« January 2007 | Main | March 2007 »

February 22, 2007

Anglican leaders struggle to unite

When Anglican archbishops gathered in Dar es Salaam in Tanzania for another crisis meeting at the brink of a permanent split in the Communion, it was doubtful they would all stay in the same meeting room, let alone agree a joint statement.
BBC - 21.02.07 -

Anglican leaders struggle to unite
By Robert Pigott
BBC religious affairs correspondent

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/africa/6381247.stm

Dr Rowan Williams was attempting to prevent a worldwide split

When Anglican archbishops gathered in Dar es Salaam in Tanzania for another crisis meeting at the brink of a permanent split in the Communion, it was doubtful they would all stay in the same meeting room, let alone agree a joint statement.

Then past midnight on the final day they produced an astonishing compromise, somehow maintaining unity in the face of the deepest disputes on matters of fundamental belief.

"If you'd asked me a week ago for the odds that no-one would walk out, I have said they were remote," said the Bishop of Durham, Tom Wright.

"If you'd asked me what chance there was of a unanimous agreement, I'd have said it was nil."

Dr Wright was one of the authors of the Windsor Report, a sort of road map for the Communion to weather the apparently mortal crisis brought about by the ordination of a gay bishop - Gene Robinson - in 2003.

He credits the Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, with preventing, or at least postponing, schism. "I don't know how he did it," he said.

Liberal approach

Dr Williams did it by persuading the Episcopal Church - or at least its presiding bishop Katharine Jefferts Schori - to make an outstanding sacrifice.

As the price of staying in the Communion, Dr Jefferts Schori had to agree the establishment of a parallel church organisation in America, as a home for traditionalists who have broken away from the Episcopal Church because of its liberal approach to homosexuality.

To make it worse, this alternative church body would come under the jurisdiction of a senior cleric, answerable, not to her, but to a committee of archbishops outside the United States.

It was enough to placate the conservative archbishops - especially from the Nigerian, Kenyan, Ugandan, Rwandan, Singaporean and South American branches of the Communion - who wanted to expel the Episcopal Church altogether.

Some of them have already intervened with traditionalist congregations in the United States, and will, for the time being, be allowed to continue to do so.

But the conservatives won even greater concessions.

An official Communion report saying that the Episcopal Church had just about done enough at its convention last June to conform to the Windsor Report's demands on homosexuality was sidelined.

Instead there was an uncompromising demand for an unequivocal promise not to ordain any more gay bishops or bless further same-sex relationships in church.

There will also be a covenant - a framework of shared beliefs and duties for membership of the Communion - with a sting in its tail.

Hard to sell?

It provides for measures to sever ties with churches that step out of line.

Dr Williams acknowledged that all of this - especially the parallel traditionalist church in America - was uncharted territory.

"It's an experiment," said Dr Williams. "Pray for it."

Could it work? There are signs that Dr Jefferts Schoi will find it hard to sell to her church, although Dr Wright believes "they will see that it's the only way of staying in the Communion".

That won't necessarily be enough to persuade them.

Divided Communion?

The Episcopal Church may be small (2.3m churchgoing members, compared with a claimed 18 million for the Nigerian church for example), but it is rich, and could be joined by like-minded churches in Canada, Mexico, Brazil, Australia (or most of it) and New Zealand, among others.

It is also hard to see the Episcopal Church being able to prevent its members - for whom social justice towards gay people is as much a defining issue as obedience to a literal interpretation of the Bible is to African conservatives - from blessing gay couples in church, or, one day, electing another Gene Robinson.

That is why Rowan Williams' coup has probably bought time rather than solved the crisis.

He has spoken of falling back on a two-tier Communion - with full membership of those who sign up to the covenant (the conservatives, the Church of England) and associate membership for those who do not (the Americans and Canadians perhaps).

Dr Williams did not need to fall back on this variant of schism in Dar es Salaam, but it may, sooner or later, be the fate of the Communion to be so divided.

Posted by latimer at 12:53 PM | Comments (0)

Archbishop of Canterbury: comments at the final press conference in Tanzania

20.02.07 - " ... We're still as a communion in a place where our doctrinal position is that of Lambeth 1.10 and where that position has been reiterated in a number of Primates' Meetings, ACC meetings and a number of other fora. That hasn't changed. However there are two factors which we needed to take seriously and engage with ..."

Archbishop of Canterbury: comments at the final press conference in Tanzania
20th February 2007

May I echo the thanks for your patience which Philip has already shared with you - we're very appreciative of the fact that it is late and we're all tired.

Also before I start, I went from one session just to check the BBC news and heard more details about he appalling bombing on the train in India and I know that all the Primates will want to put on record their grief and shock about this and their prayers for all involved and their families.

What I'd like to do is touch briefly - very briefly - on the issues in the final communiqué of our meeting. As usual, you'll see elements there of narrative - this is what we did, these are the activities we shared and these were the subjects we covered. You'll notice the reference there to the commissioning of our new representative at the United Nations, and following on from that, some discussion of future work that can be done on the Millennium Development goals by the Communion, especially in the forthcoming conference in Johannesburg in a few week's time at which I hope to be present.

We also received and welcomed the report on Theological Education and identified a new project on interpretation of the Bible.

The business of following through the recommendations of the Windsor report covers, as you see, a great deal of our business and it touches on what we've called the listening process, and we had an extremely good discussion and report from Canon Philip Groves and a great deal of information about the variety of responses and perspectives around the world on these questions around listening to the experience of homosexual people and the challenges of equitable and patient pastoral ministry to them.

There's a reference to the report on the Panel of Reference, you've heard something already of the Anglican Covenant, but it's probably the remainder of the document, from paragraph 17 onwards that contains the meat of our recommendations.

In short, the feeling of the meeting as a whole was that the response of the General Convention of The Episcopal Church to the recommendations of the Windsor report, a response made at General Convention last year, represented some steps in a very encouraging direction but did not yet represent a situation in which we could say 'business as usual'. What that means in practice is spelled out in what follows.

We're still as a communion in a place where our doctrinal position is that of Lambeth 1.10 and where that position has been reiterated in a number of Primates' Meetings, ACC meetings and a number of other fora.
That hasn't changed. However there are two factors which we needed to take seriously and engage with.

The first is this: the response of The Episcopal Church, while not wholly clear, represented a willingness to engage with the Communion and awareness of the cost of difficulty that decisions have generated, so our first questions is 'how do we best engage with that willingness?'
How do we work with the stream of desire to remain with the Communion?

The second factor is the very substantial group of bishops and others within The Episcopal Church perhaps amounting to nearly one quarter of the Bishops who have spelt out not only their willingness to abide by the Windsor report in all its aspects, but to provide carefully worked-through system of pastoral oversight for those in The Episcopal Church who are not content with the decisions of General Convention.

So what you have before you is an attempt to see if there is, while the Covenant is being discussed around the Communion, to see if there is an interim solution that will certainly fall very far short of resolving all the disputes that are before us but will provide a way of moving forward with integrity. A system of pastoral care for the substantial minority in The Episcopal Church, an encouragement for them and others within The Episcopal Church in whatever desire they have to remain on stream with the rest of the Communion; and also, more importantly a way of beginning to negotiate a way through the very difficult situations that have been created by interventions from other Provinces in the life of The Episcopal Church.

We accepted the good faith of those responsible for such interventions, and we heard some very moving testimonies about that; at the same time they and we recognise that that can only be a temporary solution and the preferable solution is to have some kind of settlement negotiated within the church life of the United States.

Hence the recommendations of the Primates at the end; a proposal to establish a pastoral council; a responsibility shared between the Primates' Meeting and the Presiding Bishop, asking those bishops who have already offered to take up this responsibility to provide pastoral care within The Episcopal Church for the conscientious minority and a challenge to both sides really, a challenge to The Episcopal Church to clarify its position; a challenge also to those who have intervened from elsewhere to see if they can negotiate their way towards an equitable settlement within the life of the North America Church.

You'll notice that we also suggested, to pick up an unfortunate metaphor that's been around quite a bit, the kind of ceasefire in terms of litigation. At the very end of the recommendations you'll see that the very last paragraph that the primates urge representatives of The Episcopal Church and of those congregations in property disputes with it, to suspend all actions in law arising from this situation, None of us; none of us believe that litigation and counter litigation can be a proper way forward and we don't see that we can move towards sensible balanced reconciliation while that remains a threat in wide use.

Those are the bones of what we've said here; I'd like to put it in the context of the Covenant process which you've already heard a little about and to suggest to you that what it amounts to is a package, not one single proposal, not one single scheme, but a way of encouraging and nurturing certain elements in The Episcopal Church a way of clarifying the challenge overall that the Communion wants to put to The Episcopal Church within that time frame during which the covenant will be discussed and we hope eventually accepted. Thank you.

Question concerning homosexuality; is it a gift from God or is it a sin?

The teaching of the Anglican Church remains that homosexual activity is not compatible with scripture. The homosexual condition, the homosexual desire, we don't call conditions sinful in that sense.

Q Was the cost of keeping the communion together allowing other provinces to continue to trespass on the property of The Episcopal Church?

Well I think if you look at the communiqué you'll see that that's precisely the situation we're trying to rectify and to well, to end. Now that's not going to happen tomorrow, but that is certainly very explicitly there as a concern shared round the room.

Q What's this we hear about you guys joining up with the Roman Catholic Church?

What's this we hear about the end of the world ... I think what you hear is a really rather remarkably garbled version of a document which has appeared recently which simply states where we are practically in the limits of cooperation between ourselves and the Roman Catholic Church a document agreed by Anglican and Roman Catholic bishops around the world and suggesting what can be done in pastoral practice; it amounts to no more than that.

Q [response of the (TEC) House of Bishops ...] consequences of failure to spell out

I think it's impossible for me to speculate about the House of Bishops in the US and indeed the Presiding Bishop is not in a position, as indeed none of us is in a position to deliver the whole of the House of Bishops we hope that they will. On the specifics on the wording - well, these are the terms that have been put to them, I think it would be rather difficult if there were a response in other terms.

On consequences, you'll see there in the paper what seems a statement of bare fact; that if the House of Bishops cannot in good conscience - and that's an important phrase because there are consciences involved - on both sides of this debate. If the reassurances cannot in good conscience, then in fact the damage is not repaired, and that has to affect some of the consideration we would want to give about the organs of the Communion.

Q Including invitations to Lambeth?

Among other things, that'll have to be under consideration, I don't pre-empt a decision but that'll have to be discussed.

Q Archbishop Akinola ... has he chosen to walk away from this?

Archbishop Akinola has declared that he is prepared to support this document.

Q What message is this sending to people in the pews who are tired of this ... what would you say is the end goal?

The end goal is the Kingdom of God, isn't it, and that takes a while.
What would I say to people in the pews? I would say first of all that Gospel remains the Gospel -that is the love of God, the challenge of God the love of God promising absolution, the challenge of God requiring change. That doesn't change and for people to go on in the baptised life, sharing Holy Communion, serving the world, there is no imperative bigger than that.

I said I went back from one session and put the news on and looking at the levels of human grief, terror and suffering around the world, it did seem to me that in many ways it's quite difficult to persuade people that the Church - I don't just mean the Anglican Church - has transforming good news when most of what people hear about us is our own internal divisions. There's a lot in this communiqué about what else we're doing, that is the other 97% of what the Church does in terms of the Millennium Development Goals and other matters. I do hope people will bear that in mind as the primary vision.

Q Primates concern about the problems of Africa; have they forgotten Africa?

God forbid! The discussion we had on the Millennium Development Goals, to come back to that again, focussed on many of these issues and we heard discussions not only of course about Africa, but certainly about Africa and other places. We heard about the challenge of corruption, the challenge of debt, the challenge of course about HIV and Aids, which is a major focus of a forthcoming conference in Johannesburg; and of course I had the privilege of being able to discuss some of these things with the President of Tanzania and with the President of Zanzibar during this visit and get some sense of what was being done in these terms.

Now one important fact here is that we have tired to reaffirm the capacity of the Church to deliver the Millennium Development Goals at grass roots level in a way that no other voluntary organisation can.
This is a central theme in the thinking of many people in the Anglican Church at the moment and one of the challenges we have to rise to is whether we can better coordinate our work for development and in meeting these goals.

