On first blush, it’s probably the civil (and astute) thing to do.  Thinking further, if KJS performs as she has thus far ("Mother Jesus,” “Episcopalians are smarter,” ad nauseum), the primates will have PLENTY of clarity as to what to do.

Amen, Jim

However, given the acute dissension in the Episcopal Church at this point, and the very widespread effects of this in the Communion, I am also proposing to invite two or three other contributors from that Province for a session to take place before the rest of our formal business, in which the situation may be reviewed, and I am currently consulting as to how this is best organised.

So orthodox voices will be represented, though not seated on par with the PB.  And that’s appropriate, given that the structure does not yet exist to warrant such a seating.  Let’s continue to work, pray and give toward an Anglican presence to represent the kingdom of God in North America.

I don’t think this letter is authentic.  It barely sounds like him.  This especially stands out like a sore thumb:

an important and difficult and important encounter

I doubt such an obvious error would find its way even unto a draft of a ++Rowan letter.

I think you are all misreading this, and dramatically so. I am now, officially, a pessimist with regard to the future of the Communion.

She has been, as is acknowledged in this letter, suspended from the councils of communion in keeping with the DC.

The Episcopal Church has thumbed its nose at the entire communion. Now this petulant child is being seated as an equal

AND

This is being done with the full recognition that her invitation and seating will necessarily mean the absence of ++Orombi and many others...as they have already made very clear.

The ABC has chosen to invite KJS knowing this.

This is a horrible turn of events.

Newbie,

I hope you are right. But I think you are wrong

Yawn. I have said all along that ++She would probably be invited to Tanzania. Yawn again. Goody goody! Another “wait until” event. Fortunately, at least IMHO, we are fast running out of “wait until” events. The real story at Tanzania is not going to ++Her presence. It is going to be ++Her reception by a substantial number of the primates. Also, what transpires at Tanzania will have a direct bearing on the invites to Lambeth 08.
CRYSTAL BALL MOMENT: The fur is going to fly at Tanzania. This meeting may well be the one that at last precipitates some drastic action. Praise the Lord and pass the ammunition!

Of course, I could be wrong. I was wrong once before. I told a guy I was mistaken and it turned out I wasn’t.

the snarkster

I don’t doubt the authenticity of the letter.  It sounds like the ABC is hoping that the Windsor bp.s can find a way to keep ecusa a full member of the communion.

Matt, do you think ++Orombi et al will really boycott?  Or will the ABC talk them into a face-to-face sit down with +Schori (where the fur may indeed fly)?

He’s laid his cards on the table.

publicly

If he does not act, he will lose face. That is a huge thing.

The ABC has to know that.

our sole hope and our life, today, tomorrow and for ever

It seems to me that this is the most important quote in this missive.  The other telling statement is the reference to Rome’s expectation.  Its almost as if we are being told, if we expect ecumenical dialogue to progress, we will need to be aware of our decisions and their implication to our relationship with Rome and others.

The quote above is most important as it makes it clear that THIS Anglican communion believe Jesus is the ONLY way.  Mrs Jefferts, are you listening?  Forget about your agenda and start working on your theology and bring it in sync with the rest of the Church’s mind.

The glaring grammatical error rattles me, in terms of the letter’s authenticity.  Nevertheless, mistakes like that do occur. 

Ergo, if you are correct, Matt, I can’t help but wonder if this meeting will be another kick-the-can-down-the-road sort of affair, or the colossal dust-up predicted by the Snarkster. 

In the interim, I’ll stand firm, as it were, on, “Huh?”.

I suspect that ++Orombi and his cohorts will attend but not receive communion and we will have a repeat of Dromatine.  Her presence needs to be confronted and not avoided.
Ian+

If this letter is authentic, what I find most disturbing is that she is seated but +Duncan is not, but is instead treated as a part of a “B” team.

Lets all pray that with the lambeth conferance that all the problems within the spitting of the Church can be somehow resolved and that those walking away will finally see the truth and light and repent. He can make it happen if it is within His will to do so. May God show His mercy and love to all and intervine to help all of us sinners to get back on the narrow path to Him. May God bless and watch over all of us

I’m not at all convinced that Schori will stay at Tanzania. Yes, she will go, but at what point will she go back?? I’ve blogged on this at http://www.peter-ould.net/?p=188.

If Schori’s role is put to a vote, fine. But if not, we have seen that ecusa officials, like Schori, the Griz, and other lesser lights have no shame. Given the opportunity to stay, she will.

I’m with Matt. 

Who’s going to do the eulogy?

There’s also the non-trivial fact that the host province (Tanzania) has said they don’t want her there.

How embarrassing is that.

How’s this for a really peachy scenario: ++She shows up, refuses to be seated in the same room as +Iker, +Duncan, and +Schofield and goes back home in a huff. Hmmmm.....

the snarkster

Assuming the letter is authentic and from the ABC, it is good. It addersses at least four very significant points:
1. Recognition of problems in ECUSA
2. Invitate for representation of those in dissension
3. Appreciation of the Windsor Bishops
4. A desire to move beyond the paralysis posed by ECUSA
These points being in the letter make me question if it is “too good to be true” - from the ABC. The fact that is not signed also makes me wonder, but the points are good.
Chapie+

If this letter is authentic, what I find most disturbing is that she is seated but +Duncan is not, but is instead treated as a part of a “B” team.

