Monday, July 23, 2012

Global South speaks

Global South Primates have met in Bangkok and issued a communique (see, e.g. Thinking Anglicans).

I note 17 primates signing (out of 38 across the Communion).

I note a big tick for communion with the See of Canterbury.

I note a big tick for the 'faithful' in TEC, ACNA and ACCan.

I note a black mark against some recent decisions of TEC.

I suggest the re-alignment of the Communion continues.

The demise of the Covenant is not the demise of new arrangements for the Communion.

Opponents of the Covenant have effectively tried to institute a different 'covenant' in the life of the Communion. Working on our own GS' wording it is the Covenant of fuzzy Anglicanism.

I do not sense that the 17 Global South Primates are would be signees to the Covenant of fuzzy Anglicanism.

UPDATE: with H/T to Michael A, Bishop Dan Martins blogs about the GS event here.

UPDATE: I note this post at Episcopal Cafe which questions whether the communique was put together in a manner fitting the signatures being collected up with it, as though all signing all knew what to which their names were being put.

21 comments:

Malcolm said...

Hi Peter,

When I read that list of 17 Primates, I was struck by the many connections we in NZ have with each of the Provinces named.

Through the work of NZCMS, I grew up in an Anglican church praying for NZ missionaries who were working there, and praying for their bishops (even though I often had little idea how to pronounce their names). And those connections remain even now.

I hope the Ma Whea commission will consider these communion perspectives as well and not just adopt a parochial context for our church.

Part of the pain of our church's drifting into the orbit of TEC is the distance it places between us and our brothers and sisters in the Global South.

Malcolm

carl jacobs said...

Thinking Anglicans doesn't seem to be too impressed. As in "Blah blah Blah HATE Blah Blah Blah." To which the GS Primates would likely respond "Thinking Who?" What is becoming increasingly obvious is that (the little that remains of) Liberal Christianity is irrelevant outside of the bureaucratic structures of the Anglican Communion. The Church is moving on. It is leaving the dead to bury their own dead.

carl

Bryden Black said...

In the light of such fuzzy logic:

see rather http://www.globalsouthanglican.org/index.php/blog/comments/a_communique_from_the_global_south_conference_on_the_decade_of_mission_and_

MichaelA said...

Dan Martins is a bishop of the Episcopal Church of the USA (TEC)who attended the Global South meeting. His daily blog makes interesting reading. See: http://movingdiagonally.blogspot.com.au/

Father Ron Smith said...

"I suggest the re-alignment of the Communion continues." - Peter Carrell

A good suggestion of yours, Peter.

___________________________________

"The Church is moving on. It is leaving the dead to bury their own dead." - Carl -

I wouldn't say that G.S. is dead!
___________________________________

I wonder where the Global South (GAFCON!) Primates will choose to meet next. They must have lots of Air Points by now. Who is funding all of this world travel?

There must be little to do back home, one might think - Oh, except for graft, persecution, etc.

Shawn said...

Ron,

Recently you made the claim that Liberals don't play the man, but listen to the argument being made objectively.

And yet here you are ignoring the message of the Global South Promates and attacking them for air travel and accusing them of crimes?

Can you explain this total lack of consistency? Do you have any idea where this irrational hatred of African and Asian Bishops stems from?

Father Ron Smith said...

There's no hatred here, only an estimation of damage done to the Communion by conservative Primates backing out of Indaba.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating. But if the GS Primates don't want to sit down with TEC and the A.C. of C, at the Table of the Lord then the prospects of Unity seems lost.

Bryden Black said...

The difficulty with “unity”, Ron, is that in Christian Gospel terms it needs to be a function of creedal reality. After all, the fourfold notes/marks of the Church are the result of a Nicene Orthodoxy: that’s the format of Nicaea-Constantinople, the bedrock of the oikoumene.

So when certain branches of the AC willfully depart from Orthodox belief and practice - and I’ve heard the current PB of TEC in the flesh say some pretty weird theological things, let alone other folks! - then something needs to be done. True; one could and should debate what that “something” might be. In North America, there are a number of strategies currently in play. And Peter has begun that discussion here on ADU under his threads, “The case for staying”, and, “Stay or Go?”.

So I sense, Ron, we should make any talk of “damage” into a seriously two-way street - or even like L’√Čtoile in Paris! Honesty and humility demand it.

Shawn said...

"There is no hatred here,"

On the contrary, statements like this: "I wonder where the Global South (GAFCON!) Primates will choose to meet next. They must have lots of Air Points by now. Who is funding all of this world travel There must be little to do back home, one might think - Oh, except for graft, persecution, etc.?" and similar comments you have made in the past are statements of hatred, as they do not at all deal with the issues, but merely attack people personally.


"only an estimation of damage done to the Communion by conservative Primates backing out of Indaba."

The damage was done by TEC. GAFCON was a result of TEC thumbing it's nose at the rest of the Communion and refusing to abide by the agreed upon moratorium on the ordination of practicing homosexuals.

". But if the GS Primates don't want to sit down with TEC and the A.C. of C, at the Table of the Lord then the prospects of Unity seems lost."

Why should they sit down with TEC? Like our own St. Matthews in the City, much of the leadership of TEC has abandoned the Gospel of Christ for the false gospel of liberalism.

There is no longer anything to discuss.

MichaelA said...