Q Primatial vicar - will he trump the canons? ...What authority will this figure have?

Well if you bear with me while I try and explain what is admittedly a slightly complicated concept. The Presiding Bishop has declared willingness to entertain the notion of a Primatial Vicar. What you have here is the model that those bishops within the United States who have declared their willingness to abide by Windsor and so forth should be given the right to nominate a person who will act in the terms that they recognise as constituting and offering adequate pastoral oversight. To that person the PB will delegate certain power, but that person will be responsible to the council, the Pastoral Council that will be set up, as a means of communications with the Primates as a body. Now operating under the canons and constitutions; that's a difficult one to be clear about.

Now you won't have, shouldn't have any bishop operating any canons and constitutions and the bishops we're talking about, never mind for a moment the practice of TEC, the canons and constitutions as such don't violate their conscience even if the practice does, so the challenge is to work out what that would mean, the proper degree of independence and critical engagement which I think is meant to be represented by the link to the Primates meeting as a whole, not just to the Presiding Bishop and the structure do TEC.

It's an experiment; pray for it.

ENDS

___________________________________________________________________
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London

Posted by latimer at 12:21 PM | Comments (0)

National Interfaith Forum NZ

19.02.07 The idea for a National Statement on Religious Diversity formed part of the recommendations of the New Zealand Interfaith Delegation upon its return from Yogyakarta in December 2004 in response to religious conflict in our region and around the world. The initial rationale was fourfold:

National Interfaith ForumHamilton, 19 February 2007

Towards a National Statement on Religious Diversity

Rationale and Background
The idea for a National Statement on Religious Diversity formed part of the recommendations of the New Zealand Interfaith Delegation upon its return from Yogyakarta in December 2004 in response to religious conflict in our region and around the world. The initial rationale was fourfold:

(1) The idea of a ‘National Statement’ was that it would not originate
from government and be mandated from above, as it were, rather
it would arise as a result of broad discussions among faith and interfaith groups and the wider New Zealand public.

(2) Around our region there are many instances of religious discrimination
and the religious rights of citizens are often not clear, particularly for minority groups. It was felt that our religious rights as New Zealanders, within the framework of democracy and the law, should be articulated alongside the associated responsibilities.

(3) That while religious diversity was not new in itself, there is a new
consciousness of the religious lives of others and religious diversity is increasingly part of our everyday lives in our communities, schools,
and workplaces. In many countries this increased diversity has led to conflict, discord and even violence. It was hoped that our responses to
New Zealand’s radically changing religious demography would be
more positive and provide a framework for different religious and
other communities to live together in a state of relatively peaceful coexistence.

(4) That when religious issues did arise (the ‘cartoon controversy’, the ‘Burqa affair, the wearing of the Hijab, requests for prayer times,’ religious holidays and the provision of services or facilities) the National Statement would provide a starting point for discussions and offer guidance.

Process
In August last year a draft National Statement was discussed at the Interfaith Forum in Wellington, as part of the Diversity Action Forum. There was wide support for the draft and a Reference Group was established to revise the Statement in the light of the responses and subsequent discussion. The Ministry of Social Development supported the work of this group. The Human Rights Commission undertook the process of consultation with responses called for from around the country by December 15, 2006. My purpose today is to report back on that consultation and to present an analysis of the responses.

Consultation
Public forums were held around the country, including in Christchurch, Dunedin, Levin, Hamilton, Porirua, Auckland, Wellington and Rotorua. I attended the very different Wellington and Levin meetings and many of you here were at the Wellington Diversity Forum and attended and helped organise these meetings around the country. The Wellington meeting included rationalists, humanists and a Sea of Faith Christian humanist; Buddhists and Baha’i; Hindus and Muslims; Jews and Sikhs; Maori, both Ratana and Anglican; Unificationists and Latter-Day Saints; and Exclusive Brethren and others.

It was a wonderful meeting with discussions and debates about the place of the Treaty of Waitangi in the document, whether New Zealand is or is not a Christian country, the content of school education about religion and what might constitute ‘reasonable steps’ in meeting religious demands at work. Other concerns voiced were religious coercion, women’s rights, and individual rights for members of faith groups. The meeting at Levin was very different with a variety of different Christians present – the mayor apologised for not being able to the rustle up a single non-Christian – again the debate was full on and focussed on immigration, relationships between the churches and between the churches and the state.

The Dunedin consultation included representatives from the Anglicans, the University chaplaincy, Presbyterians, Buddhists, Arya Samaj, Baptists, Catholics, Orthodox, Baha’i, Jews, Methodists, Combined Community Church, Hindus, Seventh Day Adventists, Pentecostal-Elim, Hare Krishnas, local Maori, the Brotherhood of Humanity, Quakers, Qi gong Taoists, Brahma Kumaris and Coptic Christians, along with the City Council and Problem Gambling, and Dunedin Multi-Ethnic Council. Their collective submission was supportive, thoughtful and made a number of useful suggestions that have found their way into the revised statement. Reading the reports and submissions the regional forums were successful and of value to those who attended as well as to the process as a whole.

The responses have been excellent both in terms of the numbers and the wide array of respondents and in terms of the generally high level of the submissions. The issues raised by the draft National Statement do resonate with the public and are of considerable concern and interest to many New Zealanders. They continue to arrive including two over this last weekend. The issue of religious rights, the religious nature of our country and our religious responsibilities are all too rarely debated and discussed and this became an opportunity to do so. The wide range of responses included the Catholics Bishops’ Conference, replies from representatives and members of all the major churches, including the Anglicans, Baptists, Methodists, Presbyterians and Quakers. Then there were responses from Baha’i, Buddhists, Hindus, Jewish responses, Muslim submissions and groups such as the PPTA, the National School Trustees Association, the Council of Women, The Christian Education Commission, Vision Network New Zealand and Destiny Church. Some were short and confined themselves to a single point and others ran for pages and pages. Taken as a whole, the responses reflect the views of more than 600 people as well as a number of large national organisations.

There was also a meeting with officials from different government ministries and departments following their meeting to discuss the draft national Statement.

The process itself in bringing together different people to discuss these issues for what for many was the first time is so far its greatest success and in my view may well be as important as the National Statement itself. We often think that we are a secular country where there is little concern about religion but reading the submissions would dissuade you of this and instead make you think of New Zealand as a place where religion is debated in public in a serious fashion by informed and articulate atheists, agnostics and believers of all stripes.

Analysis
Generally speaking there was wide support for the Statement and for almost all of the content in the draft. Before looking at the responses in some details, it is clear that a number of the respondents and commentators did not grasp the nature of the draft statement. There were two principal misunderstandings. First, a minority were concerned that the National Statement on Religious Diversity was a new law to be enacted and binding on all New Zealanders. Of course, this is not the case but this was obviously not made as clear as it might have been and it should have been further stressed that the Statement is the beginning of a dialogue about religious diversity, a process rather than an end in itself. As you know the plan is to discuss the revised Statement here today with the aim of reporting back to the third Regional Interfaith Dialogue to be held in Waitangi in may this year. Associated with this first misunderstanding was the minority view that the NSRD was designed to somehow give the government new controls over religions in New Zealand.

Secondly, what I refer to as the new context for religious diversity was not appreciated or understood. I deliberately began today’s paper with this new context I consider that this view is supported by overseas examples and our own census (see below).

To the consultation itself: A small number of responses advocated dropping the whole process as the negative answer as to why we need it at all. A minority of respondents wanted to know what the NSRD would add to existing legislation, and again if nothing, then why proceed. Most respondents, in terms of the new context of religious diversity and some of the negative overseas models for dealing with religious diversity or failing to do, appreciated the point of the whole.

A large number of submissions argued that the normative and prescriptive tone of the draft was unhelpful and undermined what they understood as the potential importance of the document. They suggested that ‘shall’ should be replaced by ‘will’ and ‘should’ and thus the National Statement would have a more aspirational tone. I am fully persuaded by this argument and it was supported by the Reference Group. A number of responses questioned whether the terms, faith group, faith, belief, religious community and religion had different meanings or are simple synonyms or alternatives. We had used ‘belief’ as in United Nation’s documents in contrast to faith, as in ‘ethical belief’, referring to non-religious belief. The number of responses that raised this indicates that this terminology is not well known and we have changed this.

Submissions from the rationalist/humanist minority, in terms of the total responses, contended that the non-religious were not given equal place or significant as believers. The Reference Group discussed this concern and it was decided that the Statement should be inclusive of the non –religious although it was noted that this was a statement on religious diversity not on everyone and the focus was necessarily on the religious communities.

There were a number of suggestions for additional clauses. There was support for the right to religion to include the right to propagate one’s religious beliefs to others with some arguing that this was a fundamental religious right. Again, the RG were happy to include this. There was support for religious communities to have responsibilities as well as rights, in particular the responsibility ‘to build and maintain positive relationships’ with other faith communities and to promote ‘mutual respect and understanding’ and this has been included.

There were concerns from a number of respondents about ‘extreme’ religious ‘cults’ and the limits of tolerance or respect. We considered that this was addressed by the rubric, ‘under the law’ and this, of course, applies to all religious groups. Likewise, the issue of coercion and religious groups restricting the rights of members, especially women and children, falls under existing legislation.

It is impossible to meet all the demands and suggestions for changes, as many of them are mutually exclusive and some contradictory. We received responses that supported the use of ‘tolerance’ but not ‘respect’ on the grounds that, as one self-designated atheist put it, ‘I cannot respect irrational beliefs’. Another respondent argued exactly the opposite and considered that tolerance was offensive and that respect was required.

The Prologue was generally supported in particular the Treaty reference. A small number of Christian submissions considered that the paragraph on Christianity was not forceful enough and was too historical, many other expressed satisfaction at the recognition of the special role of Christianity in our history and national life. One submission included a list of forty examples of special Christian privilege.

The phrase, ‘reaffirmation of our national commitment to religious diversity’ was thought to be problematic by a small number of respondents and has been amended. It was advocated by a number of submissions that New Zealand legislation be included alongside the international treaties mentioned in the fifth paragraph. This has been done.

Finally, there were a very small number of people who were very suspicious of the term ‘diversity’. One person was anxious that it was an ideological term that masked an anti-religious viewpoint. In the document we use ‘diversity’ to simply refer to the fact of there being different faiths. This is consistent with the scholarly literature where ‘pluralism’ is sometimes uses to refer to a positive evaluation of the fact of religious diversity.

Let us now look briefly at each of the eight numbered ‘clauses’ in turn.
(1) The State and Religion
This clause was subjected to a great deal of comment. A number of minority religious groups objected to the claim that the State did in fact deal with all faiths equally and highlighted the ways in which Christianity plays a privileged role in our national life. The RG considered this and it was decided that this should be reworded as an aspiration. There were a small number of responses including Vision Network New Zealand and Destiny Church who understood Christianity to be the state religion of New Zealand. Most respondents supported the view expressed in the draft although some called for a stronger statement along the lines of referring to New Zealand as a ‘secular’ state. Suggestions included replacing ‘state religion’ with established religion. While it is clear that New Zealand does not have a state religion like the Scandinavian countries or a number of Muslim majority countries nor an established religion like Anglicanism in England, some argued that as the Queen of England is Head of the Church of England and Head of State and is as well Queen of New Zealand, Christianity is a state religion. One respondent propounded this case in relation to the Queen of England being the Head of the Commonwealth, which would make India, a country with more than one billion Hindus and over one hundred million Muslims a Christian country! Further, those that consider Christianity to be the state religion do not want it to be treated equally with other faiths, as this would undercut its especial status.

The revised version reads:
(1) The State seeks to treat all faith communities and those who
profess no religion equally before the law. New Zealand has
no state religion.

(2) The Right to Religion
There was widespread support from the religious communities and many individual respondents for this clause. Non-religious submissions called for the inclusion of non-religious belief too under this heading, including one who wanted an equal right to have no religion. Many respondents found it useful to have the right to religion clearly articulated. ‘Other belief’
refers to non-religious beliefs that have the same protection under the law.

The revised version read:
(2) New Zealand upholds the right to freedom of religion and
belief and the right to freedom from discrimination on the grounds
of religious or other belief.