But Dr. Schori *is* the Presiding “Bishop” of PECUSA, and Bp. Duncan is only one of many bishops. Of course the ABC is going to act in accord with existing structures.

And since the only thing which gives the “Anglican Communion” any cohesion is not law or faith or practice but these non-binding primatal get-togethers, he’s not going to “disinvite” the ranking “bishop” of a member church on canonical or theological grounds, because that would be to destroy the one thing which holds the Canturbury Club together for the sake of something which doesn’t. Given the facts of the situation, it’s not surprising he acts as he does—the problem is not with the ABC per se, but with the Anglican Communion itself.

All of which has to do with my own belief that THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS THE ANGLICAN COMMUNION—not in any meaningful sense of “communion”.

A blessed Feast of the Nativity to all.

pax,
LP

I agree with Newbie. On first and now second reading, I did not think it sounded like Rowan Williams++.  Also why would he write so openly about these kind of monumental plans to someone in Australia?

Well, it seems that the ABC is capable of making a decision. It doesn’t bother me that Schori will appear in Tanzania - it will bother me a great deal if the Primates end up acting like Anglicans of the Club. Ms Schori does need to hear in great and unrelenting detail the reason why TEC (once known as ECUSA) has no credibility among other Anglican Provinces and why it needs to repent or take steps to form its own cult.

Guys, I can verify this too. It’s authentic

Here is the (one of the) money quotes:
“In other words, questions remain to be considered about the Episcopal Church’s relations with other Provinces (though some Provinces have already made their position clear). I do not think it wise or just to take any action that will appear to bring that consideration and the whole process of our shared discernment to a premature end.”

There are two opposite and equally mistaken judgements to be made about Schori’s invitation to the Primates meeting.  (1) That everything is okay, and see here is evidence that our primate is in the club.  This will be made in spades by the usual suspects.  The opposite mistake is the one prevailing in the comments above, (2) That this is a huge failure of nerve and a step away from conciliar discipline.  But I disagree.  I think it will likely be a step in the very direction of conciliar discipline and discernment that the ABC has long been trying to guide us. 

I don’t think this is a big deal and I don’t think we should be making one of it, frankly.

Peace and have blessed Christmas.

Emphasis here on part of the B team. By including representatives of the Camp Allen meeting (which includes, for instance, the liberal bishops of Rhode Island and Alaska) the voice of the leader of the Network and Common Cause gets diminished as one of many diverse voices speaking for Episcopalians. Can you smell the Anglican fudge cooking in the oven?

Primates from a number of provinces have said they will not attend (not just refuse communion but not attend) if KJS is seated. If that holds up, then the GS does not have the numbers necessary to discipline ECUSa or send anyone home. Its as simple as that.

If we can figure this out, do you suppose the ABC knows it too?

1.  Schiori will stay for the entire meeting
2.  She will object to Iker, Duncan and Schofield but this will be meaningless.  The point of inviting them is to down play her importance to that of merely being there to explain her position and to see the beginnings of the consequences of TEC’s actions as the Primates begin the process of creating a new province.  Nothing will have a more “pruning effect” on Schori than to have to sit and witness an event which as the formation of the new province.  I’m sure given the option, she would prefer to leave and not see it but I don’t think they are gonna let her.  They will make her sit and watch the WHOLE event!
3.  There is a greater likelihood that a more centrist bishop will be included as well or in lieu of Schofield.  This is for complying with a “fairness in process” approach.
4.  She will not be invited to Lambeth.
5.  Tanzania will be a gracious host despite any personal feelings.  Any objections and indignation will be reserved for the moment when Schori begins to give glib and relativistic responses.  Righteous indignation will rain from the African plains upon her.

I’m always intrigued by the words that the ABC uses. The sentences seem carefully crafted and chosen: “I have decided not to withhold an invitation to Bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori …….” Does that mean he seriously considered withholding an invitation?

My reaction was the exact opposite of Matt’s, but everything about this is wierd.
1. Who leaked this?  I would guess London.
2. Why the Friday night of Christmas weekend?  I assume to bury it, so it will be old news when the liberal MSM returns to work after Boxing Day, if then.  This seems to be a familiar tactic for “conservative” developments.
3. Why David Virtue?  To discredit it further?
4.Why ++Aspinall?  Is he the only one to ask, “By the way, Rowan, what are you going to do?”
5. Is this a draft that someone is trying to shoot down?  If so, why?

Matt+ has a very good point. Every effort should be made to persuade every GS primate to attend, if only to give us (the orthodox) enough votes to pass some sort of sanctions on TECusa. They could attend the meeting but not associate with ++Her which would send the same message that non-attendance would.

the snarkster

Game tied. Its the bottom of the 9th, 2 out and bases loaded.  The batter stepping up to the plate will determine the outcome of the game.  I hope the game doesn’t go into extra innings.  Know what I mean?