"But if the GS Primates don't want to sit down with TEC and the A.C. of C, at the Table of the Lord then the prospects of Unity seems lost."

Its certainly an acknowledgment that unity is not there at present. But as for the prospect being lost, I don't think the Global South leaders would ever write anyone off. For instance, if TEC and ACoC acknowledge that they have departed from catholic and apostolic faith, and that they must repent, then I am sure communion could be restored very quickly.

But you are correct: at the present time, the leaders of most of the world's Anglicans decline to have communion with the leadership of TEC and ACofC (although they will have communion with the orthodox bishops within TEC).

Even in many non-Global South provinces that is largely the case: When the leader of TEC, Katherine Schori, visited Australia a couple of years ago, only one diocese was prepared to receive her.

Shawn said...

Our own Christchurch diocese did not officially receive KJS and as I understand it Bishop Victoria forbade ordinands to attend her meetings.

A large majority of Anglicans, not just those in GAFCON and the FCA, are fed up with trouble and disunity the leadership of TEC has selfishly caused, not to mention the outright creedal heresy that is being promted.

Peter Carrell said...

Hi Shawn,
I cannot comment on your remark that ordinands were forbidden to attend ++KJS's meeting when she was in NZ: I had not ever heard that.

The invitation to visit Christchurch was made by the Maori bishop resident in Christchurch, +John Gray, and the welcome was to the HQ of his hui amorangi, Te Wai Pounamou. As part of that visit ++KJS was welcomed in a powhiri which (as I recall) included members of the Diocese of Christchurch. +Victoria was overseas at that time so understandably was not able to either physically or officially welcome ++KJS to her Diocese.

Shawn said...

Peter,

I may be wrong about the ordinands issue, so until I can confirm one way or another I retract the statement.

Peter Carrell said...

From Ron. Lightly moderated as too many assumptions of a doubtful nature are packed into the last sentence.

""Our own Christchurch diocese did not officially receive KJS and as I understand it Bishop Victoria forbade ordinands to attend her meetings."

- Shawn -

Wrong again, Shawn! As Peter says, our local Maori Bishop received TEC's Primate, The Rt. Revd Katharine Jefferts-Schori on the local marae. I guess you didn't get an invite - loving in Auckland and all?

Bishop Victoria hardly, therefore, forbade KJS's Wlecome in OUR Diocese of Christchurch."

Shawn said...

"ourr local Maori Bishop received TEC's Primate, The Rt. Revd Katharine Jefferts-Schori on the local marae"

That's a shame. One of the roles of a Bishop is to keep the wolves away from the sheep, not invite them in.

Father Ron Smith said...

"That's a shame. One of the roles of a Bishop is to keep the wolves away from the sheep, not invite them in."

- Guess Who? -

If this is not 'ad hominem' about the Presiding bishop of the American Episcopal Church, I don't know what is. Is there no limit to 'Shawn's' chauvinism appearing on your blog, Peter?

My own, much less questionable and more pertinent comments get sterner treatment from you.

Peter Carrell said...

Hi Ron,
My primary concern about 'ad hominems' is between commenters because, frankly, it becomes quite time-consuming keeping the peace.

That is not to say that any other 'ad hominem' or 'ad hominem' type remark is intrinsically acceptable. The remark about 'wolves away from the sheep' is questionable. I let it through because I understand 'wolves' here to refer to false teachers, and there is considerable debate around the Angli-net about just how close an adherent to orthodox doctrine the PB of TEC is.

However, if Shawn is reading this: no more remarks like that please.

Shawn said...

"My own, much less questionable and more pertinent comment"

Seriously?

Anyway, Peter I am happy to abide by your rule regarding that comment. I would only point out that I my intention was solely to use Biblical language to highlight KJS's extremely questionable theology.

That said, your blog, your rules.

Property rights rule. :)

Bryden Black said...

a very interesting read from the Communion Partners who participated in Bangkok:

http://www.communionpartners.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/GS-Conf-Report.pdf

It has a rather different take on "damage" ... As well as a glorious antidote!

Father Ron Smith said...

I'm a little surprised, Bryden, given your enthusiasm for the Communion Partners (quasi-TEC) and the Global South contingency, that you were not personaly present at the Bangkok Meeting. I'm sure your presence would have heartened the delegates, and shown the support of a smallish number of conservativs from ACANZP.

However, I do wonder in what particular way you consider this gathering as 'a glorious antidote' to damage done to the Communion - in light of the fact that at least some of those present would have aided and abetted the schismatic breakup of the Anglican Communion.

I do not consider the self-styled 'Communion Partners' to have been a significant representation from TEC

MichaelA said...

"in light of the fact that at least some of those present would have aided and abetted the schismatic breakup of the Anglican Communion"

Now, that's hardly fair, Father Ron. I really doubt that anyone at that meeting had aided and abetted TEC's schismatic attempt to breakup the Anglican Communion! Fortunately, the vast majority in the Anglican Communion are determined to hold firm against attempts by the liberals to depart from classic anglicanism.

"I do not consider the self-styled 'Communion Partners' to have been a significant representation from TEC"

No, but the representatives of most the world's Anglican DID consider the Communion Partners to be a significant representation from TEC, and that is what's important, isn't it? You or I might have our opinions, but they don't really count compared to the primates, bishops and other leaders of the Global South.