(3) The Right to Safety
The feedback on this third clause indicates a clear demarcation line between the migrant and minority religious communities and the mainstream church and Christian responses. Minority communities reported experience with vandalism and damage to places of worship and of issues concerned with personal safety. The clause has been extended to reflect these concerns with ‘security of person and property’. Other responses felt that existing laws covered this and every New Zealander has these rights but that no special rights should be accorded to communities. The RG discussed this issue and decided that ‘and their members be added’ to accommodate this individual right but to keep the clause as it reflects the concerns about safety and security of a number of religious communities.

The revised version read:
(3) Faith communities and their members have a right to the safety and security of their person and property.

(4) The Right of Freedom of Expression

Respondents were anxious about the policing of this and who would be in a position to determine ‘responsibility’. There was support for media freedom being balanced with a higher degree of media accountability. References were made to the South Park episode and the Danish cartoon controversy and their publication here. The clause was intended to cover the right of religious people to express themselves and of press freedom. A number of respondents considered that the framework of accountability should extend across a range of media. This was changed accordingly. The final sentence was shortened and rendered aspirational.

The revised version read:
(4) The right to freedom of expression and freedom of the media are vital for democracy, but should be exercised with responsibility.

(5) Recognition and Accommodation
Respondents were concerned about requests for time off work or school, or expensive demands for special facilities or services and as to what constitutes ‘reasonable’. The ‘reasonable steps’ and ‘reasonable accommodation’ are taken from existing New Zealand legislation. There was an interesting exchange at the Wellington consultative meeting when a businessman and rationalist voiced his fears that much of the workday would be lost if people who wanted to pray five times were ‘accommodated’. A Muslim responded by reporting that he did have three eight minutes periods off each working shift in order to say his prayers and then returned the time by working part of his lunch break. This is clearly to be based on real demand and each case to be decided on its merits and context.

The revised version read:

(5) Reasonable steps should be taken in educational and work environments and in the delivery of public services to recognise and accommodate diverse religious beliefs and practices.

(6) Education
This clause caused difficulties in both religious and non-religious submissions. The difference between religious instruction as part of formation in faith and learning about religions in the context of the humanities and social sciences was not fully appreciated by a number of respondents. Religious Studies is compulsory in English schools but does not take the form of religious instruction within a particular faith. Even religious schools are required to teach about other faiths and the majority of English school pupils learn about the major religious traditions. Most respondents saw great value in students here learning about the faiths of their fellow New Zealanders and of the faiths of our nearest Asian neighbours. It is important that such teaching (it already takes place in six New Zealand universities) reflect accurately the faiths being taught and is unpartisan in relation to different denominations and tendencies within a faith. One person expressed the view that ‘religion had no more place in schools than any other casual subject such as tap dancing or train spotting’. This of course fails to understand the significance of religion to its adherents or its importance in the world we live in.

The point was made that in New Zealand’s integrated schools it would be inappropriate to learn about and understand other faiths, on the contrary it is just as vital if not more so in the integrated school sector than in state schools. Integrated schools would still have religious instruction for faith formation but this is quite different from religious studies. In fact, when I attended the NZQA advisory group meetings looking at religious studies syllabuses it was the Catholic and Anglican schools that had the best programmes of study about other faiths.

It is important as was indicated in a number of submissions that religious studies in a school should resonate and reflect the community of which the school is a part. Finally, in ‘an impartial manner’ caused a number of difficulties and it was decided by the RG to drop this.

A number of respondents refereed to the 1877 Education Act and understood this to prohibit teaching of religions in primary schools but it does not, of course, relate to teaching about religion at all.

The revised version read:
(6) Schools should teach an understanding of the diversity of religious and spiritual traditions in a manner that reflects the community of which the school is a part.

(7) Religious Differences
This was felt by some to be overly negative and it has been represented in a more positive way. Religious diversity is about real differences between people in terms of their values and what they hold to be most important. These deeply held differences will inevitably lead to further tensions within faith communities, between faith communities and between faith communities and those who hold non-religious values. If we cannot stop these differences from occurring it is vital that we do what we can to prevent the descent of disputes into violence and breaches of the law.

The revised version read:
(7) Debate and disagreement about religious beliefs within faith communities and beyond, will occur and should be exercised within the rule of law and without resort to violence.

(8) Cooperation and understanding
This clause was warmly received except by a minority who were concerned about the role of the government in relation to religious communities. There were submissions debating the merits of ‘tolerance’ over ‘mutual respect’ and it was here the RG considered was the appropriate place to delineate the responsibilities of faith communities in relation to government and each other.

The revised version read:
(8) Government and faith communities have a responsibility to build and maintain positive relationships with each other, and to promote mutual respect and understanding.

It is worth referring to the 2006 Census figures on religion as these appeared after the consultation had ended and serves to reinforce a number of the issues that were raised in relation to the National Statement. The figures recently released show that Christians form a majority at approximately 52% of the nation and this includes, of course, the full spectrum of churches and Christians from the most conservative to the most liberal. When taken as a whole, Christianity is still by far the largest faith. It is significant, however, that of the three largest churches only the Roman Catholics (14.3%) shows an increase in the last five years, 508,812 up from 486,015. Anglicans, now 15.7% of the population and Presbyterians (14.3%) have decreased by nearly 62,000 since 2001. Other Christians include 1.4% Ratana, 1.2% LDS, and 0.1% Exclusive Brethren. Hindus are now the largest and fastest growing non-Christian religious group (1.8%) up to 64,557 from 39,867, while Sikhs are up from 5,199 to 9507.Buddhists are up from 41,661 to 52,392. The Muslim community is now at 1% and numbers 36,150, up from a 2001 figure of 23,634. The total non-Christian sector numbers roughly 200,000 and 0.2% of the population is Jewish.

These figures must, of course, be seen alongside the 1.29 million or 37% of the population who have ‘no religion’. In summary, the Christian majority is shrinking and the non-Christian religions are increasing dramatically but not by as much as the loss in Christian numbers. Non-religious numbers are on the rise. The figures raise issues about the role of Christianity and the other religions in our national life and the trends perhaps reinforce the need for us to consider the questions that lie behind the National Statement.

The consultation has been a fascinating experience and unique insight into the religious ideas and concerns of New Zealanders. Most of us it seems are liberal in our orientation and exhibit openness to those of other faiths or none. A minority are less willing to follow this path and consider that either we err in being too liberal or are mistaken in taking faiths seriously at all. The underlying position of the Statement is a simple one. If we want to exercise our right to religion we need to afford that right equally to others. That is, our rights are dependent upon others having the same rights.

Finally, after reading the submissions it is important to note that this is not a theological document debating the relative or absolute merits of one religion over another although some of the respondents took this view. The document is pragmatically concerned with improving how we as different communities can and do live together peacefully. I believe that we can do this without compromising our integrity or unique religious identities. We can do it well or we can do it badly. We can think about it now or take our chances.

We, and our children, are going to have to live together in the future in an increasingly religiously diverse New Zealand. We can do this positively or we can mirror some of the difficulties that face other religiously diverse nations where a strict ideology of the separation of church and state or where members of minority faiths are marginalised has led to violent clashes, court cases and draconian legislation restriction the right to religion. We have an opportunity at this time to think forward and create a framework for a forward looking religiously diverse small nation in the South Pacific and I consider the National Statement on Religious Diversity to be a small but significant step forward in this positive direction. Finally, we have the opportunity of working together as the faith communities of New Zealand on a concrete project for all our futures.

Professor Paul Morris
19 February 2007

Posted by latimer at 11:57 AM | Comments (0)

February 20, 2007

Primates Meeting Communique

19.02.07 - We, the Primates and Moderators of the Anglican Communion, gathered for mutual consultation and prayer at Dar es Salaam between 15th and 19th February 2007 ... The meeting convened in an atmosphere of mutual graciousness as the Primates sought together to seek the will of God for the future life of the Communion.

The Communiqué
Of the Primates' Meeting in Dar es Salaam 19th February 2007

1. We, the Primates and Moderators of the Anglican Communion, gathered for mutual consultation and prayer at Dar es Salaam between 15th and 19th February 2007 at the invitation of the Archbishop of Canterbury and as guests of the Primate of Tanzania, Archbishop Donald Leo Mtetemela. The meeting convened in an atmosphere of mutual graciousness as the Primates sought together to seek the will of God for the future life of the Communion. We are grateful for the warm hospitality and generosity of Archbishop Donald and his Church members, many of whom have worked hard to ensure that our visit has been pleasant and comfortable, including our travel to Zanzibar on the Sunday.

2. The Archbishop of Canterbury welcomed to our number fourteen new primates, and on the Wednesday before our meeting started, he led the new primates in an afternoon of discussion about their role. We give thanks for the ministry of those primates who have completed their term of office.

3. Over these days, we have also spent time in prayer and Bible Study, and reflected upon the wide range of mission and service undertaken across the Communion. While the tensions that we face as a Communion commanded our attention, the extensive discipleship of Anglicans across the world reminds us of our first task to respond to God's call in Christ. We are grateful for the sustaining prayer which has been offered across the Communion as we meet.

4. On Sunday 18th February, we travelled to the island of Zanzibar, where we joined a celebration of the Holy Eucharist at Christ Church Cathedral, built on the site of the old slave market. The Archbishop of Canterbury preached, and commemorated the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade in the United Kingdom, which had begun a process that led to the abolition of the slave market in Zanzibar ninety years later. At that service, the Archbishop of Canterbury admitted Mrs Hellen Wangusa as the new Anglican Observer at the United Nations. We warmly welcome Hellen to her post.

5. We welcomed the presence of the President of Zanzibar at lunch on Sunday, and the opportunity for the Archbishop of Canterbury to meet with the President of Tanzania in the course of the meeting.

The Millennium Development Goals

6. We were delighted to hear from Mrs Wangusa about her vision for her post of Anglican Observer at the United Nations. She also spoke to us about the World Millennium Development Goals, while Archbishop Ndungane also spoke to us as Chair of the Task Team on Poverty and Trade, and the forthcoming conference on Towards Effective Anglican Mission in South Africa next month.
We were inspired and challenged by these presentations.
Theological Education in the Anglican Communion

7. We also heard a report from Presiding Bishop Gregory Venables and Mrs Clare Amos on the work of the Primates' Working Party on Theological Education in the Anglican Communion. The group has focussed on developing "grids" which set out the appropriate educational and developmental targets which can be applied in the education of those in ministry in the life of the Church. We warmly commend the work which the group is doing, especially on the work which reminds us that the role of the bishop is to enable the theological education of the clergy and laity of the diocese. We also welcome the scheme that the group has developed for the distribution of basic theological texts to our theological colleges across the world, the preparations for the Anglican Way Consultation in Singapore in May this year, and the appointment of three Regional Associates to work with the group. The primates affirmed the work of the Group, and urged study and reception of its work in the life of the Communion.

The Hermeneutics Project

8. We agreed to proceed with a worldwide study of hermeneutics (the methods of interpreting scripture). The primates have joined the Joint Standing Committee in asking the Anglican Communion Office to develop options for carrying the study forward following the Lambeth Conference in 2008. A report will be presented to the Joint Standing Committee next year.

Following through the Windsor Report

9. Since the controversial events of 2003, we have faced the reality of increased tension in the life of the Anglican Communion - tension so deep that the fabric of our common life together has been torn. The Windsor Report of 2004 described the Communion as suffering from an "illness". This "illness" arises from a breakdown in the trust and mutual recognition of one another as faithful disciples of Christ, which should be among the first fruits of our Communion in Christ with one another.

10. The Windsor Report identified two threats to our common life: first, certain developments in the life and ministry of the Episcopal Church and the Anglican Church of Canada which challenged the standard of teaching on human sexuality articulated in the 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10; and second, interventions in the life of those Provinces which arose as reactions to the urgent pastoral needs that certain primates perceived. The Windsor Report did not see a "moral equivalence" between these events, since the cross-boundary interventions arose from a deep concern for the welfare of Anglicans in the face of innovation. Nevertheless both innovation and intervention are central factors placing strains on our common life. The Windsor Report recognised this (TWR Section D) and invited the Instruments of Communion [1] to call for a moratorium of such actions [2] .