I agree.  I’d say ‘hold your horses’ until we know that the ABC really means to do this and then weigh consequences.  Personally, since the S. Primates represent much more of the A. C. than Shori and also occupy many more places at the table, I don’t see Rowan Williams doing something like this - it would completely destroy what’s left of the Communion, trivialize the new Anglicans here in America, and alienate most of the members of the communion these Primates represent.

From a political standpoint alone - I don’t buy it.  More likely is she would be allowed on an observer status or something…

Mark,
It wouldn’t surprise me if, assuming this is authentic, it is meant to be leaked so as to begin testing the waters - sorta check how the concept found therein will be received.

Mark McCall: All very good points. I continue to be troubled by the “important and difficult and important” error which is most unusual for a +++RW missive. I expect more will come to light soon. Until then, I will assume Matt+ knows whereof he speaks.

the snarkster

Techical issue only: the grammatical mistake could have been made in the retyping of the letter?

I can’t see the orthodox primates agreeing to “sit with” Schori. Supposedly she is to be allowed to talk before the main portion of the conference. That would allow the orthodox primates to bow out of those meetings without bowing out of the entire conference. But I believe they will make their stand - one way or another.

However, given the acute dissension in the Episcopal Church at this point, and the very widespread effects of this in the Communion, I am also proposing to invite two or three other contributors from that Province for a session to take place before the rest of our formal business, in which the situation may be reviewed, and I am currently consulting as to how this is best organised.

I’ll bet if this letter is genuine, the Primates will vote on her status before the rest of our formal business

Is it possible that the grammatical error is a transcribing error from the original letter which did not contain the error?

This letter is a total fake.

It doesn’t read like Rowan or sound like Lambeth.
Someone either did this to fool us all, distract us, or sent up a trial balloon.
But it is a fake.

I should add that I think the contents may prove to be true...that Schori will be seated...but the letter is a fake.

DHR,

Could you contact me offline

DHR: Again, some very good points. However, since it has been verified by a number of different people on both sides of the issue, I will consider it genuine until shown otherwise.

the snarkster

The AoC is no fool.  He knows he cannot put the GS primates in a position where they must publically repudiate their own convictions.  He also knows he cannot willfully subvert this conference.  So I suspect Peter Ould is exactly right - that the pre-meeting will become the de facto real meeting.  That is the only way this meeting can come off.  If so, KJS is going to be in a difficult situation to say the least.  She will be present like a prisoner in the docks, with other orthodox American bishops invited to determine her judgment.  I am not sure sure she would go under these circumstances.

carl

Something to think about that just occurred to me: If DHR is David Roseberry (and I think it is), he may be in a position to know more than us peons. This is seeming stranger and stranger.

the snarkster

carl,

I agree, he is not a fool.

I do wonder whether this pre-meeting is really what you suggest. Here is the section of the letter:

“I am also proposing to invite two or three other contributors from that Province for a session to take place before the rest of our formal business, in which the situation may be reviewed, and I am currently consulting as to how this is best organised.”

Now, he has already indicated that she will be invited to attend the primates meeting. If the real aim is to determine her status at this pre-meeting session then that would be wonderful and I hope you are right, but there is nothing to indicate that this is the case. Nothing at all.

Thanks Carl - sometimes it pays to read things properly. Rowan says exactly what he means.

#1 any priest, let alone a bishop or ABC, has got to know that anything he/she writes can/will eventually be emailed around, and therefore, must assume that any electronic communication of any kind is not in any way confidential. Unless the ABC is writing his mother a handwritten thank you note for the mutton last night, he has got to know it will leak one way or the other. And yes, he (anyone) can use this fact to his/her advantage.
#2 How come I do not hear more desire for KJS to be there? Let the primates make their best points. If she repents (ok, let’s jsut prayerfully consider that), learns some things, changes, whatever, isn’t that an ideal outcome?  And how come I do not hear more confidence that exactly this might happen?  Why so despairing?  If we have the truth, will it not show forth among so many mature and incredible global leaders/men of God? Indeed, how could it NOT happen?
Reality Check

Well, here’s another fact to think about.. The “Progressive Episcopaolians of Pittsburg Dio” (Via Media incognito), are asking to haul + Duncan into court over his “non-compliance” with the “agreement” they have.

They are especially asking for an “emergency hearing”, in order to precede the Primates Meeting in Feb.. 

Wanna bet, they are trying to stop him from going IF he has also been invited..

Grannie gloria

I encourage everyone to read Peter Ould’s blog (link above) for a very cogent interpretation of ABC’s missive.

Snarkster,
From one peon to another...the reasons why I think it is a fake or a red herring are these:
1.  The letter is too much of a definitive statement by the author to be a Rowan/Lambeth production.  Sentence construction, rambling in para #3, etc.  Lambeth is usually more nuanced, IMHO.  You read the Lambeth writing and often you end up thining..."Huh??"
2. “Decided not to withhold...”.  Lambeth doesn’t think it has the power to withhold invitations anyway.  If the letter is true that it is really good news that the ABC believes that he has the power to invite or not invite...and that his ‘nod’ is a clear indication of who is in and who is out.

DHR (not David Roseberry)

Don’t miss Peter Ould’s take.
http://www.peter-ould.net/?p=188

I do not agree because I think he is reading far too much into this, but he may be right and he certainly makes some very good points.

