Some Anglicans concerned about change in status of some TEC members of Communion committees, from 'member' to 'consultant' have wondered when the multiple consequences of non-adherence to Windsor might take effect. Specifically, when will members from parts of the Communion intervening in other parts also have their status changed? Wonder no longer, as ACNS reports,
"'At that time I wrote to the Primate of the Southern Cone, whose interventions in other provinces are referred to in the Windsor Continuation Group Report asking him for clarification as to the current state of his interventions into other provinces. I have not received a response.
'Consequently, I have written to the person from the Province of the Southern Cone who is a member of the Inter Anglican Standing Commission on Unity Faith and Order (IASCUFO), Bishop Tito Zavala, withdrawing his membership and inviting him to serve as a Consultant to that body.
'These decisions are not taken easily or lightly, but relate to the gracious restraint requested by successive meetings of the Instruments of Communion and the implications for Communion bodies when these requests are not honoured.' "
So do the provinces who comprise "the majority of Anglicans," and who are also involved in claim jumping contra Windsor, not have experts on these same bodies?
ReplyDeleteThis is the most recent published list of the membership;
ReplyDeleteThe Most Revd Bernard Ntahoturi, Burundi (Chair)
The Rt Revd Dr George Titre Ande, Congo
The Ven Professor Dapo Asaju, Lagos State University, Nigeria
The Revd Canon Dr Paul Avis, England
The Rt Revd Philip D Baji, Bishop of Tanga, Tanzania
The Revd Canon Dr Alyson Barnett-Cowan, Canada
The Revd Canon Dr John Gibaut, WCC Commission on Faith and Order
The Rt Revd Howard Gregory, Bishop of Montego Bay, West Indies
The Revd Dr Katherine Grieb, Virginia Theological Seminary, The Episcopal Church
The Revd Canon Clement Janda, Sudan
The Revd Dr Edison Muhindo Kalengyo, Uganda Christian University, Uganda
The Rt Revd Victoria Matthews, Bishop of Christchurch, Aotearoa, New Zealand & Polynesia
The Revd Canon Dr Charlotte Methuen, Oxford University, England
The Revd Dr Simon Oliver, University of Nottingham, England
The Rt Revd Professor Stephen Pickard, Assistant Bishop of Adelaide, Australia
Dr Andrew Pierce, Irish School of Ecumenics, Ireland
The Revd Canon Dr Michael Nai Chiu Poon, Trinity Theological College, Singapore, South East Asia
The Revd Sarah Rowland Jones, Southern Africa
The Revd Dr Jeremiah Yang, Sheng Gong Hui (Anglican) University, Korea
The Rt Revd Tito Zavala, Bishop of Chile, Southern Cone
Well, well, there we have it. There are indeed two members from the cattle rustling provinces of Nigeria and Uganda and the Archbishop of All Anglicanism has not said a word about them and their standing on the commission!
WHY????
BTW, the Chair of the commission is Canadian, but AC Canada, which breaks the same two moratoria as TEC, is too British in their demeanor to actually say that they do in polite company through their national synod!
Italics = removed
Bold = Interlopers not removed
Bold Italics = the Canadian Chair of commission
The list was shamelessly stolen from The Lead!
Hi David,
ReplyDeleteI would be very surprised if the trajectory of consistency now being demonstrated by Kearon and ++Williams halted for no good reason. My presumption is that either Nigeria is next to get a letter or (and I speak without much great knowledge) Nigeria has effectively ceased interventions (because CANA is well ensconced within the ACNA framework) and Kearon/Williams will not bother to send a letter.
Go study the CANA website a bit more Peter, CANA is less in ACNA than you think. It is much better ensconced in Mother Nigeria than ACNA.
ReplyDeleteThen it is not me who needs to do this reading David, but our friends in Lambeth!
ReplyDeleteSeems like this would settle it!
ReplyDeleteCANA Episcopate:
the Rt. Rev'd Martyn Minns, founding Missionary Bishop
the Rt. Rev'd Roger Ames, Suffragan Bishop
the Rt. Rev'd David Anderson, Sr., Suffragan Bishop
the Right Rev'd David Bena, Suffragan Bishop
the Rt. Rev'd Amos Fagbamiye, Suffragan Bishop
Provincial Primatial Archbishop: The Most Rev'd Nicholas Okoh
Would it settle it, David?
ReplyDeleteI would understand that Anglicans not part of TEC or ACCan could be in relationship with whom they like around the Communion. I would not understand them flying over the Atlantic to attend a synod in Nigeria as contravening the Windsor Report.
The question (I imagine) Kearon and ++Williams are attending to it this: are the bishops, with which CANA is in fellowship, physically entering the territory otherwise under the jurisdiction of TEC or ACCan to engage in episcopal acts such as ordinations or confirmations? Are Nigerian bishops continuing to fly across the Atlantic, into North America, to ordain or to confirm?
All of the CANA bishops are Nigerian bishops. All are members in good standing in the Nigerian church. They state in this published notice that their primate is the primate of the Nigerian church, not the ACNA archbishop. These Nigerian bishops are performing episcopal ministry in TEC territory. They are conducting ordinations and confirmations.
ReplyDeleteWhy are you playing this shell game Dr. Carrell? I know that you are intelligent. This does not become you.
Ah, David, when you put it like that, I see your point very clearly: these are Nigerian bishops etc. So we should expect the penny to drop any day now with Kearon and letters to be written. Perhaps in the post even as we speak?
ReplyDeleteYou are now being mean.
ReplyDeleteUm, not trying to be mean, David. Trying, in fact, to take your point seriously: it should be clear to Kearon and there should be letters in the post as a consequence.
ReplyDeleteHi Peter,
ReplyDeleteThe confusing aspect of this for me is why Bishop Venables did not reply to Canon Kearon's letter. Does he think a reply would be a complete waste of time, or part of a game where the outcome has already been decided? He attended Lambeth 2008, and seemed to have a policy of continuing to engage with the broader Communion, even while he offered oversight for departing TEC dioceses. Why would he not reply to the letter, and say the following?
1) The dioceses left TEC because of the heretical actions of that church, which violated moratoria 1 and 2.
2) They were then sued by TEC, in contravention of the 4th moratorium against civil legal action.
3) The Southern Cone offered them a safe haven so they could remain faithful Anglicans.
4) We are offering them a temporary safe haven, while they establish an alternate North American province. At that time, we will cease our provincial oversight.
At least it would provide a defence of what he has done, and make the ACO have to justify its decision to remove them from IASCUFO beyond "they didn't reply to my letter".
There is confusion, Andrew!
ReplyDelete