11. What has been quite clear throughout this period is that the 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10 is the standard of teaching which is presupposed in the Windsor Report and from which the primates have worked. This restates the traditional teaching of the Christian Church that "in view of the teaching of Scripture, [the Conference] upholds faithfulness in marriage between a man and a woman in lifelong union, and believes that abstinence is right for those who are not called to marriage", and applies this to several areas which are discussed further below. The Primates have reaffirmed this teaching in all their recent meetings [3], and indicated how a change in the formal teaching of any one Province would indicate a departure from the standard upheld by the Communion as a whole.

12. At our last meeting in Dromantine, the primates called for certain actions to address the situation in our common life, and to address those challenges to the teaching of the Lambeth Resolution which had been raised by recent developments. Now in Dar es Salaam, we have had to give attention to the progress that has been made.

The Listening Process

13. The 1998 Lambeth Resolution 1.10, committed the Provinces "to listen to the experience of homosexual persons" and called "all our people to minister pastorally and sensitively to all irrespective of sexual orientation and to condemn irrational fear of homosexuals". The initiation of this process of listening was requested formally by the Primates at Dromantine and commissioned by ACC-13. We received a report from Canon Philip Groves, the Facilitator of the Listening Process, on the progress of his work. We wish to affirm this work in collating various research studies, statements and other material from the Provinces. We look forward to this material being made more fully available across the Communion for study and reflection, and to the preparation of material to assist the bishops at 2008 Lambeth Conference.

The Panel of Reference

14. We are grateful to the retired Primate of Australia, Archbishop Peter Carnley for being with us to update us on the work of the Archbishop of Canterbury's Panel of Reference. This was established by the Archbishop in response to the request of the Primates at Dromantine "to supervise the adequacy of pastoral provisions made by any churches" for "groups in serious theological dispute with their diocesan bishop, or dioceses in dispute with their Provinces" [4] . Archbishop Peter informed us of the careful work which this Panel undertakes on our behalf, although he pointed to the difficulty of the work with which it has been charged arising from the conflicted and polarised situations which the Panel must address on the basis of the slender resources which can be given to the work. We were grateful for his report, and for the work so far undertaken by the Panel.

The Anglican Covenant

15. Archbishop Drexel Gomez reported to us on the work of the Covenant Design Group. The Group met in Nassau last month, and has made substantial progress. We commend the Report of the Covenant Design Group for study and urge the Provinces to submit an initial response to the draft through the Anglican Communion Office by the end of 2007. In the meantime, we hope that the Anglican Communion Office will move in the near future to the publication of the minutes of the discussion that we have had, together with the minutes of the Joint Standing Committee's discussion, so that some of the ideas and reflection that have already begun to emerge might assist and stimulate reflection throughout the Communion.

16. The proposal is that a revised draft will be discussed at the Lambeth Conference, so that the bishops may offer further reflections and contributions. Following a further round of consultation, a final text will be presented to ACC-14, and then, if adopted as definitive, offered to the Provinces for ratification. The covenant process will conclude when any definitive text is adopted or rejected finally through the synodical processes of the Provinces.

The Episcopal Church

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.

18. In 2005 the Primates asked The Episcopal Church to consider specific requests made by the Windsor Report [6]. On the first day of our meeting, we were joined by the members of the Standing Committee of the Anglican Consultative Council as we considered the responses of the 75th General Convention. This is the first time that we have been joined by the Standing Committee at a Primates' Meeting, and we welcome and commend the spirit of closer co-operation between the Instruments of Communion.

19. We are grateful for the comprehensive and clear report commissioned by the Joint Standing Committee. We heard from the Presiding Bishop and three other bishops [7] representing different perspectives within The Episcopal Church. Each spoke passionately about their understanding of the problems which The Episcopal Church faces, and possible ways forward. Each of the four, in their own way, looked to the Primates to assist The Episcopal Church. We are grateful to the Archbishop of Canterbury for enabling us on this occasion to hear directly this range of views.

20. We believe several factors must be faced together. First, the Episcopal Church has taken seriously the recommendations of the Windsor Report, and we express our gratitude for the consideration by the 75th General Convention.

21. However, secondly, we believe that there remains a lack of clarity about the stance of The Episcopal Church, especially its position on the authorisation of Rites of Blessing for persons living in same-sex unions.
There appears to us to be an inconsistency between the position of General Convention and local pastoral provision. We recognise that the General Convention made no explicit resolution about such Rites and in fact declined to pursue resolutions which, if passed, could have led to the development and authorisation of them. However, we understand that local pastoral provision is made in some places for such blessings. It is the ambiguous stance of The Episcopal Church which causes concern among us.

22. The standard of teaching stated in Resolution 1.10 of the Lambeth Conference 1998 asserted that the Conference "cannot advise the legitimising or blessing of same sex unions". The primates stated in their pastoral letter of May 2003,

"The Archbishop of Canterbury spoke for us all when he said that it is through liturgy that we express what we believe, and that there is no theological consensus about same sex unions. Therefore, we as a body cannot support the authorisation of such rites.".

23. Further, some of us believe that Resolution B033 of the 75th General Convention [8] does not in fact give the assurances requested in the Windsor Report.

24. The response of The Episcopal Church to the requests made at Dromantine has not persuaded this meeting that we are yet in a position to recognise that The Episcopal Church has mended its broken relationships.

25. It is also clear that a significant number of bishops, clergy and lay people in The Episcopal Church are committed to the proposals of the Windsor Report and the standard of teaching presupposed in it (cf paragraph 11).
These faithful people feel great pain at what they perceive to be the failure of The Episcopal Church to adopt the Windsor proposals in full. They desire to find a way to remain in faithful fellowship with the Anglican Communion. They believe that they should have the liberty to practice and live by that expression of Anglican faith which they believe to be true. We are deeply concerned that so great has been the estrangement between some of the faithful and The Episcopal Church that this has led to recrimination, hostility and even to disputes in the civil courts.

26. The interventions by some of our number and by bishops of some Provinces, against the explicit recommendations of the Windsor Report, however well-intentioned, have exacerbated this situation. Furthermore, those Primates who have undertaken interventions do not feel that it is right to end those interventions until it becomes clear that sufficient provision has been made for the life of those persons.

27. A further complication is that a number of dioceses or their bishops have indicated, for a variety of reasons, that they are unable in conscience to accept the primacy of the Presiding Bishop in The Episcopal Church, and have requested the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Primates to consider making provision for some sort of alternative primatial ministry. At the same time we recognise that the Presiding Bishop has been duly elected in accordance with the Constitution and Canons of The Episcopal Church, which must be respected.

28. These pastoral needs, together with the requests from those making presentations to this meeting, have moved us to consider how the primates might contribute to healing and reconciliation within The Episcopal Church and more broadly. We believe that it would be a tragedy if The Episcopal Church was to fracture, and we are committed to doing what we can to preserve and uphold its life. While we may support such processes, such change and development which is required must be generated within its own life.

The Future

29. We believe that the establishment of a Covenant for the Churches of the Anglican Communion in the longer term may lead to the trust required to re-establish our interdependent life. By making explicit what Anglicans mean by the "bonds of affection" and securing the commitment of each Province to those bonds, the structures of our common life can be articulated and enhanced.

30. However, an interim response is required in the period until the Covenant is secured. For there to be healing in the life of the Communion in the interim, it seems that the recommendations of the Windsor Report, as interpreted by the Primates' Statement at Dromantine, are the most clear and comprehensive principles on which our common life may be re-established.

31. Three urgent needs exist. First, those of us who have lost trust in The Episcopal Church need to be re-assured that there is a genuine readiness in The Episcopal Church to embrace fully the recommendations of the Windsor Report.

32. Second, those of us who have intervened in other jurisdictions believe that we cannot abandon those who have appealed to us for pastoral care in situations in which they find themselves at odds with the normal jurisdiction. For interventions to cease, what is required in their view is a robust scheme of pastoral oversight to provide individuals and congregations alienated from The Episcopal Church with adequate space to flourish within the life of that church in the period leading up to the conclusion of the Covenant Process.

33. Third, the Presiding Bishop has reminded us that in The Episcopal Church there are those who have lost trust in the Primates and bishops of certain of our Provinces because they fear that they are all too ready to undermine or subvert the polity of The Episcopal Church. In their view, there is an urgent need to embrace the recommendations of the Windsor Report and to bring an end to all interventions.

34. Those who have intervened believe it would be inappropriate to bring an end to interventions until there is change in The Episcopal Church. Many in the House of Bishops are unlikely to commit themselves to further requests for clarity from the Primates unless they believe that actions that they perceive to undermine the polity of The Episcopal Church will be brought to an end. Through our discussions, the primates have become convinced that pastoral strategies are required to address these three urgent needs simultaneously.

35. Our discussions have drawn us into a much more detailed response than we would have thought necessary at the beginning of our meeting. But such is the imperative laid on us to seek reconciliation in the Church of Christ, that we have been emboldened to offer a number of recommendations. We have set these out in a Schedule to this statement. We offer them to the wider Communion, and in particular to the House of Bishops of The Episcopal Church in the hope that they will enable us to find a way forward together for the period leading up to the conclusion of the Covenant Process. We also hope that the provisions of this pastoral scheme will mean that no further interventions will be necessary since bishops within The Episcopal Church will themselves provide the extended episcopal ministry required.

Wider Application

36. The primates recognise that such pastoral needs as those considered here are not limited to The Episcopal Church alone. Nor do such pastoral needs arise only in relation to issues of human sexuality. The primates believe that until a covenant for the Anglican Communion is secured, it may be appropriate for the Instruments of Communion to request the use of this or a similar scheme in other contexts should urgent pastoral needs arise.

Conclusion

37. Throughout this meeting, the primates have worked and prayed for the healing and unity of the Anglican Communion. We also pray that the Anglican Communion may be renewed in its discipleship and mission in proclaiming the Gospel. We recognise that we have been wrestling with demanding and difficult issues and we commend the results of our deliberations to the prayers of the people. We do not underestimate the difficulties and heart-searching that our proposals will cause, but we believe that commitment to the ways forward which we propose can bring healing and reconciliation across the Communion.

Notes

1. Namely, the Archbishop of Canterbury, the Lambeth Conference, the Anglican Consultative Council and the Primates' Meeting.
2. Cf The Windsor Report and the Statement of the Primates at Dromantine.

3. Gramado, May 2003; Lambeth, October 2003; Dromantine, February 2005.
4. Dromantine Statement, paragraph 15.

5. The Episcopal Church is the name adopted by the Church formerly known as The Episcopal Church (USA). The Province operates across a number of nations, and decided that it was more true to its international nature not to use thedesignation USA. It should not be confused with those other Provinces and Churches of the Anglican Communion which share the name "Episcopal Church".
6. (1) the Episcopal Church (USA) be invited to express its regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached in the events surrounding the election and consecration of a bishop for the See of New Hampshire, and for the consequences which followed, and that such an expression of regret would represent the desire of the Episcopal Church
(USA) to remain within the Communion (2) the Episcopal Church (USA) be invited to effect a moratorium on the election and consent to the consecration of any candidate to the episcopate who is living in a same gender union until some new consensus in the Anglican Communion emerges.
(TWR §134)
(3) we call for a moratorium on all such public Rites, and recommend that bishops who have authorised such rites in the United States and Canada be invited to express regret that the proper constraints of the bonds of affection were breached by such authorisation. (TWR §144) A fourth request (TWR §135) was discharged by the presentation of The Episcopal Church made at ACC-13 in Nottingham, UK, in 2005.

6. Bishop Robert Duncan, Bishop of Pittsburgh and Moderator of the Network of Anglican Communion Dioceses and Parishes; Bishop Christopher Epting, Deputy for Ecumenical Affairs in The Episcopal Church; Bishop Bruce McPherson, Bishop of Western Louisiana, President of the Presiding Bishop's Council of Advice, and a member of the "Camp Allen" bishops.