I’m a bit confused: what, exactly, does it mean “to be seated” with the Primates?

Peter,

Could you provide more insight as to why you see this pre-meeting as the showdown?

I read your article and the letter through again, but what evidence do you have that this is not simply an attempt at some form of reconciliation. Or, perhaps, an attempt to secure KJS’ approval for the seating of an orthorox rep? In other words, who knows what this pre-meeting is going to be about?

Could the dissenters’ representatives include, say, +Minns?  Two or three?  +Duncan, +Minns, +Iker possibly, but surely not +Murphy?

The following is also interestingly worded:

I do not think it wise or just to take any action that will appear to bring that consideration and the whole process of our shared discernment to a premature end.

The words “appear” and “premature” would seem to be encouraging.  In other words, we do not want to make it appear that we are going to end this discernment prematurely, but at the end of the road, regardless, is TECUSA walking apart.  Perhaps what he is suggesting is that he wants to lead TEC on until a bit further down the road, then let them walk apart after he has kept as many in the Anglican fold as possible.

Matt,
My opinion comes from a careful reading of what Rowan has actually said on the subject of sexuality over the past 24 months. In particular we should take great care to note his address to the ACC 18 months ago and his addresses to the General Synod of the Church of England. He has rapidly come to the conclusion that the orthodox position on sexuality is by far the overwhelming majority consensus of the Primates and Bishops of the Communion and that an attempt to go against that would fracture the Communion FAR MORE then disciplining TEC to the fullest extent.
On top of that, my sources close to Lambeth are telling me that personally he has come to the end of his tether with 815. Now, I can’t guarantee that those sources are telling me the truth, but I have no reason to doubt them. In the past the few things I’ve been told have come to pass.
That’s why I think it’s SO important for us all (here on the internet and elsewhere) to do the theological groundwork now on what the ecclesiology of deposing bishops and primate is. If we can sort that out in the next 2 months then the work of protecting orthodox bishops, clergy and layity becomes much easier.
Let the reader understand.

Four things:

1.  I agree with Matt+ and Snarkster.  And I think this could be the ABC trying to manipulate the rest of those not wanting to “sit” with +KJS to attend.  If they don’t go to the meeting....then don’t be surprised as what the meeting comes up with.  Just like the November meeting.  By not attending the Nov. meeting(though all of us certainly understand the futility), +Duncan et al., gave the “rest” of the committee carte blanche to do the will of TEC.

2.

...and the Joint Standing Committee has appointed a sub-group which has been working on a report to develop our thinking as to how we should as a meeting interpret the Episcopal Church’s response so far to the Windsor recommendations.

Who is this group and is it tied to the Sept. and Nov. “meetings”.  If so, I don’t hold out much hope in this area.

3.  Authenticity shouldn’t be based on copy errors.  I think we all have had things go out that should have had another eye on it. 

4.  Lastly and based on 1&2 above, if the primates choose not to attend and defend the Faith at the meeting in Feb., they will be handing the Anglican Communion over to the TEC’s course faster than it took for the TEC to push the rest of us out.  If these primates were a majority, then not attending and providing an alternate meeting/course would provide a way for the future--but that doesn’t appear to be the case from what I’ve heard here.

I tend to agree with Peter. 

While I understand everyone’s pain, frustration, and impatience(because I feel those, too), the bottom line here is that all the hotheaded speculation will not get you anywhere or anything except hypertension and gloating revisionists.  We have to allow this process to unfold.  I plan on giving it until just after Lambeth ‘08.  If I think the solution is not of God, then I will consider other options. 

He may not like it, and he may not like having to act, but I fully believe that Rowan “gets it”.  What he needs is the courage to act and do it right...if he’s smart, he will see that he can draw that from other Primates.  It’s high time to go from being a deep thinker to a battlefield Christian.  Jesus, too, figuratively “came with a sword”.  The AB of C knows what he has to do, he just needs the strength to do it.  That’s where my prayers lie, right next to True, Scripturally-based, Communion unity.

Lakeland Two

The AoC has a better chance of finding life on Mars then he does of manipulating the GS primates into attending a meeting with KJS.  He knows this.  With whom do you suppose the AoC is consulting about this pre-meeting?  I believe he is trying to arrange acceptable terms for the GS primates to come.  Those terms will necessarily preclude any interaction in which KJS is treated as a Primate in good standing.

carl

Jen,

Thanks for the compliment. I’d argue “Let’s do two months of deep thinking, then go to Tanzania and fight like anything”.

Jen, no pain, frustration or hotheadedness here.

I am looking at a letter and cannot seem to find what Peter sees in it. And this is from one who, over the past year or two, has echoed his argument in the first paragraph of his last post.

PS--I don’t have access to sources like Peter does, but I also said in a recent post that I believed Rowan had “had it” with 815. 

