|
1) http://www.virtueonline.org/portal/modules/news/article.php?storyid=1542 RWANDAN PRIMATE SAYS WINDSOR REPORT IS NOT FINAL
WORD Initial Comments on the Windsor Report
The Most Rev. Emmanuel Kolini, Primate Province of the Episcopal Church of Rwanda
Now that the anticipated "Windsor Report" has been released publicly, it is quite important to note that this Report is recommendatory in nature and by no means the final word concerning the heretical doctrines and practices in various parts of the Anglican Communion, including the United States and Canada. The content of the Report - a product of a nineteen-person Commission - is not unexpected. Regretfully, it offers an institutional and ecclesiological response to grave theological and doctrinal matters which erode the Gospel message. A Scriptural response - and not one based in church politics - is vital at this crucial time.
It is also observed that the Report overlooks the long history of overlapping jurisdictions within the Anglican Communion, dating back more than two and one-half centuries and even sanctioned by the British Parliament. Numerous examples have emerged throughout the Communion over the years. These include the Church Missionary Society, the previous but longstanding presence of two Anglican churches in Scotland, 'flying' bishops in England and Wales, the Church of South India's presence in the United States, the situation in the Armed Forces, and the presence of American and English Dioceses in Europe, among others.
Furthermore in the last several years, the reality of this practice has expanded to involve not only the establishment of the Anglican Mission in America, but also the ministry of the leadership of additional Provinces, including the actions or expressed intentions of the leadership in the Provinces of Uganda (in the USA), Southern Cone (USA), Kenya (USA and Canada - ACiC), Congo (Canada - ACiC), Central Africa (USA and Canada - ACiC), Nigeria (in North America), Tanzania (Italy) and now Brazil (USA). Humanly devised borders must not be used to keep the Gospel out of beleaguered lands. The Gospel imperative must be paramount in importance in our actions and our words!
While the Report will continue the seemingly endless process of conversation, dialogue and discussion, we must not be deterred from the foremost mission of God's church to proclaim the Good News of salvation in Jesus Christ alone. We must forge ahead in the work of God's Kingdom. Everyday people die without having accepted the eternal grace offered in Jesus Christ. We must not lose the urgency for the Great Commission!
23nd October 2004
The ACiC Press Release.
The Windsor Report: a Mixed Blessing
The Anglican Communion in Canada (ACiC) welcomes the highlighting in the Windsor Report of the un-Anglican, unilateral actions of the Diocese of New Westminster, the General Synod of the Anglican Church of Canada, and the Episcopal Church of the USA. As Archbishop Akinola, the Nigeria Primate of 20 Million Anglicans, puts it, "The report correctly notes that the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of New Westminster have pushed the Anglican Communion to the breaking point. It rightly states that they did not listen to the clear voices of the Communion and rejected the counsel of all four Instruments of Unity." We are also appreciative of the Windsor Report's reaffirmation of the primacy of Holy Scripture.
We are, however, disappointed at the lack of any vehicle for disciplining those who have departed from the faith and order of orthodox Anglicanism. The Windsor-recommended ECUSA DEPO model does not deal adequately with the sincere need of orthodox believers in revisionist dioceses for adequate Episcopal oversight (AEO). Regret, without real repentance and remorse, is hollow and without any real value. We share the Archbishop Akinola's concern that "Instead of a clear call for repentance, we have been offered warm words of sentimentality for those who have shown no godly sorrow for their actions and harsh words of condemnation for those who have reached out a helping hand to friends in need of pastoral and spiritual care." *
To equate the necessary actions of those who have had to break with their diocese and seek adequate Episcopal oversight from overseas, with the sin and degradation which caused it, is less than helpful. As Archbishop Akinola expressed, "The imbalance is bewildering. It is wrong to use equal language for unequal actions." This is why we are grateful for the recent public clarification by Archbishop Josiah Idowu-Fearon that he rejects such 'moral equivalence': "Within the same family, if one of your children is drowning, you don't seek permission to save their lives. There is no equivalence." As the Rev Greg Brewer put it, "when apostolic authority is not under girded by apostolic doctrine, the result is almost always geographic tyranny."
The Windsor Report is a conversation starter-it does not solve any present crisis. We expect the Windsor report to be vigorously taken up by the All Africa Bishops meeting next week in Lagos, and hopefully strengthened at the Primates' Meeting in February 2005.