7. Set out and discussed in the Report of the Communion Sub-Group presented at the Meeting.

The Key Recommendations of the Primates

Foundations

The Primates recognise the urgency of the current situation and therefore emphasise the need to:

a.. affirm the Windsor Report (TWR) and the standard of teaching commanding respect across the Communion (most recently expressed in Resolution 1.10 of the 1998 Lambeth Conference);
b.. set in place a Covenant for the Anglican Communion;
c.. encourage healing and reconciliation within The Episcopal Church, between The Episcopal Church and congregations alienated from it, and between The Episcopal Church and the rest of the Anglican Communion;
d.. respect the proper constitutional autonomy of all of the Churches of the Anglican Communion, while upholding the interdependent life and mutual responsibility of the Churches, and the responsibility of each to the Communion as a whole;
e.. respond pastorally and provide for those groups alienated by recent developments in the Episcopal Church.
In order to address these foundations and apply them in the difficult situation which arises at present in The Episcopal Church, we recommend the following actions. The scheme proposed and the undertakings requested are intended to have force until the conclusion of the Covenant Process and a definitive statement of the position of The Episcopal Church with respect to the Covenant and its place within the life of the Communion, when some new provision may be required.

A Pastoral Council

a.. The Primates will establish a Pastoral Council to act on behalf of the Primates in consultation with The Episcopal Church. This Council shall consist of up to five members: two nominated by the Primates, two by the Presiding Bishop, and a Primate of a Province of the Anglican Communion nominated by the Archbishop of Canterbury to chair the Council.
b.. The Council will work in co-operation with The Episcopal Church, the Presiding Bishop and the leadership of the bishops participating in the scheme proposed below to
a.. negotiate the necessary structures for pastoral care which would meet the requests of the Windsor Report (TWR, §147-155) and the Primates'
requests in the Lambeth Statement of October 2003 [1];
b.. authorise protocols for the functioning of such a scheme, including the criteria for participation of bishops, dioceses and congregations in the scheme;
c.. assure the effectiveness of the structures for pastoral care;
o liaise with those other primates of the Anglican Communion who currently have care of parishes to seek a secure way forward for those parishes within the scheme;
d.. facilitate and encourage healing and reconciliation within The Episcopal Church, between The Episcopal Church and congregations alienated from it, and between The Episcopal Church and the rest of the Anglican Communion (TWR, §156);
e.. advise the Presiding Bishop and the Instruments of Communion;
f.. monitor the response of The Episcopal Church to the Windsor Report;
g.. consider whether any of the courses of action contemplated by the Windsor Report §157 should be applied to the life of The Episcopal Church or its bishops, and, if appropriate, to recommend such action to The Episcopal Church and its institutions and to the Instruments of Communion;
h.. take whatever reasonable action is needed to give effect to this scheme
and report to the Primates.

A Pastoral Scheme

a.. We recognise that there are individuals, congregations and clergy, who in the current situation, feel unable to accept the direct ministry of their bishop or of the Presiding Bishop, and some of whom have sought the oversight of other jurisdictions.
b.. We have received representations from a number of bishops of The Episcopal Church who have expressed a commitment to a number of principles set out in two recent letters[2] . We recognise that these bishops are taking those actions which they believe necessary to sustain full communion with the Anglican Communion.
c.. We acknowledge and welcome the initiative of the Presiding Bishop to consent to appoint a Primatial Vicar.
On this basis, the Primates recommend that structures for pastoral care be established in conjunction with the Pastoral Council, to enable such individuals, congregations and clergy to exercise their ministries and congregational life within The Episcopal Church, and that

a.. the Pastoral Council and the Presiding Bishop invite the bishops expressing a commitment to "the Camp Allen principles" [3], or as otherwise determined by the Pastoral Council, to participate in the pastoral scheme ;
b.. in consultation with the Council and with the consent of the Presiding Bishop, those bishops who are part of the scheme will nominate a Primatial Vicar, who shall be responsible to the Council;
c.. the Presiding Bishop in consultation with the Pastoral Council will delegate specific powers and duties to the Primatial Vicar.
Once this scheme of pastoral care is recognised to be fully operational, the Primates undertake to end all interventions. Congregations or parishes in current arrangements will negotiate their place within the structures of pastoral oversight set out above.

We believe that such a scheme is robust enough to function and provide sufficient space for those who are unable to accept the direct ministry of their bishop or the Presiding Bishop to have a secure place within The Episcopal Church and the Anglican Communion until such time as the Covenant Process is complete. At that time, other provisions may become necessary.

Although there are particular difficulties associated with AMiA and CANA, the Pastoral Council should negotiate with them and the Primates currently ministering to them to find a place for them within these provisions. We believe that with goodwill this may be possible.

On Clarifying the Response to Windsor

The Primates recognise the seriousness with which The Episcopal Church addressed the requests of the Windsor Report put to it by the Primates at their Dromantine Meeting. They value and accept the apology and the request for forgiveness made [4]. 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.

On property disputes

The Primates urge the representatives of The Episcopal Church and of those congregations in property disputes with it to suspend all actions in law arising in this situation. We also urge both parties to give assurances that no steps will be taken to alienate property from The Episcopal Church without its consent or to deny the use of that property to those congregations.

Appendix One

"The Camp Allen Principles"

The commitments expressed in the letter of 22nd September 2006 were:

a.. an acceptance of Lambeth 1998 Res. I.10 as expressing, on its given topic, the mind of the Communion to which we subject our own teaching and discipline;
b.. an acceptance of the Windsor Report, as interpreted by the Primates at Dromantine, as outlining the Communion's "way forward" for our own church's reconciliation and witness within the Communion;
c.. a personal acceptance by each of us of the particular recommendations made by the Windsor Report to ECUSA, and a pledge to comply with them;
d.. a clear sense that General Convention 2006 did not adequately respond to the requests made of ECUSA by the Communion through the Windsor Report;
e.. a clear belief that we faithfully represent ECUSA in accordance with this church's Constitution and Canons, as properly interpreted by the Scripture and our historic faith and discipline;
f.. a desire to provide a common witness through which faithful Anglican Episcopalians committed to our Communion life might join together for the renewal of our church and the furtherance of the mission of Christ Jesus.

The principles expressed in the letter of 11th January 2007 were:

1. It is our hope that you will explicitly recognize that we are in full communion with you in order to maintain the integrity of our ministries within our dioceses and the larger Church.

2. We are prepared, among other things, to work with the Primates and with others in our American context to make provision for the varying needs of individuals, congregations, dioceses and clergy to continue to exercise their ministries as the Covenant process unfolds. This includes the needs of those seeking primatial ministry from outside the United States, those dioceses and parishes unable to accept the ordination of women, and congregations which sense they can no longer be inside the Episcopal Church.

3. We are prepared to offer oversight, with the agreement of the local bishop, of congregations in dioceses whose bishops are not fully supportive of Communion teaching and discipline.

4. We are prepared to offer oversight to congregations who are currently under foreign jurisdictions in consultation with the bishops and Primates involved.

5. Finally, we respectfully request that the Primates address the issue of congregations within our dioceses seeking oversight in foreign jurisdictions. We are Communion-committed bishops and find the option of turning to foreign oversight presents anomalies which weaken our own diocesan familieis and places strains on the Communion as a whole.

Notes:

1. Whilst we reaffirm the teaching of successive Lambeth Conferences that bishops must respect the autonomy and territorial integrity of dioceses and provinces other than their own, we call on the provinces concerned to make adequate provision for episcopal oversight of dissenting minorities within their own area of pastoral care in consultation with the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the Primates (Lambeth, October 2003)

2. Namely, a letter of 22nd September 2006 to the Archbishop of Canterbury and a further letter of 11th 2007 to the Primates setting out a number of commitments and proposals. These commitments and principles are colloquially known as "the Camp Allen principles". (see Appendix One)

3. As set out in Appendix One.

4. Resolved, That the 75th General Convention of The Episcopal Church, mindful of "the repentance, forgiveness, and reconciliation enjoined on us by Christ" (Windsor Report, paragraph 134), express its regret for straining the bonds of affection in the events surrounding the General Convention of
2003 and the consequences which followed; offer its sincerest apology to those within our Anglican Communion who are offended by our failure to accord sufficient importance to the impact of our actions on our church and other parts of the Communion; and ask forgiveness as we seek to live into deeper levels of communion one with another. The Communion Sub-Group added the comment: "These words were not lightly offered, and should not be lighted received."

___________________________________________________________________
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London

Posted by latimer at 11:39 AM | Comments (0)

Primates Meeting - Report of the Covenant Design Group

19.02.07 - The meeting discussed four major areas of work related to the development of an Anglican Covenant: its content, the process by which it would be received into the life of the Communion, the foundations on which a covenant might be built, and its own methods of working.

Report of the Covenant Design Group

The Covenant Design Group, appointed by the Archbishop of Canterbury on behalf of the Primates of the Anglican Communion, held its first meeting in Nassau, the Bahamas, between Monday, 15th and Thursday, 18th January, 2007. The Archbishop of the West Indies, the Most Revd Drexel Gomez, chaired the group.

The meeting discussed four major areas of work related to the development of an Anglican Covenant: its content, the process by which it would be received into the life of the Communion, the foundations on which a covenant might be built, and its own methods of working.

The JSC paper, Towards an Anglican Covenant, was one of the initial papers tabled at the meeting, together with a wide range of responses to it from both individuals and from churches and other alliances within the Communion. In addition, a number of correspondents had been invited to submit reflections to the group. The group noted that there was a wide range of support for the concept of covenant in the life of the Communion, and although in the papers submitted there was a great deal of concern about the nature of any covenant that might be put forward for adoption, very few of the respondents objected to the concept of covenant per se, but rather saw the covenant as a moment of opportunity within the life of the Communion.

In their discussion, all the members of the group spoke of the value and importance of the continued life of the Anglican Communion as an instrument through which the Gospel could be proclaimed and God's mission carried forward. There was a real desire to see the interdependent life of the Communion strengthened by a covenant which would articulate our common foundations, and set out principles by which our life of Communion in Christ could be strengthened and nurtured.

It was also recognised, however, that the proposal for a covenant was born out of a specific context in which the Communion's life was under severe strain. While the group felt that it was important that the strength of a covenant would be greater if it addressed broad principles, and did not focus on particular issues, the need for its introduction into the life of the Communion in order to restore trust was urgent.

There were therefore two particular factors which would need to be borne in mind:

Content

The text of the Covenant would need to hold together and strengthen the life of the Communion. To do so, it need not introduce some new development into the life of the Communion but rather be the clarification of a process of discernment which was embodied in the Windsor Report and in the recent reality of the life of the Instruments of Communion, and which was founded in and built upon the elements traditionally articulated in association with Anglicanism and the life of the Anglican Churches.

Urgency

While a definitive text which held all such elements in balance might take time to develop in the life of the Communion, there was also an urgent need to re-establish trust between the churches of the Communion.
The faithfulness of patterns of obedience to Christ were no longer recognised across the Communion, despite Paul's call to another way of life (Romans 14.15), and its life would suffer irreparably if some measure of mutual and common commitment to the Gospel was not reasserted in a short time frame. We were mindful also of the words of the Primates at Oporto, "We are conscious that we all stand together at the foot of the Cross of Jesus Christ, so we know that to turn away from each other would be to turn away from the Cross".

Bearing this in mind, the CDG recommends a dual track approach. The definitive text of any proposed Covenant which could command the long term confidence of the Communion would need extensive consultation and refining. Although several possible texts have already been developed, a text for adoption would need to be debated and accepted in the Provinces through their own appropriate processes before formal synodical processes of adoption, if the Covenant was to be received and have any strength or reality.

At the same time, there needed to be a commitment now to the fundamental shape of the covenant in order to address the concerns of those who feared that the very credibility of the commitment of the Anglican Churches to one another and to the Gospel itself was in doubt.

The CDG therefore proposes that the Primates give consideration to a preliminary draft text for a covenant which has been developed from existing models, that they commend this text to the Provinces for study and response, and that they express an appropriate measure of consent to this text and express the intention to pursue its fine-tuning and adoption through the consultative and constitutional processes of the Provinces.

The Primates are not being asked to commit their churches at this stage, since they are all bound by their own Provincial constitutions to observe due process. What they are being asked to do is to recognise in the general substance of the preliminary draft set forth by the CDG a concise expression of what may be considered as authentic Anglicanism.
Primates are also asked to request a response from their Provinces on the draft text to the Covenant Design Group in time for there to be the preparation of a revised draft which could receive initial consideration at the Lambeth Conference.