Spend a little time with Friedman, everybody--for the moment, it’s a lot like being a machine.  Be a non-anxious presence, keep the Faith, and maintain the Kingdom work.  There are GOOD people, above our pay grades, trying to make sure this gets done right.  Give them, and our Lord, a chance…

What we would like to see is the primates actually tell +KJS/TEC that the only way they would be allowed to stay in the Anglican Communion is to repent of their actions, confess that Jesus Christ is Lord AND the only way to the Father.  In the event they are unwilling to do that (which I suspect will be the case), then the AC should tell +KJS/TEC not to oppose the creation of a new province in the US nor the transfer of any who choose to go, property included...that if TEC files even one lawsuit to retain anything of a congregation or diocese desiring to leave for this new province, TEC is OUT of the Anglican Communion.

Carl, do you know what’s going on in the ABC’s mind exactly?  None of us do.  All we are doing is guessing.  But we all know there are primates who have put their positions out there.  Now the ABC is.  Our hope is that all is being done for God’s purpose.

The letter does not sound authentic at all, but it is not claiming to be from Abp. Williams—it just sounds like it.  It’s not even signed.

Also, Dromantine communique specifically requests that ECUSA and the Anglican Church of Canada withdraw from Communion meetings until Lambeth 2008.  It’s only a request, but ECUSA complied with it for the ACC meeting in 2005.

If ECUSA attends the Primates’ Meeting, it will not be complying with the Dromantine request.

Guys, once again, from multiple reliable sources, this is an authentic letter

multiple reliable sources

Was the letter sent to all the Primates?

This particular item is a great example of the “christianity” of the majority of posters here.

it contains rank speculation.
people lusting after conflict eagerly anticipating dissention and fomenting it when they can.
childish namecalling
post after post of people setting themselves up as being smarter and more spiritual than others.
the most rank kind of political posturing and hopedfor manipulation.
this is the pattern I have seen in item after item on this blog.
perhaps it is time for a little personal reflection and spiritual housecleaning among yourselves.

Jen - We appreciate and do agree with all that you have said but part of one point:

There are GOOD people, above our pay grades, trying to make sure this gets done right.

While this is indeed true, the sad fact is that many of us did count on those “above our pay grades” to do the work/battle.  And we are two who listened to “we don’t have to worry about THAT here” from our priest...a couple them acutally.  I caution you and anyone who wants to think this way that it is very dangerous.  It is this very mentality that got the TEC in this position in the first place.  I am reminded that we are to be vigilant.  Ever watching.

lwrh,

No one is forcing you to read it.

Lakeland, by no means have I taken “vigilant” out of my own vocabulary.  Just, at the moment, I have no reason not to trust Duncan and co.  Your point is well-taken and I still reserve the right to change my mind on that score, as should everyone. 

Just for kicks, I re-read the original letter again. I believe Matt in his sources and I’m not necessarily questioning its “authenticity”.  But, Matt, consider this:  How many 0-6 and above do you know that always write their own correspondence?  They don’t always write it, correct; it’s just “prepared for their signature”.  To me, this letter reads an awful lot like Kearon trying to sound like Rowan.  The former would not be the first “JO” to color the commentary or fitrep with his/her own wishful thinking, even if such did pass through the filter and end up with the senior’s signature. 

All comments and blogging aside, everywhere, I hope Rowan understands that he has A LOT at stake here, as do many.  As I said, I do agree with Peter but I don’t put much of anything past anybody, especially when the rubber meets the road and anxiety starts to rule.  If Rowan chooses to give TEC a free pass on its nose-thumbing the Windsor Report and offers them some sort of peacenik, left-handed group hug instead of justified discipline, it will do nothing but backfire on him and the whole Communion.  It’s my hope that the theologically astute, gutsy Pope Benedict recently told the AB of C, “get your house in order”, and Rowan listens. 

I wait and watch with interest…

Jen - did not mean to imply that you are not being vigilant, nor that I lack faith in +Duncan, +Iker, +Schofield, etc.  The “above my paygrade” comments I’ve seen posted elsewhere, to me, imply that we should blindly flollow what we’re being told.  Our experience has brought us to the crisis the TEC is in now.  Hopefully, we all are watching and holding our leaders accountable—something we in the past left to those “above my paygrade” who didn’t do it.  That’s all I was trying to say.

Jen,

Kearon could have written it, but Rowan still has to agree to it and then sign it.

If this letter is genuine, I think +++Rowan is making the right call. Since “Mother Bishop” is recently enthroned and hasn’t had the full pleasure of the primates’ collective company, she SHOULD have to come face-to-face with the pain her branch has caused. Moreover, it will give her MUCH less wiggle and spin room as she will be confronted with the issues personally—she can’t claim that info from secondary sources wasn’t really what it appeared.

Secondly, she must share de facto American representation with a conservative delegation. True, they will be meeting in a pre-event conference BUT the fact that a few conservatives were invited gives them the credibility and standing she tries hard to deny exists.  It won’t be lost on onlookers that the movement she vigorously tries to dismiss at a tiny, lunatic fringe is taken seriously by the primates, while her invitation to the meeting was a “decision” and not a certainty. She would get far too much mileage and whine factor if she wasn’t invited. A begrudging invitation to “face the music” is so much better than a snub she could spin into some sense of “martyrdom.” I’m hoping she takes Booth Beers with her so the primates see full American arrogance and litigousness on parade!

Is it possible, too, that +++Rowan wants her there to face any decisions made by the Primates concerning TEC? Could this meeting begin the process of creating a new Anglican presence in the States?