The Anglican Communion in Canada is very grateful to be a missionary outreach of the Episcopal Province of Rwanda (Archbishop Emmanuel Kolini), sponsored by the Primates of Rwanda, SE Asia, Kenya, Congo and Central Africa. We have been called by our Bishop and sponsoring Archbishops to bring people to faith, to raise up disciples and to plant active and reproducible churches in the Anglican Tradition. In the midst of increased tensions and political uncertainty in the Anglican Communion, that remains the primary focus of our ministry and mission. The offer of Temporary Adequate Episcopal Oversight (TAEO) continues to be available to all faithful Canadian Anglicans who wish to be free.
For further information about the Anglican Communion in Canada and opportunities for affiliation, please contact the Rev. Paul Carter, ACiC Acting Network Leader at paul@acicanada.ca or (604) 222-4486 or The Rev. Barclay Mayo, ACiC Mission Strategy Coordinator at bamayo@sunshine.net or (604) 883-1371.
Please note our website: http://www.acicanada.ca
30- * http://titusonenine.classicalanglican.net/index.php?p=3042 From Nigeria's Primate, Archbishop Peter Akinola: Statement on Windsor Report
Released on Tuesday, October 19, 2004
I welcome the sincerity and hard work of those who have prepared 'The Windsor Report 2004'. After an initial reading it is clear to me that the report falls far short of the prescription needed for this current crisis. It fails to confront the reality that a small, economically privileged group of people has sought to subvert the Christian faith and impose their new and false doctrine on the wider community of faithful believers. We have watched in sadness as sisters and brothers who have sought to maintain their allegiance to the "faith once delivered to the saints" have been marginalized and persecuted for their faith. We have been filled with grief as we have witnessed the decline of the North American Church that was once filled with missionary zeal and yet now seems determined to bury itself in a deadly embrace with the spirit of the age. Instead of a clear call for repentance we have been offered warm words of sentimentality for those who have shown no godly sorrow for their actions and harsh words of condemnation for those who have reached out a helping hand to friends in need of pastoral and spiritual care.
Why, throughout the document, is there such a marked contrast between the language used against those who are subverting the faith and that used against those of us, from the Global South, who are trying to bring the church back to the Bible? Where are the expressions of deep concern for the men and women whose witness is jeopardized and whose lives are at risk because of the actions of ECUSA? Where are the words of "deep regret" for the impact of ECUSA's actions upon the Global South and our missionary efforts? Where is the language of rebuke for those who are promoting sexual sins as holy and acceptable behaviour?
The imbalance is bewildering. It is wrong to use equal language for unequal actions.
The report correctly notes that the Episcopal Church and the Diocese of New Westminster have pushed the Anglican Communion to the breaking point. It rightly states that they did not listen to the clear voices of the Communion and rejected the counsel of all four Instruments of Unity. Therefore it is surprising that the primary recommendation of the report is "greater sensitivity" instead of heartfelt repentance. Already the Presiding Bishop of ECUSA has stated that he sees no need to halt welcoming practising homosexuals into all orders of ministry! In addition, the bishop of New Westminster has indicated that same sex blessing will continue. Thus they are hell bent on destroying the fabric of our common life and we are told to sit and wait.
We have been asked to express regret for our actions and "affirm our desire to remain in the Communion". How patronizing! We will not be intimidated. In the absence of any signs of repentance and reform from those who have torn the fabric of our Communion, and while there is continuing oppression of those who uphold the Faith, we cannot forsake our duty to provide care and protection for those who cry out for our help.
The Bible says that two cannot walk together unless they are agreed. The report rightly observes that if the "call to halt" is ignored "then we shall have to begin to learn to walk apart". The Episcopal Church and Diocese of New Westminster are already walking alone on this and if they do not repent and return to the fold, they will find that they are all alone. They will have broken the Anglican Communion.
I am disappointed that an important report that was requested by the Primates who gathered at Lambeth Palace last October was not submitted to us for prayerful consideration. Instead it has been released to the entire world as if it were the final word on this troubling matter. However, before the next meeting of the Primates in February, I will now take it to the All Africa Bishops Conference that will gather in Lagos from October 26th-31st and we will have further opportunity to speak of the crisis created by the North American Church.
We commend the future of our Communion to the hands of almighty God and the prayers of all.
+ Peter Akinola
The Most Rev. Peter Akinola Primate of All Nigeria and Chairman of the Council of Anglican Provinces in Africa.
3) http://gs2004.classicalanglican.com/modules/news/ http://anglicanjournal.com/extra/news.php?newsItem=2004-10-22_mns.news 'In the end the report was something that I could live with' Interviews with Canadian member of Lambeth Commission, primate
MARITES N. SISON, ANGLICAN JOURNAL Oct. 22, 2004 - (...)Interview with Canon Alyson Barnett-Cowan, member of the Lambeth Commission and director of the Anglican Church of Canada 's faith, worship and ministry department.
