection in principle if RW suddenly announced that he was prepared to scuttle his own plan and recognize a Common Cause Province in North America? If keeping a Province in communion that explicitly violates Biblical and Lambeth norms is acceptable, why not the anomaly of parallel Provinces? Like you, I do not see much in his character and record that would lead to such an action, but is it not true that one little word from the ABC would transform the situation on the ground?

[34] Posted by Stephen Noll on 08-29-2008 at 09:59 PM • top

This is a very nice development indeed.  Thanks be to God.

[35] Posted by physician without health on 08-29-2008 at 10:17 PM • top

34 Nolls+  How do you think the rest of the primates (i.e. the non-interventionists) would react to ++Rowan if he did that?  There are 2 issues here.  1.  Some of the congregations involvec have reasons for leaving their bishops that, let’s be honest, are not all that theolgical and it’s really hard to figure out who is and isn’t pure in their departure motivation as well as who should do the deciding.  2nd, if it can happen in TEC and the ACC, there will be precedent set for parallel provinces being set up in any primates territory by any instrument of communion.  If the primates accept such usurption their provinces may be its targets one day.  It is important to recall that in the scandal of Central Africa and +Kunonga, +Rowan did not intervene.

[36] Posted by EmilyH on 08-29-2008 at 10:20 PM • top

Well, Emily, I doubt that the idea would go over very well with the Primate of Wales or the PB of TEC, but I think the signers the Global South Statement at Lambeth would be delighted. Their only major difference with the GAFCON Primates has to do with deference to Canterbury. This obstacle would be overcome in an instant if he were to recognize a Common Cause Province. As I said, I don’t think you need worry that this will happen, but it does show what bold, inspired leadership could do.

[37] Posted by Stephen Noll on 08-29-2008 at 10:39 PM • top

Over-lapping jurisdictions exist within the Eastern Orthodox Church in the USA—Serbian, Syrian, Greek, Romanian etc,. While they are trying to unite them in a common church structure, they all recognize each other as truly Orthodox Christians who can share in each other sacraments. It’s not a perfect set-up, but it does show that over-lapping jurisdictions can work. Therefore, I do think they can work with Anglicans in North America. The problem is mutual recognition of ministry and sacraments.

[38] Posted by Forever Anglican on 08-29-2008 at 11:56 PM • top

Dr. Noll wrote: “one little word from
the ABC would transform the situation on the ground” 

NO - one little word might shift things on the ground…but it would not restore the church, or the situation. 

The only choices are - Separation or Repentance WITH discipline and true, honest, complete handling of the situation with no compromise - these are the only things that will restore the church. 

This is a systemic and advanced stage metastatic cancer that would require longterm radical measures as well as admission of sin, submission to discipline, and ongoing accountability.

But more than that, it would take the Hand of God…repentance cannot be legislated or voted over, repentance is a grace, a mercy, a gift granted from above, given only to the humble, meek, teachable, who acknowledge their wretchedness and poverty of spirit.

[39] Posted by Theodora on 08-30-2008 at 03:56 AM • top

Sarah, you say:  “My prediction—there will be three “provinces” in the US before it’s all over—the CCP province, TEC, and the one that the Anglican Communion ends up recognizing.”  Does this mean that you think the Communion Partners, the inside-strategy team, will end up being recognized as the true Anglican body by Canterbury, while revisionist TEC and CCP will not?

[40] Posted by Katherine on 08-30-2008 at 06:06 AM • top

Let me piggyback on Katherine’s question (#40) to Sarah (#31), with a comment of my own.  That unspecified third group Sarah alludes to (presumably the Communion Partners group) is the one she says will end up being recognized by “the Anglican Communion.”  I regard that as a very telling way of phrasing it.

Like Katherine, I’m assuming that Sarah really means recognition by Canterbury.  But recognition by ++Rowan Williams and recognition by “the Anglican Communion” will very soon now no longer be the same thing.  When GAFCON, or I should start saying the FCA, recognizes the CCP that will mean that over half the AC (in terms of individual believers) recognizes the Common Cause group as the main legitimate Anglican presence in the US.  And if the AC itself splits (as it eventually and inevitably will), things get even more complicated.  It may be natural for a Com Con like Sarah to equate recognition by Canterbury with recognition by “the Anglican Communion,” but I for one no longer make that equation.  What counts is recogniation by the FCA; Canterbury is increasingly irrelevant.  Indeed, Canterbury can go to hell, for all I care.

David Handy+

[41] Posted by New Reformation Advocate on 08-30-2008 at 07:20 AM • top

After carefully reading this communique, I see that the Common Cause Partnership is going to be THE Anglican Presence here in North America to be recognized by the FCA.  Therefore those Provinces, Dioceses, Parishes, etc which affiliate with FCA will also recognize the Common Cause Partnership as THE Anglican Presence.  Those not in the FCA, and that would include the Communion Partners Group, Rowan Williams, TEC, etc etc are not going to recognize CCP, and that is just fine with us in the CCP.  The FCA Primates Council has correctly recognized that the ABC and ACC have self-excluded themselves by past actions from having any future relevant roles in the New Communion.  The Anglican House built upon the Rock will supplant the Anglican House built upon the Sand.  Recognition by the Anglican House built upon the Rock is all important.  Recognition by the Anglican House built upon the Sand is now irrelevant.