Like everyone else in the world, I wish Rowan Williams could speak or write a clear sentence in the English language.  But after mulling this over during the last of my Christmas preparations, such as they are, I’m somewhat optimistic.  I think Global South primates like Orombi could easily attend this pre-meeting without violating their consciences.  And Dr. Williams may be setting himself up for the very thing he’s trying to avoid.

A hypothetical.  What if, during this pre-meeting, the primates inform Mrs. Schori that TEC’s response to the Windsor Report was completely unacceptable?  What if they then lay down a series of stringent conditions TEC must meet to the letter in order to get back in the good graces of the rest of the Communion?

If Mrs. Schori pleads polity, as she probably will, saying only a General Convention can decide these things, the primates can tell her, that’s fine, we’ll see you in three years and until such time as our conditions are met, we will consider Bishop Duncan over there as being the Anglican primate of the United States.  If she knows that she can’t possibly get the primates demands through a General Convention, she may just decide to leave on her own and get started organizing that liberal Anglican Communion.

If Dr. Williams asks that Mrs. Schori be allowed to stay and that we should all keep prattling some more, the Global South primates can bluntly inform him that you can have the Americans or you can have us but you can no longer have both.  And then it will be my gracious lord of Canterbury who will finally be forced to make a hard decision.

lwrh,

Ditto Matt. Motes and beams.

Matt Kennedy wrote:

Guys, once again, from multiple reliable sources, this is an authentic letter

This article quotes Virtue Online as one source.  It also quotes Daily Episcopalian, which in turn quotes it from Virtue Online.

So far, there appears to be only one source, and that source is not always reliable.

Whether or not the letter is real, important information is missing from its citation here:  To whom it was addressed (Phillip J. Aspinall, Primate of Australia).

It could be authentic—but it sure doesn’t seem authentic to me, unless Abp. Williams suddenly had a change in personality and writing style.

Randy,

I was not at all referring to DV or Daily Episcopalian. I have spoken to others closer to events.

Virtue claims that Iker, Schofield and Duncan will be the other representatives present in Tanzania. I just spoke with +Iker and he said he’s received no invitation.

To be fair to Virtue, he speculates who might be there.

Matt first a joyous and blessed Christmas to you and yours. May the glory of God make light your troubles and increase your hopes.
You write : I think you are all misreading this, and dramatically so. I am now, officially, a pessimist with regard to the future of the Communion..”

I know next to nothing about the political and structural nuances of the Anglican Communion.  I do know of the struggle of the faithful orthodox to keep Christ as the center of that Communion’s face in the US the TEC.  I know that you have received disappoint and setbacks in this struggle.  But when has that ever been untrue for those who declare Christ the way the truth and the life?  When have the faithful ever seen the words of Christ “ remember those who revile you first reviled me” made irrelevant?  What age has not seen Christians sacrificed on the altars of idols?  How many times would it have been simpler to declare failure.  How tempting it is to be pessimistic and how heavily it ladens our hearts.

But we Christians have a hope in the Resurrected Christ who has promised to be with us always.  That hope must sustain the Communion’s faithful in the US.  True the TEC is very quickly going down a path that leads away from the everlasting message of salvation.  It embraces a way of death and forgets that true life is found only in Christ Jesus.  But that does not hold true for faithful Anglicans.  The fact is that these faithful are in their own season of Advent.  An advent that awaits not only the Birth of Christ but the Birth of a Church.  An advent that reminds us of the very deep truth of the Christ advent.  Not only does it anticipate a birth but it looks forward to another mystery.  The mystery of the death and arising of Jesus Christ.  You and others who uphold the faith are looking forward to the resurrection of the Church.  That is what should give you hope and gladness even during these uncertain times.  Christ makes all things new again.  That is a promise.  Yet to do this the old must be swept away.  I believe Christ is doing that with the Anglican Communion.  The new thing is not “ the Holy Spirit doing a new thang”.  It is a renewal and a restoration of God’s promise to His people.  It is the truth rung in by Christmas bells and Easter alleluias.  That the living God has triumphed.  That darkness will be cast aside at the light of Christ.  That evil has lost.  That God loves us and treasures us beyond all measure.
So do not fall to pessimism.  You are God’s own.

And who said it’s always a slow news cycle just before Christmas? 

Based on all appearances (and Mr. Ould’s excellent analysis) this will finally be IT.  And if any of the participants start heming and hawing beforehand, an extremely impatient laity will convince them otherwise, I believe.

Sure hope I don’t offend anyone by stating the obvious. Can’t be too careful of offending revisionist sensitivities.
Anyhow, here it is: Most of us arrogant old Episcopalians will not stand for any further appeasement of the Capo Regime, her consiglieri or any of their odious goodfella foot soldiers.
We have been assured that the Tanzania meeting will resolve the apostacy with which we have been cursed and abused since the days of creation of our very Common Book of Prayer in the 70s. We are absolutley relying on resolving the problem in February. We have reached the end point of our careers and for the most part have the means and uncompromising fidelity to the faith once given to make our positions well known indeed. And, oh yeh, as well as causing stuff to happen. We have spent our lives making stuff happen.
Here’s the deal. We are running out of time, and thus patience. We don’t want to hear any more about 2008. I mean, April 2007 is too late. Got it? Now, I genuinely believe that ABC is just calculating enough to have designed this confrontation with the goal of marginalizing Her Emminence and the others. Great. My exec used to say “make it so.” What he meant was take out whatever objective he was referencing. Not if it’s convenient, not if it has passed the committee on taking out objectives, not if it doesn’t offend some Berkley sociologist.  Our message to Iker, Duncan, Akinola, and all Windsor Bishops: Make it so. 40 years is long enough in the wilderness.