Q: Could we get your own reaction to the report in general and to its specific recommendations regarding New Westminster, the Anglican Church of Canada, ECUSA and the primates of the Global South?
A: In the end the report was something that I could live with or I wouldn't have agreed to the recommendations(...)
Q: What was difficult for you?
A: I was the only Canadian and I wasn't chosen to represent Canada but I'm a Canadian and I'm a staff person and normally as a staff person I don't take positions. I try to argue for the breadth of views that we hear in our church but since I was only the one and we were one of the churches that was singled out, there was a lot of pressure to speak honorably and truthfully but also to listen to what was being said about us and to somehow put all of that together with integrity.
Q: Can explain the specific recommendations. What exactly is being asked?
A: It's to express regret.
Q: For what?
For breaching the bonds of affection…As I heard it from people who were very upset, and these included people who would be in favour of change on the gay front, (they) perceived that North Americans were going ahead off their own bat just because they want to and to some extent that's linked with what's the perception of the world that North America just does whatever it wants without really taking into account the positions of other people. And so it's that regret that people didn't pay sufficient attention to the deeply held convictions and emotions of other places.
Q: So it's not so much to express regret for ordaining a gay bishop, authorizing same-sex blessings. It's not making a judgment about those actions?
A: That's right, and many people are not getting that. That's precisely the case. The commission didn't feel that it could pass judgment on the actual actions. Its mandate was around what makes and breaks communion and it was felt that the way in which those actions were taken was what caused events in the communion. And equally, therefore, those who came in to take other parishes under their wing and so were also breaching communion by not paying attention to the traditions of the church around not intervening and not consulting. Everyone's going off in their own direction and doing their own thing and not having any conversations. It's an attempt to cool things off; everybody's gone off a little half-baked here and needs to consider the views of the other. Not that that would necessarily change anyone's attitudes or actions but that we need to be far more in conversation with one another.
Q: Were there any attempts to have stronger recommendations?
A: Of course everybody had their own ideas but this represented the consensus.
Q: How can the commission recommend a moratorium when everyone's supposed to be self-governing? Doesn't this step on the boundaries of dioceses and provinces?
A: It's a request. There's nothing that says what would happen. There's no penalty attached to it other than the penalty that one might choose one's self. The request for instance for (Bishop) Michael Ingham (of New Westminster) is for a moratorium on approval for the public rite of same-sex blessing. That's an important distinction. It's the authorization for public rites, for him to ask that these not take place, the official public liturgy, until such time as another conversation takes place in the communion to try to establish what it is that's going on. There's a huge confusion. People think that they are marriages and it's not. Similarly it's not saying it's not recognizing gay ministry and it's not a moratorium on gay clergy -- it's of openly gay bishops living in committed same-sex relationships. It's very specific.
Q: So a gay bishop who's not living in a same-sex relationship can still be ordained and consecrated?
A: That's the current policy in the Anglican Church of Canada. Bishops who are not practising is not an issue.
Q: What exactly will the common Anglican covenant be?
A: It's a long-term process. I think one of the reasons we got into difficulty is that the different provinces have different understandings of how the Anglican Communion works. We've always said that, 'we're an autonomous province, jurisdiction rests with us.' Technically speaking that's true for other provinces but obviously there are some who believe that legislation of the Lambeth Conference is, for example, binding law. Well, what we need is how it really does work. That's been called for. The Virginia Report called for that. We haven't really addressed that.
The draft covenant attached, we didn't go through with a fine-toothed comb. It's only a sample about the kind of things that might be included. The commission is endorsing the process for a covenant and not this specific draft. It's not a covenant about whether or not we'll ordain gay people that's not what it says, but a covenant around how we will live with each other and how we make decisions and I think that's a good thing. If we're a global family we need to agree on how the family works.
Q: What about the specific recommendation regarding (Bishop) Gene Robinson (of New Hampshire)?
A: As I understand it the recommendation for Gene is that ECUSA express regret for the breach of affection.
Q: But his attendance and his ministry will be under review of the Council of Advice?
A: The commission in the end decided not to make a specific recommendation to the Archbishop of Canterbury as to whether Gene should nor should not be invited to the Lambeth Conference. It's up to the Council of Advice and it's up to Gene as well.
Q: What constitutes an apology?
A: No, it's not an apology. It's an expression of regret.
Q: That's the same, isn't it?
A: I don't think so. I regret very much that what I've done has hurt you. I apologize for what I've done. Those are two very different statements.
Q: Withdrawing from representations to the Anglican Communion, what does that mean?