The text offered is meant to be robust enough to express clear commitment in those areas of Anglican faith about which there has been the most underlying concern in recent events, while at the same time being faithful and consistent with the declarations, formularies and commitments of Anglicanism as they have been received by our Churches.
In this way, nothing which is commended in the draft text of the Covenant can be said to be "new"; it is rather an assertion of that understanding of true Christian faith as it has been received in the Anglican Churches.

What is to be offered in the Covenant is not the invention of a new way of being Anglican, but a fresh restatement and assertion of the faith which we as Anglicans have received, and a commitment to inter-dependent life such as always in theory at least been given recognition.

An Introduction to a Draft Text for an Anglican Covenant

God has called us into communion in Jesus Christ (1 Cor. 1:9; 1 Jn.
1:3). This call is established in God's purposes for creation (Eph.
1:10; 3:9ff.), which have been furthered in God's covenants with Israel and its representatives such as Abraham and most fully in the life, death, and resurrection of Christ Jesus. We humbly recognize that this calling and gift of communion grants us responsibilities for our common life before God.

Through God's grace we have been given the Communion of Anglican churches through which to respond to God's larger calling in Christ (Acts 2:42). This Communion provides us with a special charism and identity among the many followers and servants of Jesus. Recognizing the wonder, beauty and challenge of maintaining communion in this family of churches, and the need for mutual commitment and discipline as a witness to God's promise in a world and time of instability, conflict, and fragmentation, we covenant together as churches of this Anglican Communion to be faithful to God's promises through the historic faith we confess, the way we live together and the focus of our mission.

Our faith embodies a coherent testimony to what we have received from God's Word and the Church's long-standing witness; our life together reflects the blessings of God in growing our Communion into a truly global body; and the mission we pursue aims at serving the great promises of God in Christ that embrace the world and its peoples, carried out in shared responsibility and stewardship of resources, and in interdependence among ourselves and with the wider Church.

Our prayer is that God will redeem our struggles and weakness, and renew and enrich our common life so that the Anglican Communion may be used to witness effectively in all the world to the new life and hope found in Christ.

An Anglican Covenant Draft prepared by the Covenant Design Group, January 2007

1 Preamble

(Psalm 127.1-2, Ezekiel 37.1-14, Mark 1.1, John 10.10; Romans 5.1-5, Ephesians 4:1-16, Revelation 2-3)

We, the Churches of the Anglican Communion, under the Lordship of Jesus Christ , solemnly covenant together in these articles, in order to proclaim more effectively in our different contexts the Grace of God revealed in the Gospel, to offer God's love in responding to the needs of the world, to maintain the unity in the Spirit in the bond of peace, and to grow up together as a worldwide Communion to the full stature of Christ.

2 The Life We Share: Common Catholicity, Apostolicity and Confession of Faith

(Deuteronomy 6.4-7, Leviticus 19.9-10, Amos 5.14-15, 24; Matthew 25, 28.16-20, 1 Corinthians 15.3-11, Philippians 2.1-11, 1 Timothy 3:15-16, Hebrews 13.1-17)

Each member Church, and the Communion as a whole, affirms:

* that it is part of the one, holy, catholic, and apostolic Church, worshipping the one true God, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit;

* that it professes the faith which is uniquely revealed in the Holy Scriptures as containing all things necessary for salvation and as being the rule and ultimate standard of faith, and which is set forth in the catholic creeds, which faith the Church is called upon to proclaim afresh in each generation;

* that it holds and duly administers the two sacraments ordained by Christ himself - Baptism and the Supper of the Lord - ministered with the unfailing use of Christ's words of institution, and of the elements ordained by him;

* that it participates in the apostolic mission of the whole people of God;

* that, led by the Holy Spirit, it has borne witness to Christian truth in its historic formularies, the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion, the
1662 Book of Common Prayer, and the Ordering of Bishops, Priests, and Deacons [1];

* our loyalty to this inheritance of faith as our inspiration and guidance under God in bringing the grace and truth of Christ to this generation and making Him known to our societies and nations.

3 Our Commitment to Confession of the Faith

(Deuteronomy 30.11-14, Psalm 126, Mark 10.26-27, Luke 1.37, 46-55, John
8: 32, 14:15-17, 1 Corinthians 11.23-26,2 Timothy 3:10-4:5;)

In seeking to be faithful to God in their various contexts, each Church commits itself to:

* uphold and act in continuity and consistency with the catholic and apostolic faith, order and tradition, biblically derived moral values and the vision of humanity received by and developed in the communion of member Churches;

* seek in all things to uphold the solemn obligation to sustain Eucharistic communion, welcoming members of all other member churches to join in its own celebration, and encouraging its members to participate in the Eucharist in a member church in accordance with the canonical discipline of that host church;

* ensure that biblical texts are handled faithfully, respectfully, comprehensively and coherently, primarily through the teaching and initiative of bishops and synods, and building on our best scholarship, believing that scriptural revelation must continue to illuminate, challenge and transform cultures, structures and ways of thinking;

* nurture and respond to prophetic and faithful leadership and ministry to assist our Churches as courageous witnesses to the transformative power of the Gospel in the world.

* pursue a common pilgrimage with other members of the Communion to discern truth, that peoples from all nations may truly be free and receive the new and abundant life in the Lord Jesus Christ.

4 The Life We Share with Others: Our Anglican Vocation

(Jeremiah 31.31-34, Ezekiel. 36.22-28, Matthew 28.16-20, John 17.20-24,
2 Corinthians 8-9, Ephesians 2:11-3:21, James 1.22-27)

We affirm that Communion is a gift of God: that His people from east and west, north and south, may together declare his glory and be a sign of God's Kingdom. We gratefully acknowledge God's gracious providence extended to us down the ages, our origins in the undivided Church, the rich history of the Church in the British Isles shaped particularly by the Reformation, and our growth into a global communion through the various mission initiatives.

As the Communion continues to develop into a worldwide family of interdependent churches, we also face challenges and opportunities for mission at local, regional, and international levels. We cherish our faith and mission heritage as offering us unique opportunities for mission collaboration, for discovery ofthe life ofthe wholegospel and for reconciliation and shared mission with the Church throughout the world.

The member Churches acknowledge that their common mission is a mission shared with other churches and traditions not party to this covenant.
It is with all the saints that we will comprehend the fuller dimensions of Christ's redemptive and immeasurablelove.

We commit ourselves to answering God's call to share in his healing and reconciling mission for our blessed but broken and hurting world, and, with mutual accountability, to share our God-given spiritual and material resources in this task.

In this mission, which is the Mission of Christ, we commit ourselves

* to proclaim the Good News of the Kingdom of God
* to teach, baptize and nurture new believers;
* to respond to human need by loving service;
* to seek to transform unjust structures of society; and
* to strive to safeguard the integrity of creation and to sustain and renew the life of the earth.

5 Our Unity and Common Life

(Numbers 11.16-20, Luke 22.14-27, Acts 2.43-47, 4.32-35, 1 Corinthians 11.23-26, 1 Peter 4:7-11, 5:1-11)

We affirm the historic episcopate, locally adapted in the methods of its administration to the varying needs of the nations and peoples called of God into the unity of his Church and the central role of bishopsas custodians of faith, leaders in mission, and as visible sign of unity.

We affirm the place of four Instruments of Communion which serve to discern our common mind in communion issues, and to foster our interdependence and mutual accountability in Christ. While each member Church orders and regulates its own affairs through its own system of government and law and is therefore described as autonomous, each church recognises that the member churches of the Anglican Communion are bound together, not juridically by a central legislative or executive authority, but by the Holy Spirit who calls and enables us to live in mutual loyalty and service.

Of these four Instruments of Communion, the Archbishop of Canterbury, with whose See Anglicans have historically been in communion, is accorded a primacy of honour and respect as first amongst equals (primus inter pares). He calls the Lambeth Conference, and Primates' Meeting, and is President of the Anglican Consultative Council.

The Lambeth Conference, under the presidency of the Archbishop of Canterbury, expressing episcopal collegiality worldwide, gathers the bishops for common counsel, consultation and encouragement and serves as an instrument in guarding the faith and unity of the Communion.

The Primates' Meeting, presided over by the Archbishop of Canterbury, assembles for mutual support and counsel, monitors global developments and works in full collaboration in doctrinal, moral and pastoral matters that have Communion-wide implications.

The Anglican Consultative Council is a body representative of bishops, clergy and laity of the churches, which co-ordinates aspects of international Anglican ecumenical and mission work.

6 Unity of the Communion

(Nehemiah 2.17,18, Mt. 18.15-18, 1 Corinthians 12, 2 Corinthians 4.1-18,
13: 5-10, Galatians 6.1-10)

Each Church commits itself

* in essential matters of common concern, to have regard to the common good of the Communion in the exercise of its autonomy, and to support the work of the Instruments of Communion with the spiritual and material resources available to it.

* to spend time with openness and patience in matters of theological debate and discernment to listen and to study with one another in order to comprehend the will of God. Such study and debate is an essential feature of the life of the Church as its seeks to be led by the Spirit into all truth and to proclaim the Gospel afresh in each generation.
Some issues, which are perceived as controversial or new when they arise, may well evoke a deeper understanding of the implications of God's revelation to us; others may prove to be distractions or even obstacles to the faith: all therefore need to be tested by shared discernment in the life of the Church.

* to seek with other members, through the Church's shared councils, a common mind about matters of essential concern, consistent with the Scriptures, common standards of faith, and the canon law of our churches.

* to heed the counsel of our Instruments of Communion in matters which threaten the unity of the Communion and the effectiveness of our mission. While the Instruments of Communion have no juridical or executive authority in our Provinces, we recognise them as those bodies by which our common life in Christ is articulated and sustained, and which therefore carry a moral authority which commands our respect.

* to seek the guidance of the Instruments of Communion, where there are matters in serious dispute among churches that cannot be resolved by mutual admonition and counsel:

* by submitting the matter to the Primates Meeting
* if the Primates believe that the matter is not one for which a
common mind has been articulated, they will seek it with the
other instruments and their councils
* finally, on this basis, the Primates will offer guidance and direction.
* We acknowledge that in the most extreme circumstances, where member churches choose not to fulfil the substance of the covenant as understood by the Councils of the Instruments of Communion, we will consider that such churches will have relinquished for themselves the force and meaning of the covenant's purpose, and a process of restoration and renewal will be required to re-establish their covenant relationship with other member churches.

7 Our Declaration

(Psalms 46, 72.18,19, 150, Acts10.34-44, 2 Corinthians 13.13, Jude
24-25)

With joy and with firm resolve, we declare our Churches to be partners in this Anglican Covenant, releasing ourselves for fruitful service and binding ourselves more closely in the truth andlove of Christ, to whom with the Father and the Holy Spirit be glory for ever. Amen.

Notes:

[1] This is not meant to exclude other Books of Common Prayer and Ordinals duly authorised for use throughout the Anglican Communion, but acknowledges the foundational nature of the Book of Common Prayer 1662 in the life of the Communion.

Editors Note:

The Report and the Covenant Draft text are also available to download as a PDF Document here:
http://www.aco.org/commission/d_covenant/downloads.cfm

___________________________________________________________________
ACNSlist, published by Anglican Communion News Service, London,

Posted by latimer at 11:33 AM | Comments (0)

February 16, 2007

Episcopal Leader's Gay Views Won't Waver

The head of the U.S. wing of the Anglican church, who supports ordaining gays and allowing blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples, will not soften her views even as the issues threaten to break apart the Christian denomination, her aide said Thursday.
American Anglican Council

Episcopal Leader's Gay Views Won't Waver
Source: Forbes.com / Associated Press
By ELIZABETH A. KENNEDY
February 15, 2007 10:03 AM ET
www.americananglican.org/site/c.ikLUK3MJIpG/b.691905/apps/nl/content2.asp?content_id={ADBC8A94-AF07-4319-8FA3-71DCE7CB4B2F}¬oc=1The head of the U.S. wing of the Anglican church, who supports ordaining gays and allowing blessing ceremonies for same-sex couples, will not soften her views even as the issues threaten to break apart the Christian denomination, her aide said Thursday.