Paula L,

Thank you for your kind words. I am not at all out of hope. God can do all things. I am not depressed or upset or emotional. I am very calm. My life does not depend on the Anglican Communion.

Its just that the only way to read this letter as something positive is to tell a story that has little or no connection to the text itself. I can do that too.

Many here are speculating that the three representatives invited to the pre-meeting will be orthodox reps. The letter does not say that. Here is what it says:

...I am also proposing to invite two or three other contributors from that Province for a session to take place before the rest of our formal business, in which the situation may be reviewed, and I am currently consulting as to how this is best organised.

The Episcopal Church is not in any way a monochrome body and we need to be aware of the full range of conviction within it…

This could mean three conservative reps. But, the guest list could just as easily look like this:

1. Bishop Duncan
2. Center right bishop
3. Center left bishop
4. KJS

In fact, I think that sort of lineup would fit the wording of the letter far better than a guest list that included +Duncan, +Schofield, and +Iker. It would be far more representative of..."the full range of conviction...”

So, here’s my story. Why not get these 4 in a room together with a broad range of primates from a similarly full range of conviction and then, at the end of the discussion, ask the assembled 4 US reps whether they thing KJS ought to be seated. And, schocker, three of them do.

So, how can the ABC do anything other than honor the wishes of the representatives from the Episcopal Church?

Dear Stand Firm readers,

I shall now accept apologies from those who doubted the veracity of my reportage.

Jen is right on the mark with this:
Spend a little time with Friedman, everybody--for the moment, it’s a lot like being a machine.  Be a non-anxious presence, keep the Faith, and maintain the Kingdom work.  There are GOOD people, above our pay grades, trying to make sure this gets done right.  Give them, and our Lord, a chance…

I have believed this ever since I’ve heard her comment that the problem with ecusa is that the church is well-defined enough.  This is right out of the Ed Friedman playbook.

This makes no sense:
If Mrs. Schori pleads polity, as she probably will, saying only a General Convention can decide these things, the primates can tell her, that’s fine, we’ll see you in three years and until such time as our conditions are met, we will consider Bishop Duncan over there as being the Anglican primate of the United States.

ecusa was given three years and blown it.  The public comments coming out of GC06 make it clear that ecusa has no desire to turn around.

Matt,
I do not disagree with your take on the letter.  I just wanted to emphasize that our hope is in Christ.  That when the dust clears no matter what happens we know that Christ remains.  That our certainity is based on the both the advent of His birth and His resurrection and His returning.  Any hopes I have for the Communion are not based on the actions of men but on the promises of Christ. 

I wanted most of all to let you know my prayers are with you and all who love and serve Him in all you do.

I have tossed out to Peter the possibility that rather than creating a new province, the Primates may look at a solution using the Aotearoa, New Zealand & Polynesia model where there are three equal Primates.  I first learned of the model reading the bio of the Primates attending the Primates meeting in 2005. 

Such a solution would certainly avoid legal battles and would allow, say Duncan and Schori to be equals meeting the needs of each group within TEC.  Theologically it would be disasterous in the actions of the GC but still, a solution.  I’m not a proponent rather, exploring an option which has not previously been discussed.  Any takes?

I need to agree with Teddy Mak.  The end of the raod is in sight for many in the church today and Lambeth is too far beyond the horizon to even contemplate.  I find parishioners in my diocese are putting the heat on their clergy to fish or cut bait.  The clergy might stand for resolution in 2008 or 2009, but many of the laity will not.  It needs to come to a speedy conclusion and I do hope Dar es Salam provides what we have been hoping for.

Goodness,
I must be doing something right when Matt starts to agree with my perspective! LOL.  He has agreed that the three orthodox bishops is not the likely lineup and that more centrist balance is more likely.

Matt, I understand your unhappiness with the text of the letter. What hope I can muster (other than that in God’s time, all will be well) is that the ABC knows the score, and has shown himself a very able player.

On the surface, he is boxed into a position where he must decide which half of the communion he wishes to keep: He seats ++KJS, and substantial parts of the GS have committed themselves to walk. Or, he holds the most numerically significant branch of the church by rejecting the most culturally significant. I don’t know what alternatives he may have, but I somewhat suspect he will prove more adept than that. Others have suggested some possibilities. A confrontation, almost an “intervention” could occur, such that ++KJS either capitulates or leaves, with the decision then being made by TEC, not the ABC. It could work that with everyone there, censure occurs as a council function, not hierarchical (which authority, I understand +++Rowen to eschew). That, of course, would hinge on getting everyone to show up. There are problems with each of those guesses, but they do point to the kind of thing that could happen.

