The big Anglican Primates meeting in Tanzania wrapped up Monday. It was a bit of a mixed bag. Despite some public pissiness by a few Primates, most of the goings-on were fairly favorable to the Episcopal Church. Bp Jefferts Schori was invited to sit in a very important committee. The work on the Anglican Covenant looked much less hard-line than I’m sure the hard-liners wanted, and the
committee that Canterbury had put together to report on whether TEC had worked with the Windsor Report recommendations or not came back a lot more positively than the conservatives had been hoping. There as no approved proposal to create a “provincial overlay” in the US.
Alas, the wheels kind of came off at the very end, with the official Communique issued at the conclusion. Father Jake gives a rather depressing analysis, which basically comes down to the Primates issuing ultimata that cannot, as the Episcopal Church is structured, be met, even if one was convinced they should
be. Unlike most Anglican provinces, TEC isn’t controlled by the Primate (our Presiding Bishop), nor even just by the Bishops themselves, but by General Convention which includes a legislative house that includes the laity. Major actions cannot take place outside of that structure and without their consent, and it seems unlikely that the demands that the US bishops just wave their hands and make commitments can be (or will be) met.
He adds:
It amazes me that the leaders of the Anglican Communion continue to believe that the Episcopal Church is so desperate to stay in their club that we will agree to anything to make peace. Peace at any cost is always a false peace. In this case, it seems to me that the cost is much too high.
This is no longer solely about issues of sexual diversity. That is the presenting issue; the canary in the coal mine. The foundational issue is about where the locus of authority will reside in the Anglicanism of the future. This proposal by the Primates is a direct challenge to our polity.
The Primates have not been, until now, like the Roman Curia. In our discipline, it is General Convention, with representatives from all four orders having voice and vote, that sets policy, within the confines of the Constitution and Canons of the Episcopal Church. We believe that this process allows us to discern the movement of God within the Church quite well. We are not inclined to grant veto power to some outside agency.
Thanks for playing, Primates, and better luck next time.
Here’s the real problem (aside from the Primates assuming the bishops in the US have more power than they do): TEC’s been trying to show that we’re sensitive to the recommendations of the Windsor Report (despite some folks seeing that report itself as marching orders for TEC and only ignorable guidelines for themselves). Part of that has been saying, “Y’know, we’re just going to hold off for now on all this ordination/blessing of gays thang until we’ve all had more of a chance to thrash it
out and discern more clearly where we think God is drawing us.”
The Primate’s Communique, though, is clear that (a) the Windsor items are non-negotiable (except for those who are violating apparently trivial aspects of it, such as predating on dioceses and congregations within TEC), and (b) they expect such moratoria to be immediate, complete and permanent. Given that GC06 held off from this stuff only out of respect for the process above, and that GC09 will likely move forward again in some fashion, I suspect the Primates behind the
Communique will be quite disappointed (except for those who are actually eager to boot the Episcopal Church from the fold).
From the Communique:
17. At the heart of our tensions is the belief that The Episcopal Church [5] has departed from the standard of teaching on human sexuality accepted by the Communion in the 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 by consenting to the episcopal election of a candidate living in a committed same-sex relationship, and by permitting Rites of Blessing for same-sex unions. The episcopal ministry of a person living in a same-sex relationship is not acceptable to the majority of the Communion.”
[…] While they appreciate the actions of the 75th General Convention which offer some affirmation of the Windsor Report and its recommendations, they deeply regret a lack of clarity about certain of those responses.
In particular, the Primates request, through the Presiding Bishop, that the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church
1. make an unequivocal common covenant that the bishops will not authorise any Rite of Blessing for same-sex unions in their dioceses or through General Convention (cf TWR, §143, 144); and
2. confirm that the passing of Resolution B033 of the 75th General Convention means that a candidate for episcopal orders living in a same-sex union shall not receive the necessary consent (cf TWR, §134);
unless some new consensus on these matters emerges across the Communion (cf TWR, §134).The Primates request that the answer of the House of Bishops is conveyed to the Primates by the Presiding Bishop by 30th September 2007.
If the reassurances requested of the House of Bishops cannot in good conscience be given, the relationship between The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion as a whole remains damaged at best, and this has consequences for the full participation of the Church in the life of the Communion.
Which, y’know — may just be the bottom line. And while I’d regret it, I’d regret more toeing a moral line “acceptable to the majority of the Communion” but not to me.
Other commentary on the standard we follow, long-term good news but bad primates, asking again if the Communion is worth it, the
communique vs. the rest of the meeting.