A: Again there are a lot of people who believe that those who assented to Gene's ordination or who took part by the laying of hands -- some people have interpreted that to mean that they've contradicted Anglican law and people should have nothing to do with them and so on. This is saying bishops who did that need to think about whether their action has so offended others in the communion that it might be better if they didn't take on any representative role. In other words, if they were elected to the Anglican Consultative Council. It's not saying they don't have legitimacy. It's not saying they're not valid bishops or anything. It's simply saying it's like, I'm thinking of an analogy -- you've got a family reunion and there's some guy that's really upset the family. He might think 'well. I won't spoil their party by coming this time. I'll just stay away and see if the cooling off will be helpful."
Q: So it leaves the decision up to them whether to withdraw?
That's right.
Q: What about their presence at the Lambeth Conference of bishops?
A: It doesn't speak about that.
Q: So it's the ecumenical dialogues and bodies?
A: Yes, for instance, Frank Griswold (presiding bishop of ECUSA) chose to resign from the ARCIC (Anglican-Roman Catholic International Commission). It's that kind of thing. That was his choice.
Q: What happens to this report?
A: It goes to the Standing Commission of the Primates, the Primates' meeting in February. We've established here (in the Anglican Church of Canada) a task force from the house of bishops, faith, worship and ministry and partners in mission committee that will meet in late January after listening to what the house of bishops will say, what COGS (Council of General Synod) says. To advise the primate when he goes to the Primates' Meeting as to what kind of messages he should be bringing.
It's hoped that the Primates' Meeting will take it to ACC (Anglican Consultative Council) meeting in June.
Q: There are some who say that the report is rather harsh on those with liberal views…
A: I think they have to read it and they have to read it against the background of the other stories that were being circulated about what the commission was supposed to say. It didn't say ECUSA was going to be kicked out. It doesn't say New Westminster or the Anglican Church of Canada is kicked out. It didn't say there can't be gay clergy. A lot of the reaction is still to this spin, not to the report. Yes, it doesn't embrace some of the positions that our church would seem to want to go forth. That's hardly surprising when you look at the constituency of the communion. There's as much here as there can be I think.
Q: On the issue of alternative episcopal oversight, what the report is saying is that the model of ECUSA is the acceptable one?
A: It provides a good model.
Q: So the diocesan bishop will still be involved in the process?
A: Yes. And it's saying foreign primates and bishops, they can do that if that's part of that agreement.
Q: They can't just come in and take over?
A: That's right.
Q: Do you think these recommendations are enough to arrest a split in the communion?
A: We'll see. I said all along if the communion has the will to live together it can.
Q: What do you consider to be the most important recommendation?
A: That we carry on together; calling upon all parties in the dispute to seek ways of reconciliation and to heal our divisions; to keep coming back to the table and make the case and not to walk away.
Q: What if nobody follows the recommendations?
A: Then, we're back to square one and that's sad.
Q: The report doesn't say up to when that moratorium will be? There's no time period or anything?
A: I think the intention is that there be an opportunity, that those provinces in the process of discernment will engage the communion in continuing study… I think that means that it's vital that the communion establishes practices and structures to facilitate ongoing discussion. I think the question is on hold for a while until we find a way to make the case.
The basic thing that I think, a number of provinces said is, 'you didn't actually make the case as to why this was important for you and your context.' If you look at the first part of the report that talks about the way the ordination of women was handled it wasn't that we all agreed on the ordination of women but we agreed to disagree because we understood why each was making the decisions it was.
Q: And in the case of Gene Robinson and New Westminster, this didn't happen?
A: That was the perception. That's the regret.
Q: So they need to make their case?
A: Yes. Not because the communion has the legal right. But you honour them by expressing what it is that you need to do and where you are. It's important to view the covenant against the next thing that will happen, whatever that is. There are other issues where we will disagree. This will hold the model.
Q: What are the implications of the report for the General Synod resolution on the local option for same-sex blessings, for Toronto (which will have its special synod on Nov. 27 to consider same-sex blessings) and New Westminster ?
A: I'm not going to comment on Toronto because that's coming too quickly and I don't know what Toronto is deciding on that at all(...)
Q: Bishop (Michael) Ingham (of New Westminster) says as far as he's concerned there's nothing in the report that says his diocese can't continue blessing same-sex unions. Bishop Gene Robinson of New Hampshire says the report leaves "wiggle room" to continue same-sex blessings. Is this the case?