The leaders of the world's 77 million Anglicans, who are holding a closed meeting this week in Tanzania, said they would discuss the U.S. response to a 2004 report by an Anglican panel that called for a moratorium on consecrating gay bishops and blessing same-sex unions.

Splits between Anglicans have been growing for years, but became a crisis in 2003 when the Episcopal Church - the U.S. wing of the Anglican Communion - consecrated its first openly gay bishop, V. Gene Robinson of New Hampshire.

The problems mounted last year with the election of Katharine Jefferts Schori as head of the U.S. church.

"The spirit of Anglicanism will prevail here and there will be a middle way forward," said Jefferts Schori's aide, Robert Williams. But he said she "will not waver in her stand for justice and inclusion of all people in the body of Christ."

Conservative Anglicans have formed a rival network in the U.S. under the leadership of Anglican Archbishop Peter Akinola of Nigeria, who has called the acceptance of gay relationships a "satanic attack" on the church. Other conservatives have called for a parallel church within the United States.

The conference was sure to be highly charged over the rift.

"The basic issue here is what to do about those who decided they don't want to stay in the main Anglican body," said Canon (nyse: CAJ - news - people ) Jim Rosenthal, a spokesman for the Anglican Communion.

Akinola gave a letter this week to the spiritual leader of the communion, Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams, which is believed to demand some concessions to head off a schism. Africa is home to half the world's Anglicans and is dominated by conservative leaders.

Rosenthal confirmed the letter but said it was private.

Supporters of ordaining gays believe the Bible's social justice teachings take precedence over its view of sexuality. However, most Anglicans outside the U.S. believe gay relationships are sinful, and they are distancing themselves from the U.S. church.

Williams has struggled to hold off one of the biggest meltdowns in Christianity in centuries, but he lacks any direct authority to force a compromise. The Anglican Communion is the world's third-largest family of Christian churches behind Roman Catholic and Orthodox.

Bishop Martyn Minns of Fairfax, Va. - one of the most prominent U.S. clerics to leave the American church for Akinola's group - said Wednesday that it would be best for the U.S. church to "back off and reconsider" its stance on gays. But, he said, that was highly unlikely.

"It's been tragic, the amount of time and energy that has been spent on this issue that was initiated by the American church," he said.

The creation of Akinola's group, called the Convocation of Anglicans in North America, has been the most dramatic step by conservatives to encourage a breakaway Episcopal group that would be outside Jefferts Schori's oversight.

An eventual breakup of the communion would be the most stunning fallout from struggles over gay relationships that also have gripped Roman Catholics, Lutherans and others. The Anglican fellowship was founded in the 16th century by King Henry VIII and spread worldwide by the British Empire.

Several delegates at the six-day conference, which brings together the archbishops who head the 38 provinces in the Anglican Communion, have threatened to refuse to sit with Jefferts Schori over the issue of gays.

But Rosenthal said Wednesday she is welcome and was invited by the archbishop of Canterbury.

Date: 2/15/2007

Posted by latimer at 09:10 AM | Comments (0)

February 15, 2007

Anglican Church membership around the world

Find out facts about each of the major Anglican communities.
BBC 13.02.07

The Anglican Communion is holding its biennial meeting from the 14-19 February, in Tanzania.

The appointment of openly gay clergy, such as American priest Gene Robinson, is an issue that could dominate proceedings.

Feelings on this subject are so strong within the Church that there has been talk of a schism developing between the more liberal Western churches and the conservative Anglican churches of the developing world.

Find out facts about each of the major Anglican communities.

BBC.co.uk -
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

England
Primate: Dr Rowan Williams
Number of Anglicans: 26m described themselves as Anglicans at the latest Census, however, the Church of England puts the number of regular churchgoers at 2.75m.
Total population: 49m
History: English Christianity emerged from the missionary work of St Augustine, sent from Rome in 597, and from the work of Celtic missionaries in the north. Separated from Rome in the 16th Century and became Protestant.
Stance on gay issue: The issue came to the fore in 2003 when a gay canon was elected Bishop of Reading. Before he could take up his post there was an outcry and he was persuaded to resign by Archbishop Rowan Williams. However, some senior clergy have voiced dismay at this.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Australia
Primate: Dr Phillip Aspinall
Anglicans: 3.9m
Total population: 20m
History: Founded in 1788 with the arrival of the first emigrants from the UK.
Stance: No official stance on homosexuality however Dr Carnley has argued the issue is not worth splitting the church over.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Canada
Primate:Andrew Hutchison
Anglicans: 800,000+
Total population: 32m
History: First church building was St. Paul's, Halifax, in 1750.
Stance: "Canadian gays and lesbians will continue to be welcomed and received in our churches and to have their contributions to our common life honoured," said Archbishop Peers. A new rite of blessing for same sex unions has been authorised by one diocese.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Central Africa(Botswana, Malawi, Zambia, and Zimbabwe)
Primate: Bernard Malango
Anglicans: 600,000+
Total population: 36m
History: The first Anglican missionary to Malawi was Bishop Charles Mackenzie, who arrived with David Livingstone in 1861.
Stance: Archbishop Malango said the appointment of Gene Robinson "brought darkness, disappointment, sadness and grief" to his province.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Kenya
Primate: Benjamin Nzimbi
Anglicans: 2.5m
Total population: 32m
History: Mombasa saw the arrival of Anglican missionaries in 1844. The first Africans were ordained to the priesthood in 1885.
Stance: Archbishop Nzimbi has consistently and strongly spoken against admitting homosexuals into the church.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

New Zealand
Primate/Archbishop & Co-Presiding Bishop: W Brown Turei
Anglicans: 584,800
Total population: 3.9m
History: The Anglican Church in New Zealand had its beginnings in 1814 when the Maori chief Ruatara agreed with the Reverend Samuel Marsden to give protection to three missionaries and their families at Oihi in the Bay of Islands.
Stance: No stated policy.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Nigeria
Primate: Peter Akinola
Anglicans: 15m
Total population: 134m
History: The rebirth of Christianity began with the arrival of Christian freed slaves in Nigeria in the middle of the 19th Century.
Stance: The church remains vehemently opposed to homosexuality, regarding it as taboo and contrary to the teachings of the Bible. Archbishop Akinola has been one of the most outspoken opponents of the election of Bishop Robinson.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Southern Africa
(S Africa, Lesotho, Namibia, Mozambique, Swaziland)
Primate: Winston Njongonkulu Ndungane
Anglicans: 2m
Total population: 65m
History: British Anglicans met for worship in Cape Town after 1806 and the first bishop was appointed in 1847.
Stance: Archbishop Njongonkulu Ndungane has criticised his African colleagues and said that the church's attention should be focussed on more pressing concerns such as Aids and poverty.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Sudan
Primate: Joseph Marona
Anglicans: 5m
Total population: 38m
History: The Church Missionary Society began work in 1899 in Omdurman. Christianity spread rapidly among black Africans of the southern region.
Stance:Archbishop Marona says the Church should tackle the effects of war and poverty before homosexuality. "We have much worse things to face," he has said.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tanzania
Primate: Donald Mtetemela
Anglicans: 2m
Total population: 36m
History: The Universities Mission to Central Africa and the Church Missionary Society began work in 1864 and 1878 at Mpwapwa.
Stance: Archbishop Mtetemela has said homosexual practice is against the scripture.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Uganda
Primate: Livingstone Mpalanyi-Nkoyoyo
Anglicans: 8m
Total population: 26m
History: After its founding in 1877 by the Church Missionary Society, the Church grew through the evangelisation of Africans by Africans.
Stance: The Ugandan church has severed ties with its US counterpart over the election of Gene Robinson.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

United States
Primate:Katharine Jefferts Schori
Anglicans: 2.4m
Total population: 290m
History: Anglicanism was brought to the New World by explorers and colonists with the first celebration of the Holy Eucharist in Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607.
Stance: The first church to elect an openly gay bishop - but only after long and heated debate.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

West Africa
(Ghana, Gambia, Liberia, Sierre Leone)
Primate: Justice Ofei Akrofi (Ghana)
Anglicans: 1m
Total population: 31m
History: The Church of the Province of West Africa divided to form the Province of Nigeria and the Province of West Africa in 1979.
Stance: The new archbishop, elected in September, has not spoken out on the issue. His predecessor also maintained a diplomatic silence.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

West Indies(including Barbados, Belize, Guyana, Jamaica, Bahamas, Trinidad and Tobago)
Primate: Drexel Gomez
Anglicans: 777,000
Total population: 5.3m
History: The Anglican Church arrived in the West Indies with the original English settlers in the early part of the 17th Century, the clergy for the most part being state chaplains to the English officials and planters.
Stance: Archbishop Gomez has said the confirmation of Gene Robinson is incompatible with scripture.

BBC.co.uk -
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/3226753.stm

Posted by latimer at 02:15 PM | Comments (0)

Church must confront this clash of convictions

In a world of division, great international movements such as churches are precious reminders that we all belong to the same human race. Through them, people from around the world care for each other in practical and effective ways. Christians are world citizens. Unity matters. On the other hand, the church is not infinitely flexible. It cannot be, if it is to be true to its calling. It has a task to bear witness to the truth that is in Jesus Christ. There are boundaries to that truth, and hence boundaries to the Christian fellowship.
By Archbishop of Sydney, Peter Jensen in the Sydney Morning Herald
www.smh.com.au/news/opinion/church-must-confront-this-clash-of-convictions/2007/02/12/1171128900735.html

I have worshipped God in Anglican churches in places as remote from each other as Punta Arenas at the southern tip of Chile, Darwin, Cape Town, Kota Kinabalu in Malaysia, Oxford, Washington and Vancouver. I could visit many more places, in Europe, Asia, the Middle East and elsewhere. In all there is a family resemblance stemming from origin, relationships, teaching and practice.

These churches are in communion with each other. As an Anglican clergyman, I was welcome to minister with few questions asked.

In a world of division, great international movements such as churches are precious reminders that we all belong to the same human race. Through them, people from around the world care for each other in practical and effective ways. Christians are world citizens. Unity matters.

On the other hand, the church is not infinitely flexible. It cannot be, if it is to be true to its calling. It has a task to bear witness to the truth that is in Jesus Christ. There are boundaries to that truth, and hence boundaries to the Christian fellowship.

Christians sometimes have to decide that the truth of some major issue does not permit them to have unity with each other in the same way as before. We must be welcoming, but we cannot embrace indifference about doctrine and hope to survive.

The world-wide Anglican Communion is struggling with the issue of human sexuality. Despite the pleas of other Anglicans from around the world, the United States church consecrated as a bishop a practising homosexual.

Very significant numbers of Anglicans regard this as a clear violation of the Bible. They have, therefore, a broken relationship with those who have taken this step.

This has made life very awkward for the Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams. He has some immensely hard decisions to make involving questions of relationship. Who still belongs to the Anglican Communion?

Williams is also troubled by developments in England involving the same issues. For the Archbishop, with the Lambeth Conference looming in 2008, a time of crisis is at hand. He has to decide whom to invite.

In a few days, the primates of the Anglican Communion will meet in Dar es Salaam in Tanzania. The largest churches are in the southern hemisphere. There is a clear loss of patience with the Americans and their allies. Decisions may have been taken by some leading members of the group not to have fellowship with the Americans.

Indeed, various parishes in the US have already joined overseas dioceses, rather than remain in the American church, and the Nigerians have set up a branch of their numerically powerful church in the US. Considerable pain is being experienced, and it may well get worse as Anglicans rearrange their relationships.

Bishop Katharine Schori, the new presiding bishop of the American church, will be present at the invitation of Williams. There is doubt about the welcome she will receive from a number of the primates.

To them, she represents a church which has broken the boundaries needed to hold the communion together. Whether the American convictions prove to be prophetic and true, or wilful and badly mistaken, they have chosen to follow them to the end. They cannot be surprised that this will cause turbulence in the communion. They had more than sufficient warning over the years.

Already Anglicans are not as welcoming of each other as we have been in the past. In a world where truth is often regarded as no more than opinion, this is a struggle over important matters of principle. The Americans have clearly voted for the truth of their convictions over unity, although they would like both. The same thing applies to those who are opposed to them.

But this is not without hope. We are seeing not a mere power struggle but the clash of deeply held convictions.