I doubt if those of us on the outside can see all the dynamics, and all the possibilities. But I expect there is an attempt working to let this resolve in a way that does not require +++ABC to make a ruling that he does not believe is his purview to make.

Lakeland, I don’t believe you were trying to imply anything negative.  I was just clarifying where I stood. 

Peter, with all due respect, how many people do you know that sign things without reading them?  I’ve seen too many do it, especially bosses who occasionally(or frequently, for that matter) put misplaced trust in their underlings. 

To a degree, I’m with Brit--if KJS has to go to a “pre-meeting” and make some half-baked(not the phrase I really want to use) stab at explaining herself, and then becomes a focal point for all the Primates’ anger in the wider meeting, than so be it. Sometimes people eat crow because they should, and/or have to. 

I wouldn’t be surprised if the pre-meeting was some sort of ultimatum. 

Don’t get any overinflated sense of Williams’s power.  I seem to recall the Dromantine agenda getting pulled right off the table.  The Primates are running this show, make no mistake. 

I still believe that if any radical academics or wanna-bes try to play “thread the needle” with their closeted fringie agenda, then they are sounding the Communion’s death knell and it will thoroughly fracture.  It’s all no more than a “Choose this Day” moment for Williams, and it will demonstrate the stuff of which he’s made.

Tony, what do you mean by “the problem with ECUSA is that the church is well-defined enough”?  I don’t think it was me who said that. 

In my view, the problem with ECUSA is that it has long lost the ability to discipline itself, both Doctrinally and otherwise, and it is rotting from within.  Also, the last three PB’s have done nothing but illustrate the Peter Principle in action.  That’s the cleaner version--certain things tend to float, if you get my drift. 

Ed Friedman has a lot to offer us all. 

Again, I watch, wait, and pray.  I also don’t rule out the possibility of feeling the need to swim the Tiber, or otherwise, in the future. 

All blessings,

J.

I say seat KJS no matter who carries her baggage along on the trip, and Bring It On.
RC

Virtue claims that Iker, Schofield and Duncan will be the other representatives present in Tanzania. I just spoke with +Iker and he said he’s received no invitation.

VOL believes that the other persons invited include Anglican Network leader, Pittsburgh Bishop Robert Duncan, Ft. Worth Bishop Jack Iker and possibly John-David Schofield, Bishop of the San Joaquin, whose dicoese has threatened to leave the Episcopal Church. VOL has obtained no absolute confirmation that these are the persons the Archbishop of Canterbury is referring too.

Fr. Matt:
Welcome aboard.  AoC has always been ‘personally’ a revisionist - not to the extent of many in ECUSA, but way left of orthodox.  We’ve known this.  And yes, he has admitted recently that the concencus of the Primates (and laity) world-wide is for Lambeth 1:10.  And we know he can be a schrewd operator.  And we know his desire for not seeing the Communion splinter under his watch.  And all this adds up to a refusal to take a stand.  This lack of action will result in the very split he fears - and one which leaves his position nutured as ECUSA will be the lead of the “liberal” Anglicans and Africa (probably Nigeria) will be the head of the “orthodox” Anglicans. 

Teddy is right on the mark.  Even under a solidly “orthodox” rector in a ‘supposedly’ Windsor diocese (Texas), I was not willing to pledge this year - and I am not alone.  I have increased my monthly giving (and play golf regularly with my Rector - a pastoral saint) but I doubt I’ll be there much longer.  How sad!  Waiting for those “above our pay grade” has provided litle besides confusion.  I only wish we had the votes to follow our brothers from Plano and Truro, etc.

Mea Culpa! Mea Maxima Culpa!

Not surprised wtih the content...just surprised that it is out…

Matt,
Sorry...my apology was directed more toward my sense of total embarrassment.  Gee, I’m sorry that I was wrong after being to right on so many things.
But I am so sorry that I thought you were wrong.  How could I?  You don’t even OWN an eraser.  My humblest of sorrowful apologies.

Excuse my redneck ignorance, but why does anybody care what the apostate COE and the revisionist ABC thinks.  The sun has set on the British Empire and only Masterpiece Theater remains.

I found

Or, he holds the most numerically significant branch of the church by rejecting the most culturally significant.

a little arrogant. Just how do we in the West claim to be the “most culturally significant”?

My take is, IF this letter is genuine (and I still feel my initial gut feeling that it was a hoax) that ABC recognizes that he lacks the authority to deny the PBess access to the meeting, and is calling for a “committee of the whole” prior to the meeting to deal with whether she has voice or vote. If that’s the case, he makes it easy for all the Primates to gather “off the books” and deal with her. Only they have the authority to deny her access to their meeting. I would love to be there for the dust-up.

The make-up of the B team is of little interest. Just the fact that the ABC recognizes the need is crucial. They will have little impact.

Gulfstream et al....

The letter is real. There is no doubt.

I had my doubts initially when only DV and Jim Naughton were reporting it. But when I checked it out with my own very well placed sources, it was unanimously validated. Kendall has now found the same. It is a real, true, authentic letter. I know it is hard for some of you to accept, but nevertheless its the real thing.