[42] Posted by Anglican Observer on 08-30-2008 at 07:54 AM • top

For those who are troubled by the above Bishop’s apparent reluctance to seperate from the Anglican Communion, this is my take and only my take, but let me use a mental health analogy:  When dealing with someone in the midst of a full blown psychosis (e.g. TEC, et al) one does not attempt to argue reality with same.  Nor does one simply throw out the psychotic individual.  Instead, support, respect and appropriate safety measures are put in place to protect the individual and/or others from any harm.  To say it more simply, were the Orthodox bishops to move to seperate formally from the communion, then all the “tongue waggers” could have a field day with the action.  However, by simply proceeding with the formation of a viable body of leadership for the orthodox, the ABC can do nothing about it, as he has done nothing about TEC.  I think the bishops are doing a fantastic job of confining the toxicity and evil that has inserted itself into the AC.

[43] Posted by no longer NH Episcopalian on 08-30-2008 at 08:59 AM • top

Could someone tell me what the addy of the GAFCON website is?  Thanks

[44] Posted by The Templar on 08-30-2008 at 12:57 PM • top
[45] Posted by Katherine on 08-30-2008 at 12:59 PM • top

The fact remains that the Church of England and much of the North/West has the same rebellion and sickness as TEC and the ACoC.  The same repentance is needed all across the ‘communion’.

In the short term, being recognized by Canterbury does not matter a hill of beans.

[46] Posted by Theodora on 08-30-2008 at 01:24 PM • top

Oh, by short term, I mean ‘Anglican years’ in which one year = one decade.  So, give or take 30-40 years, maybe the North/West provinces will either be reformed or circumnavigated with new provinces formed around a Primate-Centered Biblical Anglican Communion.  Sad, but probable…without repentance.

[47] Posted by Theodora on 08-30-2008 at 01:28 PM • top

“My prediction­there will be three “provinces” in the US before it’s all over­the CCP province, TEC, and the one that the Anglican Communion ends up recognizing.”—Sarah Hey

Sarah, do you see the “CCP province” ever becoming, or ever merging with, “the one that the Anglican Communion ends up recognizing”?  As I understand your various comments, here and elsewhere, I assume you are waiting for the latter (a new province recogned by the whole Communion)?  Or do you anticipate that you would still remain in TEC itelf?

[48] Posted by Paula on 08-30-2008 at 02:12 PM • top

Typographical errors above—I blame a computer glitch!

[49] Posted by Paula on 08-30-2008 at 02:16 PM • top

“Biblical Anglican Communion!”  What a great….and appropriate….name for the new Communion when it comes into being, as it surely will!

[50] Posted by Cennydd on 08-30-2008 at 05:53 PM • top

Amen, M.P.  Hope you didn’t want a hotel room up here in the Burg, though.  We’re full up.
I pray especially for those who have just rebuilt.  I was in Camille and in Katrina, but they were 30+ years apart, not three.

[51] Posted by Miss Sippi on 08-30-2008 at 06:58 PM • top

I agree. Kate and co. and whoever and whatever can wait. We need your prayers for us in LA, Mississippi, and TX. We need you all to start thinking about the dioceses involved regardless of which side who is on in all three states. We will eventually need aide to several of these diocese so tomorrow we need you all to start talking to your congregations whoever and where ever they are about what they would like to do. We need all the clergy to offer prayers at the eucharist. We need intercessions and plans for aide in whatever will be needed by those bishops, Anglican, RC, Orthodox, etc and other churches in where ever this thing hits. TEC and the AC mess can wait. We are the Body of Christ. We are his church all of us and we need to do what we do best for Him and in Him, and through Him. IHN

[52] Posted by Houseownedbythedog3 on 08-30-2008 at 07:02 PM • top

From the Catholic Diocese of Pensacola-Tallahassee:

God our Father, Creator and Lord of the universe, you have set the earth on its foundation and all the elements of nature obey your command. We humbly ask you to keep us safe from all dangers and calm the storms that threaten us. May we be secure in your loving protection and serve you always with grateful hearts. We ask this through our Lord, Jesus Christ, Your Son, who lives and reigns with you and the Holy Spirit, one God forever and ever. Amen.

This Floridian will be praying for you all!

[53] Posted by episcopalienated on 08-30-2008 at 07:17 PM • top

A Prayer for Hurricane Season

O God, Master of this passing world, hear the humble voices of your children.  The Sea of Galilee obeyed your order and returned to its former quietude; you are still the Master of land and sea.  We live in the shadow of a danger over which we have no control.  The Gulf, like a provoked and angry giant, can awake from its seeming lethargy, overstep its conventional boundaries, invade our land and spread chaos and disaster.  During this hurricane season, we turn to You, O loving Father.  Spare us from past tragedies whose memories are still so vivid and whose wounds seem to refuse to heal with the passing of time.  O Virgin, Star of the Sea, Our Beloved Mother, we ask you to plead with your Son in our behalf, so that spared from the calamities common to this area and animated with a true spirit of gratitude, we will walk in the footsteps of your Divine Son to reach the heavenly Jerusalem where a storm-less eternity awaits us.  Amen.

[54] Posted by episcopalienated on 08-30-2008 at 07:22 PM • top

Amen to all three of your posts and prayers, Episcopalienated!

[55] Posted by Theodora on 08-31-2008 at 04:57 AM • top

I understand giving the ABC one last chance to get it right, but at some point we cannot forget that justice delayed is justice denied.

[56] Posted by Simple Man on 09-01-2008 at 07:08 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.