It is not unchristian to have serious disagreement over truth. But here is a biblical command for us all: speak the truth with love.

Can Anglicans continue to witness to the truth and also love those with whom we differ so significantly? If so, perhaps one day we will see unity restored.

The Dar es Salaam meetings may well clarify the way ahead for Anglicans.

Dr Peter Jensen is the Anglican Archbishop of Sydney.

Posted by latimer at 10:25 AM | Comments (0)

News from Tanzania: Security Goes Tight Around the White Sands Special Compound

News from Tanzania: Security Goes Tight Around the White Sands Special Compound where the Anglican Primates’ Meeting is being held. A Report from the Rev. Canon David Anderson
www.americananglican.org/site/apps/nl/content2.asp?c=ikLUK3MJIpG&b=675589&ct=3535741

News from Tanzania:

Security Goes Tight Around the White Sands Special Compound

A Report from the Rev. Canon David Anderson
AAC Press Release
Tuesday, February 13, 2007

Dar Es Salaam—As reported late yesterday by some media, the security level around the White Sands Resort, where the Anglican Primates’ Meeting is being held this week, has increased rapidly as the resort prepares for the arrival of Archbishop of Canterbury Rowan Williams. One reporter from the London Telegraph called the security around the conference center a “ring of steel.” Well, almost. Whether any of the additional levels of security are because of the presence of the controversial presiding bishop of the U.S. Episcopal Church, Katharine Jefferts Schori, is hard to tell, because other well-known primates of the Anglican Communion are also present.

One entire end of the large resort has been sectioned off into a compound where the rooms are numbered in the 100s. Poor planning by some of the conference arrangers resulted in some of the rooms within the block having been already rented by others staying at the resort, but one presumes that they will have been moved out as the security lines went up. The rest of the news and advocacy community are within the resort, but in slightly less posh accommodations and a bit of a walk from the security lines.

The second and lesser entrance has been closed except to official Anglican Primates’ Meeting traffic, and the guards make it clear that without a red security badge from the Anglican Communion Office, you cannot get in through that gate. At the other end of the compound, bordering on the main resort offices, desks have been set up and special guards are positioned together with a supervisor. No red badge, no entrance, no excuses. Several of the media people in attendance have already tested the resolve of the guards and believe that no one will be slipping in uninvited. Bring out the telephoto lenses!

Above: A frame mounted in the hallway of the Beachcomber Resort in Dar Es Salaam - the location of many of the pre-gatherings prior to the official Primates' Meeting. (AAC Photo by Canon David Anderson)
Many of the primates who arrived early are still housed in the Beachcomber Resort next door but are scheduled to move over Wednesday morning to their accommodations in the White Sands. They will leave behind a comforting cross mounted behind glass in a picture frame hung on the wall in the hallway leading to the rooms. The picture says, "In Case of Spiritual Crisis, Break Glass." One wonders that no one has availed themselves yet and broken the glass—but then, the Primates’ Meeting isn't nearly over yet. In fact, it only officially begins tomorrow.

Date: 2/13/2007

Posted by latimer at 10:20 AM | Comments (0)

February 07, 2007

5 Reasons men hate church

Andrew Cameron, Moore College ethics lecturer, believes the major reason men struggle with church is that it is usually in a style of meeting alien to modern men. This can be summed up with four words: silence, sharing, sitting and singing.
your.sydneyanglicans.net/indepth/articles/five_reasons_men_hate_church/

Posted by latimer at 11:50 AM | Comments (0)

Bishop Richard Ellena - Ordained in Diocese of Nelson

The Diocese of Nelson is today celebrating its new Bishop, Richard Ellena – ordained in Nelson’s Christ Church Cathedral yesterday before a crowd of hundreds of clergy, civic dignitaries and well-wishers.
04.02.07

All’s well that ends well
A precarious beginning to the ordaining of Nelson’s new bishop has a jubilant ending __________________________________________________________________

The Diocese of Nelson is today celebrating its new Bishop, Richard Ellena – ordained in Nelson’s Christ Church Cathedral yesterday before a crowd of hundreds of clergy, civic dignitaries and well-wishers.

But just 24 hours before that there was real doubt that someone considered rather pivotal to the proceedings – the Bishop-elect himself – would show up.

Not because he had cold feet, but because he couldn’t get to his feet.

Archdeacon Richard Ellena was, in fact, flat on his back in Christchurch Hospital, battling a serious case of blood poisoning.

The trouble started when Richard and his wife Hilary were lugging furniture into their new Nelson home. He’d scraped his knee doing so – but, like a good Kiwi bloke, he thought nothing more of it.

Richard then headed south for his ordination retreat, which was to be conducted by the Bishop of Christchurch, Dr David Coles.

Except on his retreat Richard began to feel unwell. Quite unwell. So unwell, in fact, that last Tuesday he had to be admitted to Christchurch Hospital suffering from a rocketing temperature, and raging infection.

He was still in the Christchurch hospital on the Friday, the eve of his ordination, while the other bishops, who were meeting in Nelson prior to the ordination, considered what to do.

They had no doubt about their ultimate benchmark: the wellbeing of their brother bishop-to-be. With this in mind they seriously contemplated postponing the ordination (for which many were already arriving by air); ordaining Richard at his hospital bedside; or truncating the ordination service from the normal two hours to around 20 minutes.

In the end, Richard flew from Christchurch to Nelson on the Friday afternoon – and was met by doctors and his wife Hilary, in whose hands the decision about his fitness to proceed was laid.

Their verdict? That he was sufficiently recovered to press ahead – provided he stayed in a wheelchair and kept his infected leg elevated at all times.

And so the service proceeded – and regardless of its touch’n go basis, it was a particularly cheerful and joyful celebration.

The Rev Mike Hawke, Vicar of St Christopher’s Avonhead, and Archdeacon of Selwyn-Tawera in the Diocese of Christchurch, preached the sermon on the theme: “This is the day the Lord has made.”

There were contributions from each of the three Tikanga of this church – Maori, Polynesian and Pakeha.

The three Archbishops of the Province, The Most Revs Brown Turei, David Moxon and Jabez Bryce, concelebrated the eucharist – and the music, classical, choral and contemporary, was particularly impressive. That’s hardly surprising, as Bishop Richard is a highly accomplished composer, musical producer and multi-instrumentalist.

In fact, the recessional hymn was his own composition: “May the light of Jesus shine through all the world” – which, for the final chorus, also featured the interwoven New Zealand anthem, “God Defend New Zealand.”

Archbishop David Moxon reminded those gathered of the rich precedents for Richard’s seated ordination. On the Day of Pentecost, he said, the apostles (the predecessors of the bishops) had gathered in the upper room – and were seated when the Holy Spirit came upon them.

Archbishop Moxon also reminded folk that history shows that those called to decisive ministries had often weathered physical or spiritual affliction before they were released into their calling: Jacob’s night-long wrestling with the angel being a case in point.

And Bishop Richard Ellena, the new and 10th Bishop of the Diocese of Nelson?

His consecration service over, the now elated and duly consecrated bishop headed to Nelson Hospital – where he’s expected to make a complete recovery from his affliction within a few days.

Lloyd Ashton
Media Officer to the Anglican Church
in Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia

From the Anglican Diocese of Nelson website:
www.nelsonanglican.org.nz/

Richard Ellena, the Archdeacon of Blenheim, has been elected as the next Anglican Bishop of Nelson.

Richard, who is 55, has been Bishop Derek Eaton’s Vicar General, or deputy, since 2002 – and he has pledged to continue to “hold high the flag of evangelical orthodoxy” during his term as the Diocese of Nelson’s 10th Bishop.

“Nelson,” he says, “is unique. It is, very strongly, an evangelical diocese. We believe in Biblical orthodoxy. I want to honour and affirm that. I also want to do that in a way that doesn’t isolate us. I want to be in warm communion with the other Anglican Bishops of Aotearoa, New Zealand and Polynesia – while saying, at the same time: ‘This is the truth that we hold to in this diocese.’ Bishop Derek has done this with so much grace, and I hope I can do the same.”

One of the defining characteristics of Derek Eaton’s episcopate has been the way he and his wife Alice have worked as a team in ministry – and it’s clear that this will continue with Richard and Hilary, his wife of 34 years.

Richard Ellena was born and grew up in Christchurch. His father, Vic Ellena, was the Bryndwr butcher until he became Head of Music at Burnside High School. He was also the organist and choirmaster at St Barnabas’, Fendalton, under Canon Bob Lowe.

Those musical genes flow through Richard Ellena. He has a degree in music, majoring in composition, is a multi-instrumentalist and has played in orchestras, bands and brass bands, and he has composed for, and conducted and sung in choirs. His wife shares that musical gift.

On leaving Burnside High, Richard Ellena worked briefly for the Met Service before training as a teacher and studying at the University of Canterbury. He then taught music in high schools for 10 years – including two at St Bede’s in Christchurch, and eight at Rangiora High – before beginning training for the Anglican ministry at St John’s College in Auckland in 1983.

Richard Ellena was ordained an Anglican priest in 1985, served his curacy at Highfield-Marchwiel (in Timaru) and was vicar of Kensington-Otipua, in south Timaru, from 1986 to 1991. He had learned Maori at St John’s and, at the invitation of Ngai Tahu, he taught te reo at Aoraki Polytech in Timaru.

In 1991, he was asked by Bishop Derek Eaton – who’d also grown up in Christchurch, and, as a teenager, had been a babysitter for young Richard Ellena – to move to the Nelson Diocese, to begin ministry at the Church of the Nativity in Blenheim. He is now the longest-serving minister in Marlborough.

Richard and Hilary Ellena have a particular love of worship, and music in worship, and during their time at the Church of the Nativity, the Sunday congregation there has grown from around 150 to 450.

Richard and Hilary Ellena have also played an active part in the wider Marlborough community – for example, he was music director of a two-week production of Les Miserables in the mid 90s, and Hilary sang one of the lead roles.

They have played in a number of other shows since then, and Richard wrote and arranged the music for The Journey, a musical composed for the new millennium to celebrate the history of Marlborough.

Richard and Hilary have two children, and Richard is expected to be consecrated as the 10th Bishop of Nelson in February next year – around the time his predecessor, Derek Eaton, with his wife Alice, resume missionary service in North Africa.

Posted by latimer at 10:16 AM | Comments (0)

February 02, 2007

'Agnostic' Bishop Richard Randerson to retire

The Anglican bishop who caused a furore by declaring himself an agnostic has announced he is to quit his job.
NZ Herald - 02.02.07

NZ Herald - 02.02.07
by Simon Collins
www.nzherald.co.nz/section/1/story.cfm?c_id=1&objectid=10422059

The Anglican bishop who caused a furore by declaring himself an agnostic has announced he is to quit his job.

Richard Randerson, the Assistant Bishop of Auckland and dean of Holy Trinity Cathedral, said he had told Auckland's senior bishop, John Paterson, a year ago that he planned to retire in the middle of 2007.

"I will be 67 this year. Even that is a year or two beyond the normal sort of thing," he said. "I have some regrets at retiring at this stage because the response to the religious debate that we've had has been absolutely astonishing."

The bishop sparked the debate with an article in the Herald on January 8 welcoming a planned national statement on religious diversity and expressing discomfort at leading Christian prayers in public, "thus excluding people of other faiths".

He said "much of the language of the Bible is to be read in categories of poetry and image, not as a scientific textbook". "In terms of the existence of such a being, an atheist is construed as a non-believer, an agnostic as one who feels it cannot be proved one way or another. By that measure, I regard myself as an agnostic," he wrote.

The admission unleashed a flood of letters and public argument. A Hamilton Anglican vicar, Michael Hewat, wrote that "to reject the doctrine of God's personhood, or that he is a supreme being, is heretical."

Bishop Randerson acknowledged that Mr Hewat and others promoted "a traditional view" that saw faith differently, but he had written to Mr Hewat to explain his views.

Mr Hewat said last night that Bishop Randerson had written "a very gracious response" in a letter published in the Herald on January 23, where he reaffirmed his faith in "God who, although a mystery, is fully revealed in the person of Jesus Christ".

"That means that we have come together on that one," Mr Hewat said.

Posted by latimer at 12:37 PM | Comments (0)