The report talks about authorized public rites for same-sex blessings. And Michael has said that since it was the synod that requested him to authorize that he would go back to the synod in May with the request about the moratorium. It's not to reverse the policy because it doesn't actually ask him to do that. It simply asks for a moratorium. So I suppose all those places that do that, and I don't know in the States how many (blessings) have actually been authorized by synods and how much are actually just pastoral practice. I don't know.
Q: How different are the two?
A: In New Westminster the synod took a motion asking that the bishop authorize a public liturgy and that was developed by the diocese and approved. That's like an official liturgical document of the diocese. I think that's different from a prayer blessing that's done in the context of the blessing of a home or something like that. And of course you've got the whole question that didn't even come up because it's so new and that's the question of what's the relationship of the blessing of a union to marriage?
Archbishop Andrew Hutchison, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada
(...)Q: What about the recommendations calling for a moratorium on same-sex blessings and the withdrawal from representative functions in the Anglican Communion?
A: I'm not sure that I really want to comment substantially on those. I think it's entirely reasonable that the commissioners have asked both the diocese of New Westminster and those who have so vigorously opposed their actions to the point of intervention in their affairs, that the commissioners have asked both sides to express regret for the effect of their actions on the bonds of affection throughout the Anglican communion.
It's a balanced approach and a reasonable request. I will be meeting with the house of bishops later this month. At that time I'll take up with them and with the bishop of new west specifically on the question of moratorium. I would also underline that the suggestion that the bishop of New Westminster (Michael Ingham) and others consider withdrawing representation in the communion only suggests that they withdraw if they're not prepared to express regret for their actions. I feel confident that Bishop Ingham will be more than willing to express regret.
Q: How can there be a recommendation for a moratorium when provinces and dioceses are supposed to be independent?
A: Nothing in the report is binding on any province. The proposal is being presented to the primates. The primates have the obligation to present this to the church in their province, as I will to the house of bishops and CoGS (Council of General Synod). And we then will determine how we will respond as a church. But there's nothing binding. The moratorium I imagine is suggested to give everybody a little time, to step back from actions that may be seen to further complicate the situation.
Q: What do you think about the recommendation to have a common Anglican covenant?
A. (...)The very earliest anything could happen would be 2007 (the next General Synod) to accept or not the principle of a covenant(...)
Q: Do you think that the recommendations are enough to arrest a split in the Anglican Communion?
A: One can only say I hope so. I pray that they are sufficient. I can only speak as to my own personal reactions. I can't speak for the reactions of the Canadian church and other parts of the church. I think they've (commission members) made a wonderful effort and I hope and pray that it will be sufficient.
Q: What about views that the recommendations are rather harsh on liberal views represented by ECUSA and New Westminster ?
A: I think I'd rather not comment on that just now until I've consulted the bishops.
Q: What does the recommendation to withdraw from representative functions of the Anglican Communion really mean?
A: It would mean such things as the Anglican Consultative Council. That those who are not prepared to express regret for the effects of their actions should consider very carefully whether they should therefore withdraw from representing their church in international Anglican bodies.
Q: You've stressed the words "express regret for the effects of their actions." So you're saying that what's being asked is for both New Westminster and ECUSA to express regret for the effects of their actions, not for what they've done?
A: That's right. The church in Canada makes decisions prayerfully and under the guidance of the Holy Spirit, believing that they're dong what's right and what's appropriate for the church in Canada. But what we now realize is that's had a very significant impact elsewhere in the communion. What's being asked for is that we recognize that and express regret for it. But we don't apologize for doing what we believe is right for Canada. What we do profoundly regret is that it has caused other people distress. We commit ourselves to greater consultation and what other decisions that may have significant effects.
Q: So it's not saying it was wrong that you elected Gene Robinson. It's not wrong that you authorized same-sex blessings?
A: No.
Q: What constitutes expression of regret? Is it a public apology? A letter?
A: I'm not really certain. I would think a public statement or something.
October 22, 2004
http://www.guardian.co.uk/comment/story/0,3604,1334137,00.html Blindly embracing diversity will damage unity
Face to Faith
Tom Wright Saturday October 23, 2004 The Guardian (...)The charge against the US churches, for which they have been invited to express regret, is not that they took certain decisions, but that they thereby knowingly ignored, and hence damaged, the "proper constraints of the bonds of affection" which, expressed in these "instruments", hold us together. That is why the report also criticises interdiocesan invasion, however well-intentioned.
So far, the only expressed regret has been that actions taken have hurt other people. That is not the point. What matters is a refreshed understanding, rooted in scripture and common tradition, of how "communion" works. That is what the report is all about. That is why we have urged that the "instruments" be tuned up, without losing their essential character, to meet the needs of a new day(...)
Next Ed-Mail Same-sex Blessings |